Colgate is a line of
oral hygiene products, including toothpastes, mouthwash, and floss. In this advertisement
Colgate uses a fear appeal. It does this by suggesting that the man in the
photo has bad breath, and that everyone is aware of this embarrassing fact
except him. He is an average looking man, and this makes it seem like an event which
could happen to anyone. The severity of the outcome if the product is not used
is also shown- the man is literally labelled, and everyone knows it, showing
the severe embarrassing consequences of the problem. The advertisement has a
small picture of its product in the bottom corner; to highlight that Colgate
Plax is the remedy for the embarrassing situation of bad breath which the
audience now fears. This is a simple and
easy solution, showing the ease with which the target can prevent the feared
situation.
A study by Maddux and
Rogers (1983) investigated some of the tactics used above in the fear appeal.
They aimed to look into the effects of the probability of the feared event’s occurrence,
the effectiveness of the perceived remedy, the severity of the threat’s
outcome, and their self-efficacy expectancy for performing the coping response.
They used 153 undergraduates who all smoked at least 10 cigarettes a day for
more than a year in their experiment. The participants were given materials
from one of the four conditions (high or low probability of event occurrence,
high or low effectiveness of remedy, high or low severity of threat outcome,
high or low self-efficacy for performing outcome response), and were asked to
read them then answer a questionnaire.
The materials were
educational essays on cigarette smoking, which either supported the conclusion
that cigarette smoking was likely or unlikely to lead to lung cancer and heart
disease, that stopping smoking was likely or unlikely to eliminate or reduce risk
for these conditions, that lung and heart disease are or are not serious conditions
and that the reader would have either little difficulty or great difficulty
reducing or eliminating cigarette smoking. They also measured their participant’s
intention to stop smoking, their belief they would develop health problems from
smoking, the severity of these problems, the probability to prevent the
problems by quitting smoking and their ability to quit smoking. A measure of
their fear was also added. This was done by giving participants a short
questionnaire after the essays.
The results are summarized
in the table below:
They found that participants
in the high-probability essay condition showed greater expectancies of
developing the ill effects of smoking than participants given the
low-probability essays. Those shown the high-efficacy essay demonstrated more
expectancy for avoiding ill effects by quitting smoking than those in the
low-efficacy condition. Participants given high-severity essays rated the outcomes
of smoking as more severe and dangerous than did participants exposed to the
low-severity essays. Finally, participants
who read the high self-efficacy essay had higher expectations about their
ability to give up smoking than those in the low self-efficacy communication
condition. The analysis of the fear reports showed that the high-severity essay
produced greater feelings of fear than the low-severity essay did.
Not only did
self-efficacy expectancy significantly influence intentions to adopt the
recommended remedy (quitting smoking), but self-efficacy expectancy proved to
be the most powerful predictor of behavioral intentions. Colgate highlighting the
simplicity of using the mouthwash to fix the problem of bad breath is a good
example of inducing high self-efficacy to fix a problem, which is portrayed as
having very sever embarrassing consequences.
Maddux, J. E.,
& Rogers, R. W. (1983). Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised
theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 19(5), 469-479
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.