The document discusses a study on the effectiveness of fear appeals in anti-smoking campaigns. It describes how students were split into three groups - high-threat, low-threat, and control - and shown an anti-smoking film with different threat levels. Surveys after found those in the high-threat group were most likely to intend to abstain from smoking, followed by the low-threat group. While the low-threat condition induced the same level of fear as the high-threat one, implying similar consequences of smoking had comparable effects in discouraging smoking.

1. Fear appeal

2. Overview
• Theories concerning fear appeal
• Fear appeal: a Unique Anti-smoking Film’ by
Carol L. Schmitt and Thomas Blass
• Other anti-smoking campaigns
• Fear appeal: use for Health Care Marketing to
the Elderly

3. Fear appeals: a study
• ‘Testing a Unique Anti-smoking Film’ by Carol
L. Schmitt and Thomas Blass
• Why? There’s little to guide the design of
successful anti-smoking campaigns
• Who? Students in Experimental psychology
• Method? Anti smoking film + survey

4. Fear appeals: a study
• 3 groups of students
• High-threat condition
• Low-threat condition
• Control group
• Hugh McCabe: the coach’s final lesson
(American Lung Association, 1988)

5. Fear appeals: a study
• Survey asking students about their attitudes
towards smoking and beliefs about smoking
• Results:
• No significance for parental smoking or
interactions
• Significant for behavioural intention
measures

6. Fear appeals: a study
• Results:
• Compared to the control group…
• High-threat condition: more likely to abstain
• Low-threat condition: most likely to abstain

7. Fear appeals: a study
• Level of fear aroused by low-threat condition
is the same as the one aroused by high-threat
condition
• Implied consequences of smoking have a
similar effect
=> Anticipatory / visceral fear

8. Fear appeals: ad
• Discussion:
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=0V2zn_ArlVs (Malaysia)
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-
YjrkBYDDQM&NR=1
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=1MF4sCvkAAA

9. Introduction
• Vulnerability
- Consumer-related
- Information processing
- Information acquisition
- Access to information
- Anxiety proneness
• Thayer arousal model
• Future research

10. Vulnerability
• Consumer-related
- susceptible to unfair business
- less sophisticated view of marketplace
- conditioned not to protest
- less informed

11. Vulnerability
• Information processing
- speed of response
- reduced processing efficiency ≠ reduced
processing ability
- extreme cautiousness

12. Vulnerability
• Information acquisition
- reduced sensory abilities
Eg. Poor vision, hearing loss
- no reason for connection with fear-
oriented communication

13. Vulnerability
• Access to information
- dependence on mass media
- wide access
- no results they are less informed
concerning health care

14. Vulnerability
• Anxiety proneness
- definition : “a personality trait referring
to individual differences in the likelihood
that a person will experience state anxiety
in stressful situations”
- results have shown differently :
* aware of their legal rights
* less likely to report bad experience

15. Thayer arousal model
• Representation of psychophysiological
process and affective response to advertising
stimuli
• 2 dimensions : energy and tension
• No indication for more vulnerability
• Fear related behavior

16. Future research
• Limitation : elderly as single group 65+
• Consider “new age” elderly
• Different life experiences
• Psychodynamic defenses
-> Careful consideration and continued research