The effects of message framing and message processing on testicular self-examination attitudes and perceived susceptibility

Communication Research Reports

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 97-105

  Umphrey, Laura R ^a  

^a NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85061979822     PISSN: 08824096     EISSN: 17464099     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08824090309388805     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. American Cancer Society. 2000. Cancer facts and figures — 1999., Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society.
2. Banks, S. M., Salovey, P., Greener, S., Rothman, A. J., Mover, A., Beauvais, J., and Epel, E., 1995. The effects of message framing on mammography utilization. Health Psychology, 14(2): 178–184.
3. Cacioppo, J. T., Harkins, S. G., and Petty, R. E., 1981. “ The nature of attitudes and cognitive responses and their relationships to behavior ”. In Cognitive responses in persuasion, Edited by: Petty, R. E., Ostrom, T. M., and Brock, T. C., 31–53. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Kahenman, D., and Tversky, A., 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2): 263–292.
5. Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A., 1982. The psychology of preferences. Scientific American, 247: 160–173.
6. Katz, R.C., Meyers, K., and Walls, J., 1995. Cancer awareness and self-examination practices in young men and women. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 18: 377–384.
7. Lalor, K. M., and Hailey, B. J., 1990. The effects of message framing and feelings of susceptibility to breast cancer on reported frequency of breast self-examination. International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 10: 183–192.
8. Maheswaran, D., and Meyers-Levy, J., 1990. The influence of message framing and issue involvement. Journal of Marketing Research, 27: 361–367.
9. Meyerowitz, B. E., and Chaiken, S., 1987. The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3): 500–510.
10. Moore, S.M., Barling, N.R., and Hood, B., 1998. Predicting testicular and breast self-examination behaviour: A test of the theory of reasoned action. Behaviour Change, 15(1): 41–49.
11. Petty, R. E., and Cacioppo, J. T., 1986. Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change., New York: Springer-Verlag.
12. Rothman, A. J., and Salovey, P., 1997. Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behaviors: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1): 3–19.
13. Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., Antone, C., Keough, K., and Martin, C. D., 1993. The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29: 408–433.
14. Salovey, P., Schneider, T. R., and Apanovitch, A.M., 2002. “ Message framing in the prevention and early detection of illness ”. In The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice, Edited by: Dillard, J. P., and Pfau, M., 391–406. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Schneider, T. R., Salovey, R., Apanovitch, A. M., Pizarro, J., McCarthy, D., Zullo, J., and Rothman, A. J., 2001. The effects of message framing and ethnic targeting on mammography use among low-income women. Health Psychology, 20(4): 256–266.
16. Steffen, V. J., Sternberg, L., Teegarden, L. A., and Shepard, K., 1994. Practice and persuasive frame: Effects on beliefs, intentions, and performance of a cancer self-examination. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24: 897–925.
17. Williams, T., Clarke, V., and Borland, R., 2001. Effects of message framing on breast-cancer-related beliefs and behaviors. The role of mediating factors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(5): 925–950.
18. Wolski, S., and Nabi, R. L., Message processing quality: Confirmatory analysis of an elaboration depth measure. Paper presented at the 50th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association. Acapulco, Mexico. June.