Countless messages and campaigns have been designed to convince individuals to engage in healthy behaviors in their daily lives. Because the vast majority of these messages are typically generated by others, the current study explores the effects of self-generated messages in the context of mobile media. A 3 × 2 (persuasion: self- vs. other-generated narrative vs. other-generated non-narrative × topic: regular exercise vs. healthy diet) field experiment (n = 133) was conducted during a 10-day timeframe. Results indicate that self-generated messages were more successful than other-generated messages at increasing vegetable consumption and fruit intake by way of boosting pro-attitudinal arguments and health self-efficacy. However, both self- and other-generated messages failed to increase regular exercise during the study period. We discuss theoretical and practical implications for health interventions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.. OECD health statistics. 2017. www.oecd.org/health/health-data.htm (accessed Dec.1, 2017).
2.
AronsonE. The power of self-persuasion. American Psychologist, 1999; 54:875–884.
3.
BemDJ. An experimental analysis of self-persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1965; 1:199–218.
4.
ValkenburgPM. Understanding self-effects in social media. Human Communication Research, 2017; 43:477–490.
5.
PratkanisAR, AronsonE. (2001) Age of propaganda: the everyday use and abuse of persuasion. (Rev. ed.) New York: Henry Holt.
6.
ZimbardoPG. The effect of effort and improvisation on self-persuasion produced by role-playing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1965; 1:103–120.
7.
GreenMC, BrockTC. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2000; 79:701–721.
8.
SlaterMD, RounerD. Value-affirmative and value-protective processing of alcohol education messages that include statistical evidence or anecdotes. Communication Research, 1996; 23:210–235.
9.
HinyardLJ, KreuterMW. Using narrative communication as a tool for health behavior change: a conceptual, theoretical, and empirical overview. Health Education and Behavior, 2007; 34:777–792.
10.
AtkinCK, RiceRE. (2012) Theory and principles of public communication campaigns. In RiceRE, AtkinCK, eds. Public communication campaigns. Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 3–19.
11.
PettyRE, WheelerSC, TormalaZT. (2003) Persuasion and attitude change. In MillonT, LernerMJ, eds. Comprehensive handbook of psychology: personality and social psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 353–382.
12.
JanisIL, KingBT. The influence of role playing on opinion change. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1954; 49:211–218.
13.
ElmsAC. Influence of fantasy ability on attitude change through role playing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1966; 4:36–43.
14.
AlhabashSE, WiseK. PeaceMaker: changing students' attitudes toward Palestinians and Israelis through video game play. International Journal of Communication, 2012; 6:356–380.
15.
KlasnjaP, PrattW. Healthcare in the pocket: mapping the space of mobile-phone health interventions. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 2012; 45:184–198.
16.
RodgersA, CorbettT, BramleyD, et al.Do u smoke after txt? Results of a randomised trial of smoking cessation using mobile phone text messaging. Tobacco Control, 2005; 14:255–261.
17.
ArmstrongAW, WatsonAJ, MakredesM, et al.Text-message reminders to improve sunscreen use: a randomized, controlled trial using electronic monitoring. Archives of Dermatology, 2009; 145:1230–1236.
18.
BanduraA. (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
19.
BanduraA. Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media Psychology, 2001; 3:265–299.
20.
SchwarzerR, LuszczynskaA. (2007) Self-efficacy. In GerrardM, McCaulKD, eds. Health behavior constructs: theory, measurement, and research. Rockville, MD: National Cancer Institute. www.cancercontrol.cancer.gov/brp/research/constructs/self_efficacy.html (accessed Dec.1, 2017).
21.
BriñolP, McCaslinMJ, PettyRE. Self-generated persuasion: effects of the target and direction of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2012; 102:925–940.
22.
GreenwaldAG, AlbertRD. Acceptance and recall of improvised arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1968; 8(1, Pt.1):31–34.
23.
MillerRL, WozniakW. Counter-attitudinal advocacy: effort vs. self-generation of arguments. Current Research in Social Psychology, 2001; 6:46–55.
24.
MussweilerT, NeumannR. Sources of mental contamination: comparing the effects of self-generated versus externally provided primes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2000; 36:194–206.
25.
SlameckaNJ, GrafP. The generation effect: delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1978; 4:592–604.
26.
PettyRE, HaugtvedtCP, SmithSM. (1995) Elaboration as a determinant of attitude strength: creating attitudes that are persistent, resistant, and predictive of behavior. In PettyRE, KrosnickJA, eds. Attitude strength: antecedents and consequences. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 93–130.
27.
RimalRN. Longitudinal influences of knowledge and self-efficacy on exercise behavior: tests of a mutual reinforcement model. Journal of Health Psychology, 2001; 6:31–46.
28.
ChoH, BosterFJ. Development and validation of value-, outcome-, and impression-relevant involvement scales. Communication Research, 2005; 32:235–264.
29.
Ministry of Health and Welfare. (2013) Korean nutrition intake standard: application guidebook. Seoul: Ministry of Health and Welfare.
30.
FoxJA. The use of virtual self models to promote self-efficacy and physical activity performance. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 2010.
