![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
The continuing threat of terrorist attacks and natural disasters presents a unique challenge for communication scholars and practitioners. One way to increase motivation is through the use of guilt appeals; yet, message designers must be aware of the potential negative consequences of employing messages that induce too much guilt. In a field experiment, researchers investigate the use of guilt appeals within the context of disaster preparedness with a nationally representative sample to enhance perceived importance of emergency preparedness, increase risk perceptions, and motivate behavioral intentions to prepare.
Keywords:
Notes
*Correlation is significant at the .05 level (two-tailed). **Correlation is significant at the .01 level (two-tailed).
Notably, when guilt is applied in the domain of persuasive appeals, it is often “anticipatory” guilt that is induced. That is, the message argues that the receiver will feel guilty in the future if she or he does not engage in (or buy) the recommended behavior (or product). Research has found that anticipatory guilt works just as well as felt guilt (Lindsey, Citation2005).
We also examined the guilt appeals elicitation of felt fear. The level of guilt communicated in a guilt appeals did not causes differences in fear (p > .05). With the appeals having elicited a significant amount of guilt and not a significant amount of fear, we can rule out the possibility that fear caused the differences in outcomes.