People Wear Masks when they Ski: Comparing Congruent and Incongruent Behavioral Context Appeals

Abstract

When advocating for a behavior, persuasive messaging typically focuses on the context that behavior is performed in, such as mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, situating the advocated behavior in a different context, termed an incongruent context appeal, may persuade by increasing attention, novelty, and memorability. The current study tested this supposition in a message experiment. Participants (N = 324) were randomized to view an incongruent context (e.g. skiing) or a congruent context (i.e. COVID-19) appeal advocating for mask wearing. The incongruence appeal had a direct, positive effect on mask wearing intentions and indirect, positive effects via two serial mediation pathways: time spent with the message increased attention through novelty and memorability. Findings suggest that an incongruent context appeal is an effective strategy for persuading audiences in information-saturated environments like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Acknowledgments

Yi Liao and Dallin R. Adams are graduate students in the Department of Communication at the University of Utah, Helen M. Lillie is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication Studies at the University of Iowa, and Jakob D. Jensen is a Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Utah. This manuscript was written with support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under award number 1DP2EB022360-01 (PI: J. Jensen) and the Immunology, Inflammation, and Infectious Disease Initiative (PIs: J. Jensen & A. J. King).

Supplemental data

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2023.2263745.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health [1DP2EB022360-01]; the Immunology, Inflammation, and Infectious Disease Initiative.