Calibrating the response to health warnings: Limiting both overreaction and underreaction with self-affirmation

Psychological Science

Volumn 22, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 572-578

  Griffin, Dale W ^a   Harris, Peter R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

defensiveness; health risk information; optimistic denial; risk; self affirmation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CALIBRATION; DECISION MAKING; DEFENSE MECHANISM; FEMALE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH EDUCATION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; SELF CONCEPT;

ADULT; CALIBRATION; DECISION MAKING; DEFENSE MECHANISMS; FEMALE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH EDUCATION; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; SELF EFFICACY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79955750044     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: 14679280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0956797611405678     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Briñol P.,Petty R.E. Advances in experimental social psychology. Zanna M.P., ed. New York, NY: Academic Press; 2009:69-118.
2. Correll J.,Spencer S.J.,Zanna M.P. An affirmed self and an open mind: Self-affirmation and sensitivity to argument strength. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2004;40: 350-356.
3. Harris P.R.,Epton T. The impact of self-affirmation on health cognition, health behaviour and other health-related responses: A narrative review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2009;3: 962-978.
4. Harris P.R.,Napper L. Self-affirmation and the biased processing of health-risk information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2005;31: 1250-1263.
5. Hightower J.M. Diagnosis: mercury: Money, politics, and poison. Washington, DC: Shearwater Books; 2009:.
6. Muller D.,Judd C.M.,Yzerbyt V.Y. When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2005;89: 852-863.
7. Preacher C.J.,Curran P.J.,Bauer D.J. Computational tools for probing interactions in multiple regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 2006;31: 437-448.
8. Slovic P.,Finucane M.L.,Peters E.,MacGregor D.G. Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Gilovich T. Griffin D. Kahneman D., ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2002:397-420.
9. Slovic P.,Fischhoff B.,Lichtenstein S. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Kahneman D. Slovic P. Tversky A., ed. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 1982:463-489.
10. Steele C.M. Advances in experimental social psychology. Berkowitz L., ed. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1988:261-302.
11. Thompson S.C.,Schlehofer M.M. Control, denial, and heightened sensitivity reactions to personal threat: Testing the generalizability of the threat orientation approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2008;34: 1070-1083.
12. Thompson S.C.,Schlehofer M.M.,Gonzalez A.,Denison E. Reactions to a health threat: Dispositional threat orientations and message characteristics. British Journal of Health Psychology.:.
13. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2009). What you need to know about mercury in fish and shellfish. Retrieved November 27, 2003, from http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ ucm110591.htm
14. Wiebe D.J.,Korbel C. The self-regulation of health and illness behavior. Cameron L.D. Leventhal H., ed. London, England: Routledge; 2003:184-203.
15. Wolburg J.M. College students' responses to anti-smoking messages: Denial, defiance, and other boomerang effects. Journal of Consumer Affairs. 2006;40: 293-323.