Anti-tobacco ads designed to either scare or disgust viewers are more likely to have a deeper impact than the ones with combination of fear and disgust, according to a new study.
A new study has claimed that designers of anti-tobacco ads should ensure that their tobacco-discouraging publicity campaigns should “either scare or disgust viewers”. The reason: such ads have proved to be more effective than ads which evoke “fear and disgust”.
The researchers from University of Missouri examined the effects of two types of content commonly used in anti-tobacco ads - tobacco health threats that evoke fear and disturbing or disgusting images.They found that the ads, which focused on either fear or disgust increased attention and memory in viewers, while ads that included both fear and disgust decreased viewers' attention and memory.
"When fear and disgust are combined in a single television ad, the ad might become too noxious for the viewer," said Glenn Leshner, lead author of the study and co-director of the Psychological Research on Information and Media Effects (PRIME) Lab in the Missouri School of Journalism.
"We noticed several ads in our collection of anti-tobacco public service announcements that contained very disturbing images, such as cholesterol being squeezed from a human artery, a diseased lung, or a cancer-riddled tongue.
"Presumably, these messages are designed to scare people so that they don't smoke. It appears that this strategy may backfire," he added.
The researchers measured the physiological responses of 58 viewers while they watched a series of 30-second anti-tobacco ads.
Advertisement
Electrodes were placed on the viewers' facial muscles to measure emotional responses.
Advertisement
"The way the human mind perceives and processes information in a persuasive message is the very foundation of any desired effect on targeted individuals.
The study will be published in the journal Health Communication.
Source-ANI
TAN/M