Class notes

Health Communication - Master Persuasive Communication (UvA)

1 purchase

Course
77643SP05Y (HEALTHCOMM)

Institution
Universiteit Van Amsterdam (UvA)

This document includes all of the notes from the lectures and the tutorials of the course. The concepts are clearly explained with definitions, diagrams, examples and color coding. Weekly readings notes, questions and answers are also included.

[Show more]

Preview 4 out of 52 pages

View example

Uploaded on March 4, 2024
Number of pages 52
Written in 2023/2024
Type Class notes
Professor(s) Dr. h. feenstra
Contains All classes

health
communication
health communication
communication science
persuasive communication

Institution
Universiteit van Amsterdam (UvA)
Education
MSc Communication Science
Course
77643SP05Y (HEALTHCOMM)

asicapponi

Member since 1 year 34 documents sold

$10.80

Add to cart

Add to wishlist

100% satisfaction guarantee
Immediately available after payment
Both online and in PDF
No strings attached

HEALTH COMMUNICATION
By Asiah Capponi

WEEK 1

Micro Lectures:

Fear-appeal=a message that has the goal to arouse fear in order to motivate attitude and
behavior change

How do they work?
Message → cognition (perception of being at risk, susceptibility/severity) → emotion of fear →
behavior change in the decided direction

Parallel response model
Fear can lead to 2 parallel processes and responses:
1. Danger control: how to control the threat? → cognitive response
2. Fear control: how to reduce my fear? → affective response

Protection motivation model

Health belief model

,Shortcomings of all of these models:
- Only explain a part of how fear appeal work
- Unclear when or what fear appeals don’t work

EXTENDED PARALLEL PROCESS MODEL (Witte)

Appraisal = a perception, a judgment
Susceptibility: to what extent am I at risk?
Severity: how severe are the consequences?

,Self-efficacy: do I feel like I am capable of doing this specific thing?
Response efficacy: whether they believe that adopting the behavior will avoid the threat?

Readings:

Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective
public health campaigns. Health Education & Behavior, 27(5), 591-615 [ONLY READ
PAGES 591-595]

Tannenbaum, M. B., Hepler, J., Zimmerman, R., Saul, L., Jacobs, S., Wilson, K., &
Albarracin, D. (2015). Appealing to fear: a meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness
and theories. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 1178-1204.

Kok, G. J. (2016). Social psychology applied: Politics, theories, and the future.
Valedictorian lecture, Maastricht: Maastricht University. See
https://cris.maastrichtuniversity.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/5719713/Oratie_Kok_Gerjo.pdf

Links to an external site. [ONLY READ PAGES 6-12]

Brown, S. L., & West, C. (2014). Sequencing the threat and recommendation
components of persuasive messages differentially improves the effectiveness of
high‐and low‐distressing imagery in an anti‐alcohol message in students. British
Journal of Health Psychology, 20(2), 324-340.

Reading Questions

Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective
public health campaigns. Health Education & Behavior, 27(5), 591-615. [ONLY READ
PAGES 591-595]

1. Describe the extended parallel process model (EPPM) of Witte.

Message a person perceives the threat à how susceptible am I to this threat? How efficient can
my response to the threat be? à OPT 1. Threat perceived as irrelevant à no action is taken;
OPT. 2 threat perceived as relevant à motivation to process the threat à FEAR à action to
reduce the fear: OPT 1: control the danger of the threat à high perceived self-efficacy and
response efficacy à think how to remove the threat; OPT. 2: control the fear à low self-efficacy
and response efficacy à focus on how to eliminate the fear (denial, avoidance)

, Tannenbaum, M. B., Hepler, J., Zimmerman, R., Saul, L., Jacobs, S., Wilson, K., &
Albarracin, D. (2015). Appealing to fear: a meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness and
theories. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 1178-1204.

1. Mention and explain the two forms of the efficacy statement hypothesis.

Strong hypothesis: fear appeals without efficacy statements will produce negative effects (will
backfire) [if I’m not telling you that you can do this or that this action will be useful, you will do
the opposite of what I want you to]

Weak hypothesis: fear appeals without efficacy statements will produce weaker effects [if I’m
not telling you that you can do this or that this action will be useful, it is harder to influence your
behavior]

*efficacy statement= a message that assures the recipient that they are capable of performing
the fear appeal’s recommended actions and/or performing the recommended actions will result
in desirable consequences.

2. This question aims to make you understand more about the specific moderators of the
relation between fear appeals (low vs high) and persuasive dependent variables and
challenges you to think critically.

i. Mention the hypotheses for the following moderators that may impact the
effectiveness of a fear appeal:

a) the message element of susceptibility; messages with high depicted severity
positively influenced attitudes, intentions, and behaviors, whereas messages with
high depicted susceptibility positively influenced intentions and behaviors but not
attitudes

b) the behavior element of one time versus repeated behavior; persuasive messages
should be more successful when they recommend one-time behaviors (e.g., getting
vaccinated) compared with behaviors that must be repeated over an extended period
of time (e.g., exercising)

c) the audience element of culture. fear appeals should be particularly effective for
female (vs. male) and collectivist (vs. individualist) audiences

*collectivist vs. individualistic culture

ii. Per element, check the method section to see how these elements are coded and
comment on this.

Depicted susceptibility and severity

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller asicapponi. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $10.80. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

67479 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 15 years now

Start selling

Class notes

Health Communication - Master Persuasive Communication (UvA)

Document information

Subjects

Written for

Seller

Reviews received

Content preview