Peripheral cues and involvement level: Influences on acceptance of a mammography message

Journal of Health Communication

Volumn 3, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 119-135

  Kirby, Susan D ^a   Ureda, John R ^b   Rose, Randall L ^b   Hussey, James ^b  

^a CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AFRICAN AMERICAN; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; FEMALE; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT;

ADULT; AFRICAN AMERICANS; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION;

EID: 0032034524     PISSN: 10810730     EISSN: 10870415     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/108107398127418     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Andrews, C., & Shimp, T. (1990, Fall). Effects of involvement, argument strength, and source characteristics on central and peripheral processing of advertising. Psychology and Marketing, 195–214.
2. Baker, L. (1982). Breast cancer demonstration project: Five-year summary report. New York: American Cancer Society.
3. Cacioppo, J., Petty, R., Kao, C., & Rodriguez, R. (1986). Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1032–1043.
4. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
5. Celsi, R., & Olson, J. (1988). The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 210–224.
6. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Dodd, G. D. (1993). American Cancer Society guidelines from the past to the present. Cancer, 72(4), 1429–1432.
8. Finn, A. (1988). Print ad recognition readership scores: An information processing perspective. Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 168–177.
9. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Beliefs, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
10. Flora, J. A., & Maibach, E. W. (1990, December). Cognitive responses to AIDS information: The effects of issue involvement and message appeal. Communication Research, 17, 759-774.
11. Friestad, M., & Wright, P. (1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 1–31.
12. Galassi, J. P., Schanberg, R., & Ware, W. B. (1992). The patient reactions assessment: A brief measure of the quality of the patient-provider medical relationship. Psychological Assessment, 4, 346–351.
13. Gorn, G. J. (1982). The effects of music in advertising on choice behavior: A classical conditioning approach. Journal of Marketing, 46, 94–101.
14. Lerman, C., Rimer, B., Trock, B., Balsheim, A., & Engstrom, P. (1990). Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening. Preventive Medicine, 19, 279–290.
15. McGuire, W. J. (1989). Theoretical foundations of campaigns. In R. E. Rice & C. K. Atkin (Eds.), Public communications campaigns (2nd ed., pp. 43–65). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16. Meyers-Levy, J., & Peracchio, L. (1995). Understanding the effects of color: How the correspondence between available and required resources affects attitudes. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 121–138.
17. National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Prevention and Control. (1988). Annual cancer statistics review, including cancer trends: 1950-1985. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
18. National Cancer Institute, Office of Cancer Communications. (1989). Women’s attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs about mammography: A focus group interview study. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
19. National Center for Health Statistics. (1997). Health, United States, 1996-97 and injury chartbook. Hyattsville, MD: Centers for Disease Control, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
20. Park, C. W., & Young, S. M. (1986). Consumer response to television commercials: The impact of involvement and background music on brand attitude formation. Journal of Marketing Research, 23, 11–24.
21. Percy, L. (1984, July). Ways in which the people, words, and pictures in advertising influence its effectiveness. Paper presented at the Financial Institutions Marketing Association Conference, Chicago.
22. Petty, R., Baker, S., & Gleicher, F. (1991). Attitudes and drug abuse prevention: Implications of the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Donohew, H. Sypher, & W. Bukoski (Eds.), Persuasive communication and drug abuse prevention (pp. 71–90). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915–1926.
24. Petty, R., & Cacioppo, J. (1981). Issue involvement as a moderator of the effects on attitude of advertising content and context. Advances in Consumer Research, 8, 20–24.
25. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
26. Petty, R., Cacioppo, J., & Kasmer, J. (1987). The role of affect in the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Donohew, H. Sypher, & E. Higgins (Eds.), Communication, social cognition, and affect (pp. 117–146). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983, September). Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 135–146.
28. Prochaska, J. O., Norcross, J. C., & DiClemente, C. C. (1994). Changing for good. New York: Avon.
29. Reynolds, K., West, S., & Aiken, L. (1990, Winter). Increasing the use of mammography: A pilot program. Health Education Quarterly, 17, 429–441.
30. Rimer, B., Davis, S., Engstrom, P., Myers, R., & Rosan, J. (1988). Some reasons for compliance and non-compliance in a health maintenance organization breast cancer screening program. Journal of Compliance Health Care, 3(2), 103–114.
31. Rimer, B., Keintz, M., Engstrom, P., & Rosan, J. (1988, November). Predictors of participation in a breast screening program. Presented at the 116th Annual Meeting of the American Public Health Association, Boston, MA.
32. Salmon, C. (1986). Perspectives on involvement in consumer and communication research. Progress in Communication Science, 7, 243–268.
33. SAS Institute. (1991). SAS/STAT user’s guide (Release 6.03). Cary, NC: Author.
34. Schechter, C., Vanchieri, C., & Crofton, C. (1990, May-June). Evaluating women’s attitudes and perceptions in developing mammography promotion messages. Public Health Reports, 105, 253–257.
35. Shapiro, S., Venet, W., & Strax, P. (1985). Selection, follow-up and analysis in the Health Insurance Plan Study: A randomized trial with breast cancer screening (NCI Monograph, Vol. 67; NCI Publication 85-2713). Washington, D.C.: National Cancer Institute.
36. Silverberg, E., & Lubera, J. (1989). Cancer statistics, 1989. Ca—A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 39, 3–20.
37. Sutton, S. M., Balch, G., & Lefebvre, C. (1993). Strategic questions for consumer-based health communications. In 5 a day for better health: NCI media campaign strategy (pp. 1–12). Washington, DC: National Cancer Institute.
38. Tabar, L., & Dean, P. (1987). The control of breast cancer through mammography screening: What is the evidence? In E. Sickles (Ed.), Radiological clinicians of North America (pp. 993–1005). Philadelphia: Saunders.
39. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1990, September 14). Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 39(36), 620–630.
40. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1996, October 4). Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 45(39), 833–837.