| Abstract: | The present research was designed to extend our knowledge of fear appeals and attitude change in two directions. The first purpose was to compare a traditional negative, or fear, appeal to its counterpart, an appeal emphasizing the positive consequences of accepting a communicator's recommendation. The second purpose was to test the assumption of the theory of protection motivation that people are motivated to protect themselves from psychological and social, as well as physical, threats. The results disclosed that, compared to a no-message control condition, the traditional negative appeal to health was more persuasive than the positive appeal. A positive appeal to self-esteem, however, was superior to a negative appeal to self-esteem. Several implications for health psychology were discussed. First, the traditional negative appeals to health may be more persuasive than positive appeals. Second, people may be persuaded to adopt healthy lifestyles for reasons other than health per se (i.e., to enhance self-esteem). The following tentative conclusions were based on unexpected findings and should be interpreted with caution. The decision to use a positive or negative appeal should consider the number of available adaptive responses. Finally, the data suggested that mass media health campaigns should use both negative and positive appeals. |
