Effects Of Smoking Status,Fear Strength And Threat Types On Anti-Smoking Advertising Psychological Effectiveness

In recent years, the harm of tobacco get more and more attention from public, however, anti-smoking ads as a public service advertisement is non-profit,so it don’t get the due attention and few research about the anti-smoking ads effectiveness, which is very important for formulating appropriate and effective anti-smoking ads to reduce smoking behavior. So what type of anti-smoking ads can produce better psychological effect? Smoking and non-smoking subjects respond to different types of anti-smoking ads have any different? For domestic public, whether the effects of self-directed threat ads is better than other-directed threat ads? This thesis focuses on discussing the impact of anti-smoking advertising effectiveness on the smoking status of subject, fear strength and threat types. And further explore the differences of anti-smoking ads effect in the threat types ads for different self-oriented audience.Study 1 adopted a pretest-post test design of 2(smoking status: smoking, non-smoking) x 2(fear strength: high fear, low fear) x 2(threat types: self-directed threat, other-directed threat), 224 university students were selected as subjects, with the questionnaire method to explore the interaction on advertising effects of the smoking status, treat types and fear strength.Study 2 using IAT test measured the self-orientation of the smoking subjects, Through data analysis, the self-orientation is a factor of effectiveness differences of different threat types of anti-smoking ads was checked, and explore the possible interaction on advertising effects of the self-orientation and threat types.The results indicated that:(1) The status of smoking has a great difference in advertising effects. The non-smokers have more positive advertising attitude, smoking attitude change and intent change than smokers after viewing the anti-smoking advertisement.(2) The fear strength has a great difference in advertising effects. The high fear anti-smoking ads have more positive advertising attitude, smoking attitude change and intent change than the low fear anti-smoking ads for the subjects.(3) The threat types has no significant difference in advertising effects.(4) The status of smoking, fear strength and threat types have three interaction on the intent change is significant. For high fear ads, the intent change is better when presented self-directed threat ads for smokers; exposed other-directed threat ads will have more intent change than self-directed threat ads for non-smokers. For other-directed threat ads, non-smokers exposed high fear ads have more intent change than smokers exposed high fear ads; non-smokers exposed high fear ads have more intent change than non-smokers exposed low fear ads.(5) The self-orientation is a factor of effectiveness differences of different threat types of anti-smoking ads.(6) In advertising effects,the interaction between threat types and self-orientation is obvious. For individual self, the effect is better when presented self-directed threat ads. And for collective self, exposed other-directed threat ads will have better effects than self-directed threat ads.