Effects of high and low fear-arousing communications upon opinions toward smoking

Abstract

Three studies (Janis and Feshbach, 1953; Haeffner, 1956; Janis and Terwilliger, 1962) have all reported that high fear-arousing communications are less persuasive than low fear-arousing communications. The Janis and Feshbach study dealt with the effect of tooth decay, the Haeffner study with the destructive capabilities of hydrogen weapons, and the Janis and Terwilliger study with the relation between smoking and lung cancer. The results from all of these studies have been interpreted as being consistent with the Janis and Feshbach (1953) hypothesis that a high fear-arousing communication produces defenses against thinking about the material or toward minimizing the importance of the material contained in the persuasive communication. Two additional studies have qualified t,he above interpretation to some extent. Berkowitz and Cottingham (1960) obtained evidence indicating that a high fear-arousing communication may not differ significantly in effectiveness from a low fear-arousing communication if the latter communication is of low interest value. DeWolfe and Governale (1964) obtained evidence which they interpret as being consistent with a hypothesis put forward by Janis and Feshbach (1954). According to this hypothesis, if a persuasive communication contains reassuring recommendations as to how threat can be averted, fear can be expected to facilitate attitude change. The present study attempts to qualify still further the hypothesis that a high fear-arousing communication produces defensive reactions against thinking about the material contained in the communication. This qualification concerns the difference between the situation in which a high fear-arousing communication has as it,s major purpose the prevention or avoidance of possible future activity as opposed to the situation in which the high fear-arousing communication has as its major purpose the changing, stopping, or punishing of currently on-going activity. Strong defensive reactions would be expected only in the latter punishment situation. Furthermore, in the avoidance situation the high fear