Temporal perspective and healthy eating habits (milan 2015)
-
Upload
patriziacatellani -
Category
Food
-
view
305 -
download
0
Transcript of Temporal perspective and healthy eating habits (milan 2015)
Mauro Bertolotti, Giorgia Chirchiglia, & Patrizia Catellani
Catholic University of Milan
14th European Congress of Psychology– Milan, July 7-10, 2015
The effects of message framing in promoting healthy eating habits: Differences between younger and
older adults
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
To make people change their eating habits, risks and benefits connected with nutrition must be effectively communicated.
Psychosocial research shows that the accurate framing of the messages enhances their persuasiveness.
Health Communication Long established eating habits are very difficult to change. Calls by authorities to adopt a healthier dietary regime
rarely result in the desired effect.
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Message content about health vs. well-being
Messages can be framed according to different regulatory concerns, either safety or growth (Cesario et al., 2013).
Communication about the effects of nutrition reflects two different basic concerns (Wright & Cropanzano, 2000): Maintaining health (i.e., preventing disease risk); Improving well-being (i.e., promoting fitness and
quality of life). The framing of messages about nutrition reflects this
distinction: safety-framed messages are more suitable to address
health concerns; growth-framed messages are more suitable to address
well-being concerns.
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Factual and prefactual framing Message framing can also emphasize different aspects of a
suggested behaviour and its expected outcome: A factual frame focuses on the outcome of a behaviour; A prefactual frame focuses on the antecedents leading to such
outcome ("If you..., then..."). Prefactual reasoning on the consequences of one's
behaviour improves readiness and preparation for future behaviour (Bagozzi et al., 2004; Catellani & Milesi, 2011).
When applied to communication on nutrition: Factual framing might be more suitable to
address health concerns; Prefactual framing might be more suitable to
address well-being concerns.
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Self-efficacy Self-efficacy is an individual’s expectancy about his/her
ability to perform a certain behaviour (Bandura, 1986, 1997;.
The persuasiveness of a message often depends on recipients' self-efficacy (De Vries et al., 1988, Tudoran et al., 2012)
When people think they have the necessary skills to perform what the message recommends (high self-efficacy), they are more motivated to accept it.
When they don’t feel they have the necessary skills (low self-efficacy), they are more likely to reject it.
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Individuals’ temporal orientation
Consideration of Future Consequences (CFC) refers to the extent to which people consider the potential distant outcomes of their behaviors and are influenced by them (Strathman, Gleicher, Boninger, & Edwards, 1994).
Individuals with low CFC are more present-oriented, while individuals with high CFC are more future-oriented.
Several studies have demonstrated the link between CFC levels and willingness to adopt healthy behaviors: higher CFC stronger intentions.
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Research design
Behavioral intention
Message formulation
(factual/prefactual)
Message evaluation
EngagementAttitudes
Self-efficacy
Message regulatory concern
(growth/safety)
Hp 2
Hp 1
Three studies were conducted with the patronage of the City of Milan.
Consideration of Future
Consequences
Hp 3
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Study 1: Participants and measures N = 84 (44 women, 40 men), age M = 74.90, SD = 8:41 Independent variables:
Regulatory concern: growth- vs safety-content
Message framing: factual vs prefactual
Dependent variable Evaluation of the message (convincing, credible) Engagement (interested, involved, motivated by the message) Attitude towards meat consumption ("I like meat") Thought-listing task ("How would you improve your nutrition?") Intention to eat meat and vegetables
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Method The article was presented in four different versions:
Fact
ual f
ram
ePr
efac
tual
fram
e
Safety content Growth content
.
The World Health Organization states that "a diet with a high content of meat is bad for your health.”Epidemiological studies have shown that life expectancy is significantly shorter for those who make an abundant consumption of meat.The World Health Organization states
that "if you follow a diet with a high content of meat your health will worsen." Epidemiological studies have shown that if you make an abundant meat consumption, life expectancy will be significantly shorter.
The World Health Organization states that "a diet with a high content of meat decreases the psychophysical well-being". Epidemiological studies have shown that the quality of life is worse in those who make an abundant consumption of meat.
The World Health Organization states that "if you follow a diet high in meat it will decrease the psychophysical well-being". Epidemiological studies have shown that if you make an abundant meat consumption, it will worsen your life quality.
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Evaluation of the message
Growth-Content Safety-Content1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
FactualPrefactual
Frame
Message content
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Engagement
Growth-Content Safety-Content1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
FactualPrefactual
Frame
Message content
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Growth-Content Safety-Content1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
FactualPrefactual
Attitude towards meat
Frame
Message content
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Study 2: Participants and measures
Measures Engagement Attitude towards meat consumption Intention to eat meat and vegetables Food-choice task (simulated restaurant menu choice) Healthy-eating self-efficacy ("How capable to eat healthy
do you feel?")
N = 97, (75.5% women), age M = 73.59, SD = 7.34
Independent variables:Regulatory concern: growth- vs safety-
content Message framing: factual vs prefactual
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Food choice task“You’ve been invited to enjoy a free dinner. Below you’ll find the menu of the restaurant. For each course you can choose only one dish; please make your choice by marking the option you prefer.”
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Intention to eat red meat
Growth-Content Safety-Content1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
FactualPrefactual
Frame
Message content
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Food-choice task
Growth-Content Safety-Content0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
FactualPrefactual
Num
ber o
f mea
t-bas
ed c
hoic
es
Frame
Message content
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Food-choice task
MessageCongruently Framed
Incongruently Framed
0.0
0.8
1.5
2.3
3.0
Num
ber o
f mea
t-bas
ed ch
oice
s
Self-Efficacy-1 SD +1 SD
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Study 3 We replicated the same procedures and measures from Study 2 on
a group of university students, including a measure of the Consideration of Future Consequences in the questionnaire.
N = 97 (72,2% women), age M=25.12, DS=2.34. Independent variables:
Regulatory concern: growth vs. safety content message Message framing: factual vs. prefactual
Measures CFC Engagement Food-choice task Healthy-eating self-efficacy
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Frame
Message content
Intention to eat red meat
Health Well-being1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
FactualPrefactual
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Intention to eat red meat
Message content
Low CFC Medium CFC High CFC1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
HealthWell-being
CFC level
Bertolotti, Chirchiglia & Catellani
Conclusion
Behavioral intention
Message evaluation
EngagementAttitudes
Self-efficacy
Message regulatory concern
(growth/safety)
Message formulation
(factual/prefactual)
Message time perspective(short/long-term)
Other individual differences
CFC