Suppr超能文献

忽视理论和误解证据:对恐惧诉求的错误信念。

Ignoring theory and misinterpreting evidence: the false belief in fear appeals.

机构信息

a Department of Work and Social Psychology , Maastricht University , Maastricht , The Netherlands.

b Department of Methodology & Statistics , Open University of the Netherlands , Heerlen , The Netherlands.

出版信息

Health Psychol Rev. 2018 Jun;12(2):111-125. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2017.1415767. Epub 2017 Dec 28.

Abstract

Use of fear appeals assumes that when people are emotionally confronted with the negative effects of their behaviour they will change that behaviour. That reasoning is simple and intuitive, but only true under specific, rare circumstances. Risk perception theories predict that if people will experience a threat, they want to counter that threat. However, how they do so is determined by their coping efficacy level: if efficacy is high, they may change their behaviour in the suggested direction; if efficacy is low, they react defensively. Research on fear appeals should be methodologically sound, comparing a threatening to a non-threatening intervention under high and low efficacy levels, random assignment and measuring behaviour as outcome. We critically review extant empirical evidence and conclude that it does not support positive effects of fear appeals. Nonetheless, their use persists and is even promoted by health psychology researchers, causing scientific insights to be ignored or misinterpreted.

摘要

使用恐惧诉求假设当人们在情感上面对他们行为的负面影响时,他们会改变这种行为。这种推理简单直观,但仅在特定的、罕见的情况下才成立。风险感知理论预测,如果人们将面临威胁,他们会想要应对这种威胁。然而,他们如何应对取决于他们的应对效能水平:如果效能高,他们可能会按照建议的方向改变行为;如果效能低,他们会做出防御性反应。恐惧诉求的研究应该在方法上是合理的,即在高和低效能水平下,将威胁与非威胁干预进行比较,随机分配,并将行为作为结果进行测量。我们批判性地回顾了现有的实证证据,得出的结论是,恐惧诉求并没有产生积极的效果。尽管如此,它们的使用仍然存在,甚至被健康心理学研究人员所提倡,导致科学见解被忽视或误解。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验