Hi all, The short answer is...they are relatively effective.
Let’s start with what fear-based messages are. They are messages that are designed to instil strong negative emotions such as fear in a priority group in order to persuade them to change their behaviour. The assumption here is that when people feel a visceral reaction related to the consequences of their behaviour, they will take positive action to reduce that reaction. A common example of a fear-based message is a warning label on a cigarette package that says, “Smoking causes lung cancer” along with a graphic image showing what that might look like. Fear-based messages are known to be most effective in the lab where conditions are controlled. In field settings, they tend to have mixed results. There is evidence, however, that fear-based messages are effective at influencing health-related behaviours, particularly for people who are most directly affected by the message. For example, people at high risk of skin cancer are more likely to act on fear-based messages around sun exposure and wearing sunscreen. In order for fear-based messages to be most effective, people need to first feel fear due to an imminent threat to themselves (e.g. “I might actually get lung cancer if I continue smoking”), and they need to perceive that they have the ability to take action to neutralize the threat. Providing specific avenues for people to engage in desirable behaviours is therefore critical. By placing warning labels on cigarette packages, people who smoke become aware of the threats posed by cigarette smoking, but they may become desensitized to threatening messages because there are so many of them yet little to no avenues provided for taking action. Examples of providing avenues to act would be giving people the locations of smoking cessation clinics or directing them where to find an inexpensive nicotine patch. Fear-based messages have a relative degree of effectiveness in various contexts, but with smoking specifically, regulations are known to be more effective. For example, there is evidence from the UK that banning tobacco advertising reduces smoking rates. Decreasing the availability of tobacco and increasing its cost, as well as cutting nicotine levels in tobacco products are other examples of regulations that change behaviour, according to public health experts. In summary, if you would like to engage your priority group with fear-based messages, they will be most effective if you keep the following in mind: - Focus your efforts on a priority group who is most directly affected - Avoid repeating the message so many times that people become desensitized- Provide specific, concrete actions that the priority group can take to neutralize the threat- Consider coupling fear-based messages with advocacy for government regulations To read a brief article that highlights recent research on fear-based messaging, click here. To view an interactive website that helps smokers quit, click here.
Let’s start with what fear-based messages are. They are messages that are designed to instil strong negative emotions such as fear in a priority group in order to persuade them to change their behaviour. The assumption here is that when people feel a visceral reaction related to the consequences of their behaviour, they will take positive action to reduce that reaction. A common example of a fear-based message is a warning label on a cigarette package that says, “Smoking causes lung cancer” along with a graphic image showing what that might look like. Fear-based messages are known to be most effective in the lab where conditions are controlled. In field settings, they tend to have mixed results. There is evidence, however, that fear-based messages are effective at influencing health-related behaviours, particularly for people who are most directly affected by the message. For example, people at high risk of skin cancer are more likely to act on fear-based messages around sun exposure and wearing sunscreen. In order for fear-based messages to be most effective, people need to first feel fear due to an imminent threat to themselves (e.g. “I might actually get lung cancer if I continue smoking”), and they need to perceive that they have the ability to take action to neutralize the threat. Providing specific avenues for people to engage in desirable behaviours is therefore critical. By placing warning labels on cigarette packages, people who smoke become aware of the threats posed by cigarette smoking, but they may become desensitized to threatening messages because there are so many of them yet little to no avenues provided for taking action. Examples of providing avenues to act would be giving people the locations of smoking cessation clinics or directing them where to find an inexpensive nicotine patch. Fear-based messages have a relative degree of effectiveness in various contexts, but with smoking specifically, regulations are known to be more effective. For example, there is evidence from the UK that banning tobacco advertising reduces smoking rates. Decreasing the availability of tobacco and increasing its cost, as well as cutting nicotine levels in tobacco products are other examples of regulations that change behaviour, according to public health experts. In summary, if you would like to engage your priority group with fear-based messages, they will be most effective if you keep the following in mind: - Focus your efforts on a priority group who is most directly affected - Avoid repeating the message so many times that people become desensitized- Provide specific, concrete actions that the priority group can take to neutralize the threat- Consider coupling fear-based messages with advocacy for government regulations To read a brief article that highlights recent research on fear-based messaging, click here. To view an interactive website that helps smokers quit, click here.
