Fear Appeals and the Formation of Active Publics

Abstract

This study examines the process through which a fear appeal may transform low-involvement audiences into active publics. Cognitive and emotional responses of uninvolved viewers to a film on environmental Contamination are analyzed, together with the coping strategies used to deal with the threat. The research integrates Grunig 's situational theo y ofpublics with Rogers' protection-motivation theo y to expand the predictive ability of the situational theory. The data indicate that post-test public membenh@, cognitive activity and emotional arousal during viewing are sign ficantly related to viewers' preferences for coping through message resistance, seeking additional information, or taking action on the film's topic. Results suggest that both cognition and affect mediate viewers' responses to a fearful message, thereby contributing to the creation of active publics who arepersuaded to take action on aproblem.The family of constructs that indicate heightened audience engagement with media content has repeatedly been shown to predict more powerful and enduring exposure effects. This family encompasses audience activity, interest, personal relevance, problem recognition, and involvement, a5 well as a number of other related concepts.Of all these constructs, involvement has received the most attention. High involvement has been found to lead to deeper message processing and more enduring attitude change (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986); a more "rational" hierarchy of effects (Ray et al., 1973); higher knowledge-attitude-behavior consistency

Fear appeal messages affect accessibility of attitudes toward the threat and adaptive behaviors

“…Specifically, danger control processes may increase the accessibility of attitudes toward the adaptive behavior. Previous research has demonstrated that successful fear appeal messages result in elaborative message processing (Roser & Thompson, 1995). There are two reasons to believe that efficacy appeals will heighten elaborative message processing.…”

Who's afraid of that ad? Applying segmentation to the protection motivation model

“…When exposed to threatening stimuli, individuals experience cognitive dissonance, an internal state that is intensely uncomfortable. To resolve this tension, they must either reject the threatening habit (an adaptive response) or reject the threatening stimuli by denying or avoiding the message (a maladaptive response) (Roser & Thompson, 1995;Stuteville, 1970). Stuteville (1970) suggests that there are three maladaptive techniques for dealing with fear.…”

Social issues infotainment

“…While some authors suggest that the anxiety created by a fear strategy will provide the motivation needed to increase involvement (Roser & Thompson, 1995), other authors propose that fear is rarely as eŸective as strategies that emphasise the positive consequences of behaviour change (Backer, Rogers & Sopory, 1992, pp. 30-32;O'Keefe et al, 1996, p. 124).…”