Message Generalizations That Support Evidence-Based Persuasive Message Design: Specifying the Evidentiary Requirements

Health Communication

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 106-113

  O’Keefe, Daniel J ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HUMAN; MEDICAL INFORMATION; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC);

EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH COMMUNICATION; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84914169786     PISSN: 10410236     EISSN: 15327027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2014.974123     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Abraham, C., & Kools, M. (Eds.). (2012). Writing health communication: An evidence-based guide. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
2. Armstrong, J. S. (2010). Persuasive advertising: Evidence-based principles. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
3. Asendorpf, J. B., Conner, M., De Fruyt, F., De Houwer, J., Denissen, J. J. A., Fiedler, K., … Wicherts, J. M. (2013). Recommendations for increasing replicability in psychology. European Journal of Personality, 27, 108–119.
4. Basil, M., & Witte, K. (2012). Health risk message design using the extended parallel process model. In H. Cho (Ed.), Health communication message design: Theory and practice (pp. 41–58). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
5. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chicester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
6. Brashers, D. E., & Jackson, S. (1999). Changing conceptions of “message effects”: A 24-year overview. Human Communication Research, 25, 457–477.
7. Brown, C. H., Ten Have, T. R., Jo, B., Dagne, G., Wyman, P. A., Muthen, B., & Gibbons, R. D. (2009). Adaptive designs for randomized trials in public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 30, 1–25.
8. Browning, C. J., & Thomas, S. A. (Eds.). (2005). Behavioural change: An evidence-based handbook for social and public health. Edinburgh, UK: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone.
9. Bushman, B. J., & Wang, M. C. (2009). Vote-counting procedures in meta-analysis. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed., pp. 207–220). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
10. Card, N. A. (2012). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. New York, NY: Guilford.
11. Chan, A. W., Hrobjartsson, A., Haahr, M. T., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Altman, D. G. (2004). Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: Comparison of protocols to published articles. Journal of the American Medical Association, 291, 2457–2465.
12. Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p <.05). American Psychologist, 49, 997–1002.
13. Cumming, G. (2014). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25, 7–29.
14. Cumming, G., Fidler, F., Leonard, M., Kalinowski, P., Christiansen, A., Kleinig, A., … Wilson, S. (2007). Statistical reform in psychology: Is anything changing? Psychological Science, 18, 230–232.
15. Cushing, C. C., & Steele, R. G. (2010). A meta-analytic review of eHealth interventions for pediatric health promoting and maintaining behaviors. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 35, 937–949.
16. Dwan, K., Gamble, C., Williamson, P. R., Kirkham, J. J., & the Reporting Bias Group. (2013). Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias: An updated review. PLoS ONE, 8(7), e66844.
17. Ernst, E., & Resch, K. L. (1994). Reviewer bias: A blinded experimental study. Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine, 124, 178–182.
18. Evanschitzky, H., Baumgarth, C., Hubbard, R., & Armstrong, J. S. (2007). Replication research’s disturbing trend. Journal of Business Research, 60, 411–415.
19. Faulkner, C., Fidler, F., & Cumming, G. (2008). The value of RCT evidence depends on the quality of statistical analysis. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 46, 270–281.
20. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
21. Fritz, A., Scherndl, T., & Kühberger, A. (2013). A comprehensive review of reporting practices in psychological journals: Are effect sizes really enough? Theory and Psychology, 23, 98–122.
22. Gallagher, K. M., & Updegraff, J. A. (2012). Health message framing effects on attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A meta-analytic review. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 43, 101–116.
23. Gerber, A., & Malhotra, N. (2008). Do statistical reporting standards affect what is published? Publication bias in two leading political science journals. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 3, 313–326.
24. Glasgow, R. E. (2007). eHealth evaluation and dissemination research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32, S119–S126.
25. Goldstein, N. J., Martin, S. J., & Cialdini, R. B. (2008). Yes!: 50 Scientifically proven ways to be persuasive. New York, NY: Free Press.
26. Goodall, C. E., Slater, M. D., & Myers, T. A. (2013). Fear and anger responses to local news coverage of alcohol-related crimes, accidents, and injuries: Explaining news effects on policy support using a representative sample of messages and people. Journal of Communication, 63, 373–392.
27. Grabe, M. E., & Westley, B. H. (2003). The controlled experiment. In G. H. Stempel III, D. H. Weaver, & G. C. Wilhoit (Eds.), Mass communication research and theory (pp. 267–298). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
28. Harlow, L. L., Mulaik, S. A., & Steiger, J. H. (Eds.) (1997). What if there were no significance tests? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29. Hart, W., Albarracín, D., Eagly, A. H., Brechan, I., Lindberg, M. J., & Merrill, L. (2009). Feeling validated versus being correct: A meta-analysis of selective exposure to information. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 555–588.
30. Hogan, K. (2011). The science of influence: How to get anyone to say yes in 8 minutes or less! (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
31. Igou, E. R., & Bless, H. (2007). Conversational expectations as a basis for order effects in persuasion. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26, 260–273.
32. Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine, 2, 696–701.
33. Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2008). Why most discovered true associations are inflated. Epidemiology, 19, 640–648.
34. Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Trikalinos, T. A. (2007). The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: A large survey. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 176, 1091–1096.
35. Jackson, S. (1992). Message effects research: Principles of design and analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
36. Jackson, S., & Aakhus, M. (2014). Becoming more reflective about the role of design in communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 42, 125–134.
37. Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1983). Generalizing about messages: Suggestions for design and analysis of experiments. Human Communication Research, 9, 169–181.
38. Jefferson, T., Rudin, M., Folse, S. B., & Davidoff, F. (2007). Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, issue 2, article MR000016.
39. Jensen, J. D. (2008). Scientific uncertainty in news coverage of cancer research: Effects of hedging on scientists’ and journalists’ credibility. Human Communication Research, 34, 347–369.
40. Kay, E. J., & Richter, M. L. (1977). The category-confound: A design error. Journal of Social Psychology, 103, 57–63.
41. Kim, H. S., Bigman, C. A., Leader, A. E., Lerman, C., & Cappella, J. N. (2012). Narrative health communication and behavior change: The influence of exemplars in the news on intention to quit smoking. Journal of Communication, 62, 473–492.
42. Koole, S. L., & Lakens, D. (2012). Rewarding replications: A sure and simple way to improve psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 608–614.
43. Kromrey, J. D., & Rendina-Gobioff, G. (2006). On knowing what we do not know: An empirical comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 357–373.
44. Lee, S., Cappella, J. N., Lerman, C., & Strasser, A. A. (2011). Smoking cues, argument strength, and perceived effectiveness of antismoking PSAs. Nicotine and Tobacco Research, 13, 282–290.
45. Levine, T. R., Weber, R., Hullett, C., Park, H. S., & Lindsey, L. L. (2008). A critical assessment of null hypothesis significance testing in quantitative communication research. Human Communication Research, 34, 171–187.
46. Levine, T. R., Weber, R., Park, H. S., & Hullett, C. (2008). A communication researchers’ guide to null hypothesis significance testing and alternatives. Human Communication Research, 34, 188–209.
47. Mahoney, M. J. (1977). Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1, 161–175.
48. Mann, T., Sherman, D., & Updegraff, J. (2004). Dispositional motivations and message framing: A test of the congruency hypothesis in college students. Health Psychology, 23, 330–334.
49. Meyerowitz, B. E., & Chaiken, S. (1987). The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 500–510.
50. Murayama, K., Pekrun, R., & Fiedler, K. (2014). Research practices that can prevent an inflation of false-positive rates. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18, 107–118.
51. Nieuwenhuis, S., Forstmann, B. U., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2011). Erroneous analyses of interactions in neuroscience: A problem of significance. Nature Neuroscience, 14, 1105–1107.
52. O’Keefe, D. J. (2011a). The asymmetry of predictive and descriptive capabilities in quantitative communication research: Implications for hypothesis development and testing. Communication Methods and Measures, 5, 113–125.
53. O’Keefe, D. J. (2011b). Generalizing about the persuasive effects of message variations: The case of gain-framed and loss-framed appeals. In T. van Haaften, H. Jansen, J. de Jong, & W. Koetsenruijter (Eds.), Bending opinion: Essays on persuasion in the public domain (pp. 117–131). Leiden, The Netherlands: Leiden University Press.
54. O’Keefe, D. J. (2013). The relative persuasiveness of different message types does not vary as a function of the persuasive outcome assessed: Evidence from 29 meta-analyses of 2,062 effect sizes for 13 message variations. In E. L. Cohen (Ed.), Communication yearbook 37 (pp. 221–249). New York, NY: Routledge.
55. O’Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2006). The advantages of compliance or the disadvantages of noncompliance? A meta-analytic review of the relative persuasive effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages. In C. S. Beck (Ed.), Communication yearbook 30 (pp. 1–43). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
56. Porath-Waller, A. J., Beasley, E., & Beirness, D. J. (2010). A meta-analytic review of school-based prevention for cannabis use. Health Education and Behavior, 37, 709–723.
57. Reeves, B., & Geiger, S. (1994). Designing experiments that assess psychological responses to media messages. In A. Lang (Ed.), Measuring psychological responses to media messages (pp. 165–180). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
58. Rosenthal, R. (1991). Replication in behavioral research. In J. W. Neuliep (Ed.), Replication research in the social sciences (pp. 1–30). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
59. Scott-Sheldon, L. A. J., DeMartini, K. S., Carey, K. B., & Carey, M. P. (2009). Alcohol interventions for college students improves antecedents of behavioral change: Results from a meta-analysis of 34 randomized controlled trials. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 28, 799–823.
60. Sherman, D. K., Mann, T., & Updegraff, J. A. (2006). Approach/avoidance orientation, message framing, and health behavior: Understanding the congruency effect. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 165–169.
61. Siegel, J. T., Alvaro, E. M., Crano, W. D, Lac, A., Ting, S., & Jones, S. P. (2008). A quasi-experimental investigation of message appeal variations on organ donor registration rates. Health Psychology, 27, 170–178.
62. Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22, 1359–1366.
63. Slater, M. D., Goodall, C. E., & Hayes, A. F. (2009). Self-reported news attention does assess differential processing of media content: An experiment on risk perceptions utilizing a random sample of US local crime and accident news. Journal of Communication, 59, 117–134.
64. Sponberg, H. (1946). A study of the relative effectiveness of climax and anti-climax order in an argumentative speech. Speech Monographs, 13, 35–44.
65. Sun, S., Pan, W., & Wang, L. L. (2010). A comprehensive review of effect size reporting and interpreting practices in academic journals in education and psychology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 989–1004.
66. Thorson, E., Wicks, R., & Leshner, G. (2012). Experimental methodology in journalism and mass communication research. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89, 112–124.
67. Tsang, E. W. K., & Kwan, K.-M. (1999). Replication and theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24, 759–780.
68. Uncles, M. D., & Kwok, S. (2013). Designing research with in-built differentiated replication. Journal of Business Research, 66, 1398–1405.
69. Updegraff, J. A., Sherman, D. K., Luyster, F. S., & Mann, T. L. (2007). The effects of message quality and congruency on perceptions of tailored health communications. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 249–257.
70. Wanyonyi, K. L., Themessl-Huber, M., Humphris, G., & Freeman, R. (2011). A systematic review and meta-analysis of face-to-face communication of tailored health messages: Implications for practice. Patient Education and Counseling, 85, 348–355.
71. Wells, G. L., & Windschitl, P. D. (1999). Stimulus sampling and social psychological experimentation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1115–1125.
72. Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communication Monographs, 59, 329–349.
73. Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health programs. Health Education and Behavior, 27, 591–615.
74. Yzer, M. (2013). Reasoned action theory: Persuasion as belief-based behavior change. In J. P. Dillard & L. Shen (Eds.), The Sage handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (2nd ed., pp. 120–136). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.