Strategic message design within the context of oral sex: Integrating guilt appeals and Prospect Theory
Open Access
- Author:
- Weiner, Judith Louise
- Graduate Program:
- Communication Arts and Sciences
- Degree:
- Doctor of Philosophy
- Document Type:
- Dissertation
- Date of Defense:
- August 27, 2004
- Committee Members:
- Roxanne Louise Parrott, Committee Chair/Co-Chair
Walid A Afifi, Committee Member
Jon F Nussbaum, Committee Member
Michael L Hecht, Committee Member
Eva Sharon Lefkowitz, Committee Member - Keywords:
- message framing
emotions
message design
sexual health
guilt appeals
Prospect Theory - Abstract:
- Sexual decision making is not always a rational process and once engaged in sexual activities, individuals are not necessarily thinking about safety concerns or the consequences of their behavior. Health messages are often based on rational appeals that point to risk and encourage precautionary actions to protect individuals from pregnancy, STIs, and HIV but neglect the affective responses to such messages. The current study was designed to develop messages that address the cognitive and affective involved in sexual decision-making by integrating affect into Prospect Theory. According to the framing postulate of Prospect Theory, individuals will respond differently to factually equivalent information based on how it is framed (Rothman & Salovey, 1997). Different audience characteristics (e.g., sex, health orientation) and individual predisposition variables such as self- and response efficacy also influence individuals’ responses to messages. Therefore, it was posited that segments of the audience would respond to gain- or loss-framed guilt appeals slightly differently. To examine the processes associated with peoples’ responses to sexual health messages participants completed measures of health orientation, intensity of relational commitment, anger, embarrassment, guilt, perceived behavioral control, self- and response efficacy, reinforcement of attitudes, actual and procedural knowledge and behavioral intentions. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the five message conditions; they were instructed to read a message and then completed a questionnaire. Results revealed differences between ‘users’ and ‘nonusers.’ More specifically, ‘users’ reported greater intentions to use protection for oral sex, were less concerned with what their partners’ thought of them, were less angry, but experienced more guilt than ‘nonusers.’ Individuals in committed relationships were examined and the results for both the gain- and loss-framed conditions were similar. That is, for both types of frames guilt and anger were significant predictors of intentions to use. The more guile individuals experienced the more likely they were to use protection for oral sex in the future and the inverse relationship was found with anger. Surprisingly, a similar pattern emerged for individuals in non-committed relationships. These results are discussed in terms of the importance of using theory to guide message construction and the significance of guilt appeals. Limitations of the study and implications for future research are also discussed.