Reducing Psychological Reactance to Health Promotion Messages: Comparing Preemptive and Postscript Mitigation Strategies

• Published in: Health communication Vol. 37; no. 3; pp. 366 - 374
• Main Authors: Richards, Adam S., Bessarabova, Elena, Banas, John A., Bernard, Daniel R.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Routledge 01.03.2022; Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
• Subjects: Attitude change; Attitudes; Autonomy; Behavior change; Between-subjects design; Campaigns; Efficacy; Freedom; Health Promotion; Health risks; Humans; Intention; Measurement; Mediation; Mental health; Mitigation; Nutrition; Persuasive Communication; Preempting; Psychological reactance; Psychological Theory; Reactance; Reminders; Restoration; Scripts; Time measurement
• ISSN: 1041-0236; 1532-7027; 1532-7027
• DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2020.1839203

This study compared the relative efficacy of two strategies designed to mitigate psychological reactance in health campaigns by using reminders of behavioral autonomy: preemptive scripts, which appear before the appeal, and restoration postscripts, which appear after. Employing a mixed-model experiment with a 2 (threat to freedom: low vs. high) × 3 (reactance-mitigation strategy: control vs. preemptive script vs. restoration postscript) × 2 (health campaign topic: exercise vs. nutrition) between-subjects design and a within-subjects factor of time (immediate posttest measurement followed by a one-week delay), this study (N = 394) compared the effects of the two mitigation strategies on reactance, attitude, and behavioral intention at two points in time. Moderated mediation models indicated that the reactance-mitigation strategies equivalently reduced the degree to which reactance was experienced in response to increasingly threatening health appeals (relative to the control). This effect indirectly influenced behavioral intention via attitude change and remained after one week.