Psychology C1 - fear arousal

Question 1

Fear arousal theory of persuasion

Answer 1

-Janis and Feshbach (1953)
-persuasive messages can change attitudes and behaviour if they can arouse fear in recipients

Question 2

early theories of the effects of fear

Answer 2

-Dollard and Miller (1950), fear motivates people to change behaviour
-fear creates unpleasant physiological and psychological arousal
-changing behaviour to avoid feared outcome
-strengthened through negative reinforcement – relief from unpleasant fear is rewarding
-health promotion campaigns arouse fear

Question 3

fear-behaviour relationship

Answer 3

-Janis and Feshbach, relationship between fear arousal and behaviour = curvilinear
-message that arouses no fear doesn’t change behaviour - arousal = too weak
-moderate fear produces motivation - more likely to change
-high levels of arousal = counterproductive, changing behaviour isn’t enough to change unpleasant state
-reduces fear with denial - negative reinforcement

Question 4

Janis and Feshbach (1953) - fear arousal and dental hygiene – aim

Answer 4

-see if fear-arousing messages produce defensive reactions (denial) in place of behaviour change

Question 5

Janis and Feshbach (1953) - fear arousal and dental hygiene – procedure

Answer 5

-200 students, divided into groups matched by age, gender and intelligence
-prepared 3 15 minute lectures, differed in degree of fear-arousing material
1. strong fear arousal - tooth decay and
infection
2. moderate fear arousal - less severe and
personalised
3. minimal fear arousal - factual information
-assessed emotional responses on the day and changed in hygiene one week after

Question 6

Janis and Feshbach (1953) - fear arousal and dental hygiene – findings

Answer 6

-strong fear-arousal group = more anxiety about tooth decay (42%) than low fear group (24%)
-36% of pps in minimal fear group changed behaviour, 22% in moderate and 8% in strong

Question 7

Janis and Feshbach (1953) - fear arousal and dental hygiene – conclusions

Answer 7

-doesn’t support original hypothesis of curvilinear relationship
-does challenge linear model

Question 8

measured behaviour change
(evaluation)
+

Answer 8

-measured changes in behaviour, many studies of fear arousal don’t do this, measure changes in attitudes or intentions
-Leventhal and Singer (1966), fear arousal changes pps’ attitudes towards dental hygiene, didn’t assess behaviour change
-established ‘gap’ between peoples’ attitudes towards issue and behaviour
-Janis and Feshbach - greater validity than studies that come to different conclusions

Question 9

lack of replication
(evaluation)
-

Answer 9

-hasn’t been replicated by later research
-minimal fear arousal = most effective, later research found opposite
-Tannenbaum et al. (2015), reviewed studies of fear-arousing communications
-concluded that studies shows that fear appeals do positively influence attitudes, intentions and behaviours
-couldn’t find evidence that fear arousal backfired or produces undesirable outcomes
-study= very unusual, minimal fear arousal = most effective

Question 10

research support
(evaluation)
+

Answer 10

-evidence that fear = important motivator of behaviour change
-Dabbs and Leventhal (1966), effects on students of fear-arousing communications on not being vaccinated against tetanus
-found that arousing fear = positive effect on likelihood of students to either get vaccinated or intend to get vaccinated
-high fear arousal produces most change, not always counterproductive

Question 11

mixed evidence
(evaluation)
-

Answer 11

-evidence doesn’t fully support fear arousal
-for instance, the study by Janis and Feshbach did confirm that high-fear messages = counterproductive
-study also showed that the fear-behaviour link is curvilinear
-moderate fear arousal didn’t produce more behaviour change than minimal and high fear arousal
-findings contradicts a key prediction of fear arousal theory
-undermines its validity