The Persuasive Power of Oral Health Promotion Messages: A Theory of Planned Behavior Approach to Dental Checkups Among Young Adults

Abstract

Although routine dental checkups are important for both oral and overall health, several factors influence young adults' use or nonuse of dental services. The two studies included in this report tested the theory of reasoned action (TRA), the theory of planned behavior (TPB), and an expanded TPB model in predicting young adults' routine dental checkups. Additionally, the study tested the perceived message effectiveness of TPB-based messages. Results support the use of an expanded TPB model (particularly adding satisfaction with the dentist and environmental constraints to the traditional model) for an understanding of routine dental checkup intention and behavior, and, most notably, provide support for the use of subjective norm-based messages to prompt dental checkups. This study lays the groundwork for a health communication campaign encouraging routine dental checkups among young adults. The use of targeting and tailoring to design effective oral health media campaign messages is discussed.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was based on a doctoral dissertation conducted by the first author and supervised by the second author. We thank dissertation committee members Elisia L. Cohen, Nancy G. Harrington, and Judith Skelton for their contributions to the study. The authors also thank Mary Beth Oliver for statistical assistance with the confirmatory factor analyses.

Notes

¹An anonymous reviewer raised the issue of whether the measurement properties of scales used in the study were robust, given that several scales were created or adapted expressly for the current study. To allay this concern, we conducted confirmatory factor analyses on all scales for which fit indices could be generated (i.e., all scales with 4 or more indicators) using Mplus software. Across all of the relevant scales in Study 1, the mean Comparative Fit Index (CFI) was .98, while the mean root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was .07. In Study 2, the mean CFI was .99 and the mean RMSEA was .05. Factor loadings were virtually all .70 or above across these analyses. These figures indicate that, from a measurement perspective, scales were adequate or robust.