ABSTRACT
The Extended Parallel Process Model posits that fear-appeal messages are processed only when message recipients perceive a critical level of threat. The more recent Terror Management Health Model suggests that, in addition to level of perceived threat, the nature of the threat also influences how target audiences process fear appeals. Specifically, fear appeals that utilize the threat of death as a consequence trigger both conscious and nonconscious responses that influence message recipients' health-related decisions. Accounting for the influence of consciousness of death helps explain maladaptive responses that extant theory has been unable to explain. Results from an experiment indicate that, when the level of perceived fear was the same across participants, the Extended Parallel Process Model successfully predicted persuasive outcomes for fear appeals that utilized the threat of arrest or serious injury as a consequence of noncompliance. However, for fear appeals that utilized the threat of death as a consequence of noncompliance, as predicted by the Terror Management Health Model, ego involvement in the health-related behavior predicted persuasive outcomes more accurately than the dual fear control and danger control processes. These findings suggest that incorporating consciousness of death and ego involvement can avoid conceptual problems with the level-of-fear construct, provide a meaningful way to predict fear-appeal responses across target audiences, and explain maladaptive responses that have eluded the explanations of extant fear-appeal theories.
In this research, we compared two psychological models that explain how people respond to fear-based health promotion campaigns. The well-established Extended Parallel Process Model predicts that when faced with a fear-arousing message, audiences evaluate their self-efficacy in performing the recommended action, as well as the efficacy of the proposed action. Next, the efficacy appraisal is weighed against the perceived level of fear and the relevance of the threat to one's personal situation to determine a response to the threat. The more recently developed Terror Management Health Model states that fear of death is a special case. When faced with a fear-arousing message that utilizes threat of death as a consequence, audiences can cling to worldviews that grant them self-esteem. As such, defensiveness evoked by the fear of death is not in response to the level of perceived threat, but the qualitative nature of the threat. This worldview defense can create undesirable responses to fear appeals containing the fear of death. Results from a laboratory experiment indicate that the established model explains audience behavior for health-related messages that utilize threats with nonfatal consequences but the Terror Management Health Model is better suited to predicting behavior for messages that utilize threat of death as a consequence.
