Looking for Safety in All the Right Places: When Threatening Political Reality Strengthens Family Relationship Bonds

Elections and pandemics highlight how much one’s safety depends on fellow community members, a realization that is especially threatening when this collective perceives political realities inconsistent with one’s own. Two longitudinal studies examined how people restored safety to social bonds when everyday experience suggested that fellow community members inhabited inconsistent realities. We operationalized consensus political realities through the negativity of daily nationwide social media posts mentioning President Trump (Studies 1 and 2), and the risks of depending on fellow community members through the pending transition to a divided Congress during the 2018 election season (Study 1), and escalating daily U.S. COVID-19 infections (Study 2). On days that revealed people could not count on fellow community members to perceive the same reality of President Trump’s stewardship they perceived, being at greater risk from the judgment and behavior of the collective community motivated people to find greater happiness in their family relationships.

Message content of alcohol moderation TV commercials: impact of corporate versus nonprofit sponsorship

This content analysis examines a sample of 203 alcohol-related North American TV commercials dealing with alcohol moderation and driving under the influence (DUI), in order to determine whether the type of ad sponsor has an impact on the message content. Corporate sponsors, such as breweries and distillers, are compared to nonprofit sponsors such as governments and nonprofit organizations. Findings show that ads from corporate sponsors are less likely to make mention of threats or negative consequences, and are also less likely to use fear arousal. However, DUI/alcohol moderation ads from corporate sponsors and nonprofit sponsors do not differ in the degree to which they use humor or positive approaches.

A meta-analysis of fear appeals: implications for effective public health campaigns

The fear appeal literature is examined in a comprehensive synthesis using meta-analytical techniques. The meta-analysis suggests that strong fear appeals produce high levels of perceived severity and susceptibility, and are more persuasive than low or weak fear appeals. The results also indicate that fear appeals motivate adaptive danger control actions such as message acceptance and maladaptive fear control actions such as defensive avoidance or reactance. It appears that strong fear appeals and high-efficacy messages produce the greatest behavior change, whereas strong fear appeals with low-efficacy messages produce the greatest levels of defensive responses. Future directions and practical implications are provided.