This study investigates the effects of mHealth interventions on sustainable behavior change and weight loss, drawing on in-app user activity data and online survey data. Specifically, we focus on the interactions within mobile support groups in Noom, an mHealth application for obesity intervention, to delve into how social support from facilitators and peers may play differential roles in promoting health outcomes. The results of structural equation modeling (N = 301) demonstrated that (a) perceived facilitator support was positively associated with group members' health information acquisition such as fitness-themed article reading whereas perceived peer support was positively linked to group participation such as posting and responding; (b) perceived peer support was positively related to normative influence among group members, which subsequently increased group members' responses to others' posts; and (c) health information reading and in-group posting promoted weight loss; however, merely responding to others' posts did not lead to weight-loss success. The findings suggest that the complementary influences of facilitators and peers must be considered to enhance the efficacy of support group interventions.

Social support studies often focus on psychological outcomes for the support recipient and also presume potential support providers who will attempt to provide support in the first place. Therefore, the negative relational outcomes associated with not receiving emotional support when support is expected (nonsupport) are an understudied topic. Instances of nonsupport were compared to various emotional support messages on relational and psychological outcomes to understand how nonsupport compares against support messages of varying quality. Two hundred twenty-four women with breast cancer were asked to think of a person expected to provide emotional support if they disclosed their diagnosis on social media. Participants were given either a hypothetical support message from this person or told the person provided no message even though a message was expected. Dunnett's t tests were used to analyze the nonsupport condition against low, moderate, and highly person-centered support messages. Providing no emotional support message (nonsupport) creates low levels of emotional improvement and high levels of negative relational ramifications similar to low person-centered messages. Moreover, only participants receiving the low person-centered message agreed on average they would rather have received no message at all instead. Because low person-centered messages and saying nothing whatsoever both create negative relational ramifications, support providers should strive to communicate emotional support messages with at least a moderate amount of person-centeredness. These findings further suggest those who are expected to provide emotional support cannot dodge this obligation since nonsupport is shown to have negative relational outcomes to low person-centered support messages.

This study investigated instances of support that were deemed unwanted by a recipient in the wake of a cancer diagnosis. The investigation was framed by politeness theory and considered the face threats evident in cancer patients' descriptions of unwanted support. Additional reasons for viewing support as unwanted, as well as the outcomes of receiving unwanted support, were also explored. Interviews (N = 15) were conducted with cancer patients who had been initially diagnosed within the previous 12 months. Analyses demonstrated that face threats are among the reasons for viewing some support as problematic; however, additional reasons beyond face threats also occurred. The most frequently occurring reasons for regarding support as unwanted were threats to the receiver's negative face and messages failing to convey empathy. Finally, the influence of receiving unwanted support on cancer patients is discussed in terms of recipients' ability to manage emotions, respond to the support, potentially view the support provider negatively, and assert greater control over future supportive interactions.

Background: Not all emotional support messages consist purely of positive statements. Some emotional support messages received by cancer patients simultaneously communicate statements of caring but also negative statements, such as criticisms of patients’ actions. Objective: This study tests if a negative statement occurring within an emotional support message affects cancer patients’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the entire emotional support message as well as the perceived competence of the supporter communicating the emotional support message. Methods: Cancer patients watched video recordings of emotional support messages and subsequently provided ratings on message effectiveness and supporter competence. Some emotional support messages included negative statements, whereas other messages did not. Results: Messages that included a negative statement were rated lower on message effectiveness than messages without negative statements. Cancer patients rated supporters communicating messages with a negative statement as having significantly less competence than those who did not communicate a negative statement. Conclusion: A single negative statement occurring within an emotional support message may result in cancer patients viewing the emotional support as less effective and the supporter as less competent.

Although giving and receiving affection are beneficial, the benefits often depend on who is providing the affection and in what context. Some affectionate expressions may even reduce well-being. This mixed-method study examined perceptions of unwanted affection and its relationship to stress and anxiety. Participants described a memory of unwanted affection and their reactions to it. Additionally, participants reported on their stress, somatic anxiety, and cognitive anxiety. Thematic analyses revealed that expressions of unwanted affection ranged in verbal (e.g., disclosure rate, saying “I love you”) or nonverbal (e.g., hugs, handholding) behaviors and participants responded by explicit rejecting the affection, reduced/stopped contact with the person, and ignoring the affection. Feelings reflecting the perceived negativity of the event were related to higher stress, somatic, and cognitive anxiety. Generally, results indicated that retrospective cognitive anxiety and stress were worse when experiencing unwanted affection from well-known partners (e.g., romantic partners) than from strangers. Conversely, the perceived negativity of the recalled unwanted affectionate event tended to worsen with lesser known partners (e.g., strangers, acquaintances).