IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rug/rugwps/10-672.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Influence of the Self-Regulatory Focus on the Effectiveness of Stop-Smoking Campaigns for Young Smokers

Author

Listed:
  • L. ADAMS
  • T. FASEUR
  • M. GEUENS

Abstract

People’s self-regulatory focus may determine the effectiveness of stop-smoking campaigns. An experiment with 226 young smokers investigated the persuasiveness of different emotional appeals (fear-relief versus sadness-joy) for different self-regulatory foci (prevention versus promotion). A congruency effect emerges for attitude toward the advertisement and behavioral intentions: Young smokers with a promotion focus are more persuaded by sadness-joy than fear-relief campaigns, and the opposite is true for those with a prevention focus. As predicted by the regulatory relevancy principle, ad involvement mediates this effect.

Suggested Citation

  • L. Adams & T. Faseur & M. Geuens, 2010. "The Influence of the Self-Regulatory Focus on the Effectiveness of Stop-Smoking Campaigns for Young Smokers," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 10/672, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    • Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:10/672
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wps-feb.ugent.be/Papers/wp_10_672.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anick Bosmans & Hans Baumgartner, 2005. "Goal-Relevant Emotional Information: When Extraneous Affect Leads to Persuasion and When It Does Not," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(3), pages 424-434, December.
    2. Raghunathan, Rajagopal & Pham, Michel Tuan, 1999. "All Negative Moods Are Not Equal: Motivational Influences of Anxiety and Sadness on Decision Making, , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 56-77, July.
    3. Lee, Angela Y. & Aaker, Jennifer L. & Gardner, Wendi L., 2000. "The Pleasures and Pains of Distinct Self-Construals: The Role of Interdependence in Regulatory Focus," Research Papers 1577r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    4. Pham, Michel Tuan & Avnet, Tamar, 2009. "Contingent reliance on the affect heuristic as a function of regulatory focus," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 267-278, March.
    5. Edwards, Jeffrey R., 1994. "The Study of Congruence in Organizational Behavior Research: Critique and a Proposed Alternative," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 51-100, April.
    6. Pham, Michel Tuan, 1998. "Representativeness, Relevance, and the Use of Feelings in Decision Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(2), pages 144-159, September.
    7. Rajagopal, 2012. "Decision Making," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Darwinian Fitness in the Global Marketplace, chapter 7, pages 191-224, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. Sheth, Jagdish N. & Newman, Bruce I. & Gross, Barbara L., 1991. "Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 159-170, March.
    9. Aaker, Jennifer L & Lee, Angela Y, 2001. ""I" Seek Pleasures and "We" Avoid Pains: The Role of Self-Regulatory Goals in Information Processing and Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 28(1), pages 33-49, June.
    10. John F. Y. Brookfield, 2001. "Predicting the future," Nature, Nature, vol. 411(6841), pages 999-999, June.
    11. Pham, Michel Tuan & Avnet, Tamar, 2004. "Ideals and Oughts and the Reliance on Affect versus Substance in Persuasion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(4), pages 503-518, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Florack, Arnd & Keller, Johannes & Palcu, Johanna, 2013. "Regulatory focus in economic contexts," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 127-137.
    2. Das, Gopal & Mukherjee, Amaradri & Smith, Ronn J., 2018. "The Perfect Fit: The Moderating Role of Selling Cues on Hedonic and Utilitarian Product Types," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 203-216.
    3. Zhang, Jason Q. & Craciun, Georgiana & Shin, Dongwoo, 2010. "When does electronic word-of-mouth matter? A study of consumer product reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(12), pages 1336-1341, December.
    4. Leder, Susanne & Mannetti, Lucia & Hölzl, Erik & Kirchler, Erich, 2010. "Regulatory fit effects on perceived fiscal exchange and tax compliance," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 271-277, April.
    5. Lucia Mannetti & Ambra Brizi & Mauro Giacomantonio & E Tory Higgins, 2013. "Framing Political Messages to Fit the Audience’s Regulatory Orientation: How to Improve the Efficacy of the Same Message Content," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-1, October.
    6. Aaker, Jennifer L. & Lee, Angela Y., 2006. "Understanding Regulatory Fit," Research Papers 1910, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    7. T. Faseur & M. Geuens, 2004. "Different Positive Feelings Leading to Different Ad Evaluations: The Case of Cosiness, Excitement and Romance," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 04/280, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    8. Park, Tae-Youn & Kim, Seongsu & Sung, Li-Kuo, 2017. "Fair pay dispersion: A regulatory focus theory view," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 1-11.
    9. Xiaomei Wang & Lin Zhang & Xiaoyu Jiang & Jia Wang, 2021. "Promoting Water Conservation Based on the Matching Effect of Regulatory Focus and Emotion," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-12, February.
    10. Sunaga, Tsutomu & Meng, Yan & Zhuang, Xuhong, 2020. "Interactions between instrumental timbre and consumers’ regulatory focus," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 1-12.
    11. Choi, Jungsil & Park, Hyun Young, 2021. "How donor's regulatory focus changes the effectiveness of a sadness-evoking charity appeal," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 749-769.
    12. Trudel, Remi & Murray, Kyle B. & Cotte, June, 2012. "Beyond expectations: The effect of regulatory focus on consumer satisfaction," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 93-97.
    13. Yu, Xi & Huang, Huiling & Liu, Stephanie Q. & Lu, Zhi, 2020. "Signaling authenticity of ethnic cuisines via handwriting," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    14. Sun, Jin & Keh, Hean Tat & Lee, Angela Y., 2019. "Shaping consumer preference using alignable attributes: The roles of regulatory orientation and construal level," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 151-168.
    15. Kirsten Cowan & Atefeh Yazdanparast, 2021. "Consequences of Moral Transgressions: How Regulatory Focus Orientation Motivates or Hinders Moral Decoupling," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 170(1), pages 115-132, April.
    16. Kramer, Thomas & Yucel-Aybat, Ozge & Lau-Gesk, Loraine, 2011. "The effect of schadenfreude on choice of conventional versus unconventional options," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 140-147, September.
    17. Tuan Pham, Michel & Meyvis, Tom & Zhou, Rongrong, 2001. "Beyond the Obvious: Chronic Vividness of Imagery and the Use of Information in Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 226-253, March.
    18. Yang, Zhiyong & Janakiraman, Narayan & Hossain, Mehdi T. & Grisaffe, Douglas B., 2020. "Differential effects of pay-it-forward and direct-reciprocity on prosocial behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 400-408.
    19. Cheng, Yin-Hui & Yen, HsiuJu Rebecca & Chuang, Shih-Chieh & Chang, Chia-Jung, 2013. "Product option framing under the influence of a promotion versus prevention focus," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 402-413.
    20. Sengupta, Atri & Deb, Soumya Guha & Mittal, Shashank, 2021. "The underlying motivational process behind portfolio diversification choice decisions of individual investors: An experimental design," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:10/672. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Nathalie Verhaeghe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugbe.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.