Does Smokers’ Self-Construal Moderate the Effect of (Self-)persuasion on Smoking?

Shuang Li, S. Ritter, Chongzeng Bi, R. Baaren, Barbara C. N. Müller
{"title":"Does Smokers’ Self-Construal Moderate the Effect of (Self-)persuasion on Smoking?","authors":"Shuang Li, S. Ritter, Chongzeng Bi, R. Baaren, Barbara C. N. Müller","doi":"10.5334/HPB.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research has shown that self-persuasion is more effective in increasing smokers’ risk perception and decreasing short-term smoking behavior compared to the traditional direct persuasion. However, the role of self-construal, which is closely associated with how one perceives persuasive messages, is not explored. The current research filled this gap by introducing self-construal to the self-persuasion literature to investigate its potential moderating role. Throughout five studies, we measured daily smokers’ chronic self-construal (Study 1–3), selected smokers with different culturally-nurtured self-construal (Study 4), and primed situational self-construal (Study 5) to examine the role of self-construal in regard to smokers’ cognition, attitude, and short-term smoking behavior, after being targeted by direct- or self-persuasion. Health warnings on cigarette packages and text regarding the negative consequences of smoking were used as direct persuasive messages. Adapted versions of health warnings and an argumentation task were used to induce self-persuasion. Null results were obtained from most of the studies. The overall support for the null hypothesis, however, remains weak and needs to be further verified. Limitations and future research direction are discussed.","PeriodicalId":92902,"journal":{"name":"Health psychology bulletin","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health psychology bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/HPB.17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Research has shown that self-persuasion is more effective in increasing smokers’ risk perception and decreasing short-term smoking behavior compared to the traditional direct persuasion. However, the role of self-construal, which is closely associated with how one perceives persuasive messages, is not explored. The current research filled this gap by introducing self-construal to the self-persuasion literature to investigate its potential moderating role. Throughout five studies, we measured daily smokers’ chronic self-construal (Study 1–3), selected smokers with different culturally-nurtured self-construal (Study 4), and primed situational self-construal (Study 5) to examine the role of self-construal in regard to smokers’ cognition, attitude, and short-term smoking behavior, after being targeted by direct- or self-persuasion. Health warnings on cigarette packages and text regarding the negative consequences of smoking were used as direct persuasive messages. Adapted versions of health warnings and an argumentation task were used to induce self-persuasion. Null results were obtained from most of the studies. The overall support for the null hypothesis, however, remains weak and needs to be further verified. Limitations and future research direction are discussed.
吸烟者的自我解释是否会调节(自我)说服对吸烟的影响?
研究表明,与传统的直接说服相比,自我说服在提高吸烟者的风险认知和减少短期吸烟行为方面更有效。然而,与一个人如何感知有说服力的信息密切相关的自我解释的作用并没有被探讨。目前的研究填补了这一空白,将自我解释引入到自我说服文献中,探讨其潜在的调节作用。在五项研究中,我们测量了日常吸烟者的慢性自我解释(研究1-3),选择了具有不同文化培养的自我解释(研究4)的吸烟者,并启动了情境自我解释(研究5),以检验自我解释在吸烟者的认知、态度和短期吸烟行为中所起的作用,在直接或自我说服的目标下。香烟包装上的健康警告和有关吸烟负面后果的文字被用作直接的说服性信息。改编版本的健康警告和论证任务被用来诱导自我说服。大多数研究结果为零。然而,对零假设的总体支持仍然薄弱,需要进一步验证。讨论了局限性和未来的研究方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
52 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信