| Title |
A brief measure of reactance to health warnings
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Behavioral Medicine, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10865-016-9821-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marissa G. Hall, Paschal Sheeran, Seth M. Noar, Kurt M. Ribisl, Marcella H. Boynton, Noel T. Brewer |
| Abstract |
Reactance to persuasive messages involves perceived threat to freedom, anger, and counterarguing that may undermine the impact of health warnings. To understand reactance's effects, reliable and valid assessment is critical. We sought to develop and validate a brief Reactance to Health Warnings Scale (RHWS). Two independent samples of US adults completed the brief RHWS in studies that presented warnings on cigarette packs that smokers carried with them for 4 weeks (Study 1; n = 2149) or as digital images of cigarette packs that participants viewed briefly (Study 2; n = 1413). The three-item Brief RHWS had good internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The scale correlated with higher trait reactance and exposure to pictorial warnings, supporting its convergent validity. With respect to predictive validity, the Brief RHWS predicted perceived message effectiveness, quit intentions, avoidance of the warnings, and number of cigarettes smoked per day. The Brief RHWS can serve as an efficient adjunct to the development of persuasive messages. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 99 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 18% |
| Researcher | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 19% |
| Unknown | 21 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 23 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 14% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 15% |
| Unknown | 26 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 August 2019.
All research outputs
#6,475,974
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#425
of 1,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,242
of 419,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#14
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,078 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 419,148 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.