A conceptualization of threat communications and protective health behavior.

The effects of health threat communications have generated considerable empirical and theoretical attention. Inconsistent findings in the "fear appeat' literature suggest that the effects of these types of messages are not completely understood. Previous theoretical approaches have tended to focus upon the emotional (fear) reaction produced by exposure to threatening health information. However, the weight of the experimental evidence indicates that certain cognitions about the threat are more directly related to acceptance of the recommendations than emotional arousal. An integration of the existing theoretical approaches is offered, which views acceptance of health threat recommendations to be mediated by perceptions of threat control. Two fundamental beliefs are seen as comprising perceived threat control: response efficacy, which is the perceived ability of the recommended coping action(s) to reduce or control the threat; and personal efficacy, which is the person's expectation of being able to perform the recommended threat-coping action(s) successfully. These two threat controlfactors are consistent with existing theories of health behavior (Health Belief Model) and fear appeals (Rogers, 1975) and may help to clarify Leventhals (1970) parallel response model. Empirical support for these factors is presented and indicates that beyond some adequate level of utility, personal efficacy is a more important determinant of protective health behavior than response efficacy. The implication for health practitioners is that communications can be very effective in producing acceptance of protective health behavior if a real, but controllable threat is depicted. Therefore, future research should focus upon the ways by which response efficacy and personal efficacy can be enhanced in a health threat communication.