OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose was to examine the relative effectiveness of chronic disease and psychological health risk information combined with gain- versus loss-framed leisure time physical activity (LTPA) messages for changing perceived personal risk, LTPA response efficacy (i.e., the belief that LTPA can effectively reduce risk), and LTPA intentions. A secondary purpose was to explore the relationship between message framing and cognitive processing. METHOD: Baseline assessments of perceived risk for inactivity-related disease and psychological health problems, LTPA response efficacy, and intentions were measured among 96 individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Participants read population-specific information about the risk for inactivity-related disease and psychological health problems following SCI, and perceived risk was reassessed. Participants were then randomized to read LTPA response efficacy messages emphasizing the benefits of LTPA (gain framed) or the risks of inactivity (loss framed). Immediately following message exposure, cognitive processing (i.e., thought listing and message recall), LTPA response efficacy, and LTPA intentions were assessed. RESULTS: Changes in perceived risk were observed following exposure to health risk information. Changes in LTPA response efficacy and intentions were greater following loss-framed messages targeting psychological health compared with gain-framed messages. Greater cognitive processing was observed following loss-framed messages compared with gain-framed messages. CONCLUSION: Following exposure to psychological health risk information, loss-framed messages may be more effective than gain-framed messages for eliciting cognitive processing and changing LTPA beliefs and intentions.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose was to examine the relative effectiveness of chronic disease and psychological health risk information combined with gain- versus loss-framed leisure time physical activity (LTPA) messages for changing perceived personal risk, LTPA response efficacy (i.e., the belief that LTPA can effectively reduce risk), and LTPA intentions. A secondary purpose was to explore the relationship between message framing and cognitive processing. METHOD: Baseline assessments of perceived risk for inactivity-related disease and psychological health problems, LTPA response efficacy, and intentions were measured among 96 individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Participants read population-specific information about the risk for inactivity-related disease and psychological health problems following SCI, and perceived risk was reassessed. Participants were then randomized to read LTPA response efficacy messages emphasizing the benefits of LTPA (gain framed) or the risks of inactivity (loss framed). Immediately following message exposure, cognitive processing (i.e., thought listing and message recall), LTPA response efficacy, and LTPA intentions were assessed. RESULTS: Changes in perceived risk were observed following exposure to health risk information. Changes in LTPA response efficacy and intentions were greater following loss-framed messages targeting psychological health compared with gain-framed messages. Greater cognitive processing was observed following loss-framed messages compared with gain-framed messages. CONCLUSION: Following exposure to psychological health risk information, loss-framed messages may be more effective than gain-framed messages for eliciting cognitive processing and changing LTPA beliefs and intentions.
Authors: Kelly P Arbour-Nicitopoulos; Shane N Sweet; Marie-Eve Lamontagne; Kathleen A Martin Ginis; Samantha Jeske; François Routhier; Amy E Latimer-Cheung Journal: Spinal Cord Ser Cases Date: 2017-08-03
Authors: Kelly P Arbour-Nicitopoulos; Markus Duncan; Gary Remington; John Cairney; Guy E Faulkner Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 4.157
Authors: Chloë Williamson; Graham Baker; Jennifer R Tomasone; Adrian Bauman; Nanette Mutrie; Ailsa Niven; Justin Richards; Adewale Oyeyemi; Beelin Baxter; Benjamin Rigby; Benny Cullen; Brendan Paddy; Brett Smith; Charlie Foster; Clare Drummy; Corneel Vandelanotte; Emily Oliver; Fatwa Sari Tetra Dewi; Fran McEwen; Frances Bain; Guy Faulkner; Hamish McEwen; Hayley Mills; Jack Brazier; James Nobles; Jennifer Hall; Kaleigh Maclaren; Karen Milton; Kate Olscamp; Lisseth Villalobos Campos; Louise Bursle; Marie Murphy; Nick Cavill; Nora J Johnston; Paul McCrorie; Rakhmat Ari Wibowo; Rebecca Bassett-Gunter; Rebecca Jones; Sarah Ruane; Trevor Shilton; Paul Kelly Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2021-12-19 Impact factor: 8.915