The Effect of Temporal Frames in Anti-Smoking Messages on the Extension of Anti-Smoking Arguments to Smokers

Abstract

The present study focused on how exposure to different health message characteristics can affect extension–i.e., the sharing of arguments that were not targeted by the messages but are consistent with the message theme. In the context of anti-smoking campaigns, many messages have either emphasized reasons to quit smoking (why-quit) or ways to quit smoking (how-to-quit). Therefore, guided by construal level theory, the study aimed to examine whether the message characteristic of temporal frames can increase or decrease extension when incorporated into why-quit and how-to-quit anti-smoking messages. Results from a randomized experiment showed that exposure to why-quit messages with distant temporal frames increased extension (vs. no-message control) while why-quit messages with proximal temporal frames did not. Findings further illustrated a potential mechanism, where why-quit messages with proximal frames significantly reduced extension compared to why-quit messages with no temporal frames. Temporal frames did not have a significant effect on extension for how-to-quit messages. Results indicate that emphasizing the present in anti-smoking messages could be detrimental for the extension of why-quit arguments. Implications for applying construal level theory to health message effects research are also discussed.

Acknowledgments

The author would also like to thank Wharton Risk Management and Decision Processes Center for funding this research through the Russell Ackoff Doctoral Student Fellowship.

Disclosure Statement

No conflicts of interest to report.

Additional information

Funding

Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and FDA Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) under [Award Number P50CA179546 and award R25CA057711] . The content is solely the responsibility of the author and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).