An application of Terror Management Theory in the design of social and health-related anti-smoking appeals

Ingrid M. Martin and Michael A.KaminsJournal of Consumer Behavior (2010)

Present by Jennifer Chiang

Traditional anti-smoking PSAs

Purposes

• Traditional anti-smoking messages focus on delivering negative health consequences

• Based on the Terror Management Theory (TMT) to explain why traditional approach is actually not effective for young adult smokers

• Provided an alternative appeal – social exclusion

• The first to examine the effect of self-esteem and mortality salience within the smoking population

Terror Management Theory

“The human ability to be cognizant of one’s inevitable mortality, juxtaposed with biological instincts for survival, creates the potential for extreme anxiety or terror.”

Terror Management Theory-Two cognitive processes

Proximal defense • Conscious level • Immediate• Suppress the active awareness • Postpone to the future

Distal defense • Subconscious level• Delay• Counter reaction• Acceptance cultural worldview/

Find another way find value

Pretest- Mortality salience

• Mortality salience is a term which describes awareness of one's eventual death.

• To test the two types of mortality salience thematic approaches: social exclusion & health effects.

• The word-fragment task:

health effects messages => death-related words (dead)

social exclusion messages => social-related words (group)

Main Study-Methodology

• Samples: 198 major west coast university students• 2x3 between subject design• Online Survey method

Main Study- IV and DV

Smoking self-esteem (SSE) • The effect that smoking has on an indivisual’s seld-esteem

• High (HSSE) vs. Low(LSSE)

Mortality salience • Awareness of inevitability of death • Social exclusion vs. health effects• Anti- smoking public service

announcements (PSAs)

• Independent variables

• Dependent variablesShort run behavioral intention: participant’s likelihood of quitting to smoke in the near future

Long run behavioral intention:Participant’s likelihood of quitting smoking in the next 5, 10, and 20 years

Health risk perceptions:How risky smoking is to your health and the health of people around you

Analysis & Results

HSSE • Social > Health, Control• Health =/= Control

LSSE • Social > Health• Social =/= Control• Health=/= Control

Analysis & Results

Social > HealthSocial > Control

Health =/=Control

Analysis & Results

• Perceptions of health risk:

Social > Health Health effects appeal:

esteem (+) perception (-) Social exclusion appeal:

esteem (+) perception (+)

Findings

• Social exclusion appeal is the most effective approach for college students because…

• Traditional health effects appeal anti-smoking message is not impactful (=/= no message) because…

• Young adult smokers showed lower intent to continue smoking in the long run no matter the level of SSE

• For young smoker who was highly established their self-esteem from smoking, when they exposed to health effects PSAs, they will have less health risk perceptions

Implications

“Choosing the appropriate appeals of anti-smoking message in different time frame.”

“Using the wrong thematic approach is a waste of resources.”

“By targeting those HSSE = targeting heavier users of tobacco”

Discussions

• According to the results, “with the increase of self-esteem, the social exclusion PSAs could be more impactful.” Can you think of a good explanation for this outcome?

• Do you think the results from this study can apply to other age groups? Why?

• Can you think of other limitations of this study? • Do you have any further suggestions for future research on

this topic? • How can you apply the concept of “social exclusion

appeal” into other topics of social marketing?

Thank you for

listening