UNC Perceived Message Effectiveness: Validation of a Brief Scale

Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Volumn 53, Issue 8, 2018, Pages 732-742

  Baig, Sabeeh A ^a   Noar, Seth M ^b   Gottfredson, Nisha C ^a   Boynton, Marcella H ^a,b   Ribisl, Kurt M ^a,b   Brewer, Noel T ^a,b  

^a IL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

Formative research; Health communication; Item response theory; Message development

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BEHAVIOR ASSESSMENT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MIDDLE AGED; PROGRAM EVALUATION; PSYCHOLOGY; PSYCHOMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SMOKING; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BEHAVIOR RATING SCALE; FEMALE; HEALTH COMMUNICATION; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROGRAM EVALUATION; PSYCHOMETRICS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SMOKERS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 85057588914     PISSN: 08836612     EISSN: 15324796     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/abm/kay080     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Noar SM, Bell T, Kelley D, Barker J, Yzer M. Perceived message effectiveness measures in tobacco education campaigns: A systematic review. Commun Methods Meas. July 2018:1-19.
2. Brennan E, Durkin SJ, Wakefield MA, Kashima Y. Assessing the effectiveness of antismoking television advertisements: Do audience ratings of perceived effectiveness predict changes in quitting intentions and smoking behaviours? Tob Control. 2013;23(5):412-418.
3. Davis KC, Duke J, Shafer P, Patel D, Rodes R, Beistle D. Perceived effectiveness of antismoking ads and association with quit attempts among smokers: Evidence from the tips from former smokers campaign. Health Commun. 2016;32(8):931-938.
4. Dillard JP, Weber KM, Vail RG. The relationship between the perceived and actual effectiveness of persuasive messages: A meta-analysis with implications for formative campaign research: Perceived and actual effectiveness. J Commun. 2007;57:613-631.
5. Dillard JP, Ha Y. Perceived message effectiveness predicts information-seeking behavior. Commun Res Rep. 2016;33:356-362.
6. High AC, Dillard JP. A review and meta-analysis of person-centered messages and social support outcomes. Commun Stud. 2012;63:99-118.
7. Davis KC, Uhrig J, Bann C, Rupert D, Fraze J. Exploring African American women's perceptions of a social marketing campaign to promote HIV testing. Soc Mar Q. 2011;17: 39-60.
8. Rucker DD, Petty RE. Increasing the effectiveness of communications to consumers: Recommendations based on elaboration likelihood and attitude certainty perspectives. J Public Pol Mark. 2006;25:39-52.
9. Donovan RJ, Jalleh G, Carter OBJ. Tobacco industry smoking prevention advertisements' impact on youth motivation for smoking in the future. Soc Mar Q. 2006;12:3-13.
10. Murukutla N, Bayly M, Mullin S, Cotter T, Wakefield M; International Anti-SHS Advertisement Rating Study Team. Male smoker and non-smoker responses to television advertisements on the harms of secondhand smoke in China, India and Russia. Health Educ Res. 2014;30(1):24-34.
11. Kitchen PJ, Kerr G, Schultz DE, McColl R, Pals H. The elaboration likelihood model: Review, critique and research agenda. Eur J Mark. 2014;48:2033-2050.
12. Petty RE, Cacioppo JT. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 1986;19:123-205.
13. Zhao X, Strasser A, Cappella JN, Lerman C, Fishbein M. A measure of perceived argument strength: Reliability and validity. Commun Methods Meas. 2011;5(1):48-75.
14. Bigsby E, Cappella JN, Seitz HH. Efficiently and effectively evaluating public service announcements: Additional evidence for the utility of perceived effectiveness. Commun Monogr. 2013;80(1):1-23.
15. Niederdeppe J, Farrelly MC, Nonnemaker J, Davis KC, Wagner L. Socioeconomic variation in recall and perceived effectiveness of campaign advertisements to promote smoking cessation. Soc Sci Med. 2011;72(5):773-780.
16. Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. The affect heuristic. Eur J Oper Res. 2007;177:1333-1352.
17. So J, Achar C, Han D, Agrawal N, Duhachek A, Maheswaran D. The psychology of appraisal: Specific emotions and decision-making. J Consum Psychol. 2015;25:359-371.
18. Cesario J, Higgins ET, Scholer AA. Regulatory fit and persuasion: Basic principles and remaining questions. Social Pers Psych Compass. 2008;2:444-463.
19. Dillard JP, Ye S. The perceived effectiveness of persuasive messages: Questions of structure, referent, and bias. J Health Commun. 2008;13(2):149-168.
20. Yzer M, LoRusso S, Nagler RH. On the conceptual ambiguity surrounding perceived message effectiveness. Health Commun. 2014;30:125-134.
21. Pechmann C, Zhao G, Goldberg ME, Reibling ET. What to convey in antismoking advertisements for adolescents: The use of protection motivation theory to identify effective message themes. J Mark. 2003;67:1-18.
22. O'Keefe DJ. Message pretesting using assessments of expected or perceived persuasiveness: Evidence about diagnosticity of relative actual persuasiveness. J Commun. 2018;68: 120-142.
23. Brewer NT, Morgan JC, Baig SA, et al. Public understanding of cigarette smoke constituents: Three US surveys. Tob Control. 2016;26:592-599.
24. Noar SM, Kelley DE, Boynton MH, et al. Identifying principles for effective messages about chemicals in cigarette smoke. Prev Med. 2018;106:31-37.
25. Baig SA, Byron MJ, Boynton MH, Brewer NT, Ribisl KM. Communicating about cigarette smoke constituents: An experimental comparison of two messaging strategies. J Behav Med. 2016;40(2):352-359.
26. Kelley DE, Boynton MH, Noar SM, et al. Effective message elements for disclosures about chemicals in cigarette smoke. Nicotine Tob Res. 2017;20:1047-1054.
27. Hall MG, Sheeran P, Noar SM, et al. Negative affect, message reactance and perceived risk: How do pictorial cigarette pack warnings change quit intentions? Tob Control. December 2017. doi:10. 1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053972
28. Hall MG, Sheeran P, Noar SM, Ribisl KM, Boynton MH, Brewer NT. A brief measure of reactance to health warnings. J Behav Med. 2017;40(3):520-529.
29. Emery LF, Romer D, Sheerin KM, Jamieson KH, Peters E. Affective and cognitive mediators of the impact of cigarette warning labels. Nicotine Tob Res. 2013;16(3):263-269.
30. Lazard AJ, Kowitt SD, Huang L-L, Noar SM, Jarman KL, Goldstein AO. Believability of cigarette warnings about addiction: National experiments of adolescents and adults. Nicotine Tob Res. 2017;20:867-875.
31. Mason W, Suri S. Conducting behavioral research on Amazon's mechanical Turk. Behav Res. 2011;44:1-23.
32. Buhrmester M, Kwang T, Gosling SD. Amazon's mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011;6(1):3-5.
33. Boynton MH, Agans RP, Bowling JM, et al. Understanding how perceptions of tobacco constituents and the FDA relate to effective and credible tobacco risk messaging: A national phone survey of U. S. adults, 2014-2015. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:516.
34. Noar SM, Hall MG, Francis DB, Ribisl KM, Pepper JK, Brewer NT. Pictorial cigarette pack warnings: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Tob Control. 2015;25(3):341-354.
35. Brewer NT, Parada H, Hall MG, Boynton MH, Noar SM, Ribisl KM. Understanding why pictorial cigarette pack warnings increase quit attempts. Ann Behav Med. May 2018. doi:10. 1093/abm/kay032
36. Webb TL, Sheeran P. Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychol Bull. 2006;132(2):249-268.
37. Sheeran P, Webb TL. The intention-behavior gap: The intention-behavior gap. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2016;10:503-518.
38. Ferrer RA, Klein WM, Persoskie A, Avishai-Yitshak A, Sheeran P. The tripartite model of risk perception (TRIRISK): Distinguishing deliberative, affective, and experiential components of perceived risk. Ann Behav Med. 2016;50(5):653-663.
39. Brandon TH, Baker TB. The smoking consequences questionnaire: The subjective expected utility of smoking in college students. Psychol Assess. 1991;3:484-491.
40. Davis KC, Nonnemaker J, Duke J, Farrelly MC. Perceived effectiveness of cessation advertisements: The importance of audience reactions and practical implications for media campaign planning. Health Commun. 2013;28(5):461-472.
41. Davis S, Malarcher A, Thorne S, Maurice E, Trosclair A, Mowery P. State-specific prevalence and trends in adult cigarette smoking, united states. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009;31:36-38.
42. Arrazola RA, Neff LJ, Kennedy SM, Holder-Hayes E, Jones CD. Cancer-related news from the CDC: Tobacco use among middle & high school students. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014;36:57-65.
43. R Core Team. R language definition. Vienna, Austria: R foundation for statistical computing; 2000.
44. Rosseel Y. Lavaan: An R Package for structural equation modeling. J Stat Soft. 2012;48.
45. Chalmers RP. Mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R Environment. J Stat Soft. 2012;48.
46. Wickham H. Ggplot2. New York: Springer International Publishing; 2016.
47. Cai L. A two-tier full-information item factor analysis model with applications. Psychometrika. 2010;75:581-612.
48. Li Y, Lissitz RW. Exploring the full-information bifactor model in vertical scaling with construct shift. Appl Psychol Meas. 2012;36:3-20.
49. Woods CM. Empirical selection of anchors for tests of differential item functioning. Appl Psychol Meas. 2008;33:42-57.
50. Meade AW. A taxonomy of effect size measures for the differential functioning of items and scales. J Appl Psychol. 2010;95:728-743.
51. Steinberg L, Thissen D. Using effect sizes for research reporting: Examples using item response theory to analyze differential item functioning. Psychol Methods. 2006;11(4):402-415.
52. Hernandez A, Gonzalez-Roma V. Analysis of multitrait-multioccasion data: Additive versus multiplicative models. Multivariate Behav Res. 2002;37(1):59-87.
53. Lance CE, Fan Y. Convergence, admissibility, and fit of alternative confirmatory factor analysis models for MTMM data. Educ Psychol Meas. 2015;76(3):487-507.
54. Chalmers RP. Extended mixed-effects item response models with the MH-RM algorithm: Extended mixed-effects item response models. J Educ Meas. 2015;52:200-222.
55. Vispoel WP, Morris CA, Kilinc M. Practical applications of generalizability theory for designing, evaluating, and improving psychological assessments. J Pers Assess. 2018;100(1):53-67.
56. Noar SM, Barker J, Yzer M. Measurement and design heterogeneity in perceived message effectiveness studies: A call for research. J Commun. September 2018. doi:10. 1093/joc/jqy047