Altendorf Maria B, van Weert Julia C M, Hoving Ciska, Smit Eline S
University of Amsterdam, Department of Communication Science, Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University, Department of Health Promotion, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Digit Health. 2019 Feb 27;5:2055207619832767. doi: 10.1177/2055207619832767. eCollection 2019 Jan-Dec.
Individuals can feel more motivated to change health behaviour when perceiving autonomy-support, as induced through non-pressuring message phrasing and the provision of choice: autonomy-supportive message framing. Additionally, controlling message phrasing - commands that do not provide choice - can thwart autonomy and lead to reactance, which is detrimental to the persuasiveness of health messages. Many health messages have not been formulated in an autonomy-supportive manner and therefore could arouse reactance, resulting in reduced intervention effectiveness. We aimed to test the effects of autonomy-supportive vs. controlling alcohol reduction message frames on individuals' perceived autonomy-support from these messages; and their reactance towards the message while considering the individual need for autonomy in the context of an online computer-tailored alcohol reduction intervention. A 2 (autonomy-supportive language vs. controlling language) × 2 (choice vs. no choice) between-subjects experiment ( = 521) was conducted using an online computer-tailored alcohol reduction intervention. Outcome measures were perceived autonomy-support and reactance and we investigated whether an individual's need for autonomy moderated the effect of autonomy-supportive and controlling message frames on those outcome variables. Multiple linear regression analyses showed that neither autonomy-supportive nor controlling message frames had significant effects on perceived autonomy-support or reactance, and there was no moderation from the need for autonomy. Overall, participants evaluated the intervention as positive and perceived high levels of autonomy-support, regardless of the message frame used. Future research needs to test whether the positive intervention evaluation is due to content tailoring, and whether more distinguishable manipulations of message frames could be effective.
当个体感受到自主性支持时，他们会更有动力去改变健康行为，这种自主性支持是通过无压力的信息措辞和提供选择来诱导的，即自主性支持性的信息框架。此外，控制性的信息措辞——不提供选择的命令——会阻碍自主性并导致抵触情绪，这对健康信息的说服力是有害的。许多健康信息并非以自主性支持的方式制定，因此可能会引发抵触情绪，导致干预效果降低。我们旨在测试自主性支持性与控制性的减少酒精摄入信息框架对个体从这些信息中感受到的自主性支持的影响；以及在在线计算机定制的减少酒精摄入干预背景下，考虑个体对自主性的需求时，他们对信息的抵触情绪。使用在线计算机定制的减少酒精摄入干预进行了一项2（自主性支持性语言与控制性语言）×2（有选择与无选择）的组间实验（N = 521）。结果测量指标是感受到的自主性支持和抵触情绪，我们研究了个体对自主性的需求是否调节了自主性支持性和控制性信息框架对这些结果变量的影响。多元线性回归分析表明，自主性支持性和控制性信息框架对感受到的自主性支持或抵触情绪均无显著影响，并且自主性需求也没有起到调节作用。总体而言，无论使用何种信息框架，参与者都对干预给予了积极评价，并感受到了高水平的自主性支持。未来的研究需要测试积极的干预评价是否归因于内容定制，以及对信息框架进行更具区分性的操纵是否有效。
