Protection motivation theory

Last updated

Protection motivation theory (PMT) was originally created to help understand individual human responses to fear appeals. Protection motivation theory proposes that people protect themselves based on two factors: threat appraisal and coping appraisal. Threat appraisal assesses the severity of the situation and examines how serious the situation is, while coping appraisal is how one responds to the situation. Threat appraisal consists of the perceived severity of a threatening event and the perceived probability of the occurrence, or vulnerability. Coping appraisal consists of perceived response efficacy, or an individual's expectation that carrying out the recommended action will remove the threat, and perceived self efficacy, or the belief in one's ability to execute the recommended courses of action successfully. [1] [2]

Contents

PMT is one model that explains why people engage in unhealthy practices and offers suggestions for changing those behaviors. Primary prevention involves taking measures to combat the risk of developing a health problem [3] (e.g., controlling weight to prevent high blood pressure). Secondary prevention involves taking steps to prevent a condition from becoming worse [4] (e.g., remembering to take daily medication to control blood pressure).

Another psychological model that describes self-preservation and processing of fear is terror management theory.

History

Protection motivation theory was developed by R.W. Rogers in 1975 in order to better understand fear appeals and how people cope with them. [1] However, Dr. Rogers would later expand on the theory in 1983 to a more general theory of persuasive communication. The theory was originally based on the work of Richard Lazarus, who researched how people behave and cope during stressful situations. In his book, Stress, Appraisal, and Coping, Richard Lazarus discusses the idea of the cognitive appraisal processes and how they relate to coping with stress. He states that people "differ in their sensitivity and vulnerability to certain types of events, as well as in their interpretations and reactions". [5] While Richard Lazarus came up with many of the fundamental ideas used in the protection motivation theory, Rogers was the first to apply the terminology when discussing fear appeals. In modern times, the protection motivation theory is mainly used when discussing health issues and how people react when diagnosed with health related illnesses.

Theory

Threat-appraisal process

The threat appraisal process consists of both the severity and vulnerability of the situation. It focuses on the source of the threat and factors that increase or decrease likelihood of maladaptive behaviours. [6] Severity refers to the degree of harm from the unhealthy behavior. Vulnerability is the probability that one will experience harm. Another aspect of the threat appraisal is rewards. Rewards refer to the positive aspects of starting or continuing the unhealthy behavior. To calculate the amount of threat experienced take the combination of both the severity and vulnerability, and then subtract the rewards. Threat appraisal refers to children's evaluation of the degree to which an event has significant implications for their well-being. Theoretically, threat appraisal is related to Lazaraus' concept of primary appraisal, particularly to the way in which the event threatens the child's commitments, goals, or values. Threat appraisal is differentiated from the evaluation of stressfulness or impact of the event in that is assesses what is threatened, rather than simply the degree of stress or negativity of an event. Threat appraisal is also differentiated from negative cognitive styles, because it assesses children's reported negative appraisals for specific events in their lives rather than their typical style of responding to stressful events. Theoretically, higher threat appraisals should lead to negative arousal and coping and to increased psychological symptomatology.

Coping-appraisal process

The coping appraisal consists of the response efficacy, self-efficacy, and the response costs. Response efficacy is the effectiveness of the recommended behavior in removing or preventing possible harm. Self-efficacy is the belief that one can successfully enact the recommended behavior. The response costs are the costs associated with the recommended behavior. The amount of coping ability that one experiences is the combination of response efficacy and self-efficacy, minus the response costs. The coping appraisal process focuses on the adaptive responses and one's ability to cope with and avert the threat. The coping appraisal is the sum of the appraisals of the responses efficacy and self-efficacy, minus any physical or psychological "costs" of adopting the recommended preventive response. Coping Appraisal involves the individual's assessment of the response efficacy of the recommended behavior (i.e. perceived effectiveness of sunscreen in preventing premature aging) as well as one's perceived self-efficacy in carrying out the recommended actions. [7] (i.e. confidence that one can use sunscreen consistently).

The Threat and coping appraisal variables combine in a fairly straightforward way, although the relative emphasis may vary from topic to topic and with target population.

In Stress, Appraisal, and Coping, Richard Lazarus states that, "studies of coping suggest that different styles of coping are related to specific health outcomes; control of anger, for example, has been implicated in hypertension. Three routes through which coping can affect health include the frequency, intensity, duration, and patterning of neurochemical stress reactions; using injurious substances or carrying out activities that put the person at risk; and impeding adaptive health/illness-related behavior.". [8]

Response efficacy

Response efficacy concerns beliefs that adopting a particular behavioral response will be effective in reducing the diseases' threat, and self-efficacy is the belief that one can successfully perform the coping response. [9] In line with the traditional way of measuring the consequences of behavior, response efficacy was operationalized by linking consequences to the recommended behavior as well as to whether the subject regarded the consequences as likely outcomes of the recommended behavior. [10] Among the 6 factors (vulnerability, severity, rewards, response efficacy, self-efficacy, and response costs), self-efficacy is the most correlated with protection motivation, according to meta-analysis studies. [11] [12]

Cognitive process of protection motivation theory developed by Ronald W. Rogers in 1983 Protection motivation theory.png
Cognitive process of protection motivation theory developed by Ronald W. Rogers in 1983

Applications

Measures

Each influential factor is generally measured by asking questions through a survey. For example, Boer (2005) studied on intention of condom use to prevent from getting AIDS guided by protection motivation theory. The study asked the following questions to individuals: "If I do not use condoms, I will run a high risk of getting HIV/AIDS." for vulnerability, "If I became infected with HIV or get AIDS, I would suffer from all kind of ailments." for severity, "Using condoms will protect me against becoming infected with HIV." for response efficacy, and "I am able to talk about safe sex with my boyfriend/girlfriend." [13]

Applied research areas

Protection motivation theory conventionally has been applied in the personal health contexts. A meta-analysis study on protection motivation theory categorized major six topics: cancer prevention (17%), exercise/diet/healthy lifestyle (17%), smoking (9%), AIDS prevention (9%), alcohol consumption (8%), and adherence to medical-treatment regimens (6%). [11] As the minority topics, the study presented prevention of nuclear war, wearing bicycle helmets, driving safety, child-abuse prevention, reducing caffeine consumption, seeking treatment for sexually transmitted diseases, inoculation against influenza, saving endangered species, improving dental hygiene, home radon testing, osteoporosis prevention, marijuana use, seeking emergency help via 911, pain management during and recovery after dental surgery, and safe use of pesticides. [11] All these topics were directly or indirectly related to personal physical health.

Aside from personal physical health research, the application of protection motivation theory has extended to other areas. Namely, researchers focusing on information security have applied protection motivation theory to their studies since the end of the 2000s. The general idea here has been to use threats or information security policies to encourage protection security behaviors in the workplace [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] and at home. [21] Accordingly, a more recent security application of protection motivation theory by Boss et al. (2015), returned to use of the full nomology and measurement of fear in an organizational security context with two studies. A process-variance model of protection motivation theory was strongly supported in this context, as depicted in Figure 1. [22]

See also

Related Research Articles

Stress management consists of a wide spectrum of techniques and psychotherapies aimed at controlling a person's level of stress, especially chronic stress, usually for the purpose of improving everyday functioning. Stress produces numerous physical and mental symptoms which vary according to each individual's situational factors. These can include a decline in physical health, such as headaches, chest pain, fatigue, and sleep problems, as well as depression. The process of stress management is named as one of the keys to a happy and successful life in modern society. Life often delivers numerous demands that can be difficult to handle, but stress management provides a number of ways to manage anxiety and maintain overall well-being.

Coping refers to conscious strategies used to reduce unpleasant emotions. Coping strategies can be cognitions or behaviors and can be individual or social. To cope is to deal with and overcome struggles and difficulties in life. It is a way for people to maintain their mental and emotional well-being. Everybody has ways of handling difficult events that occur in life, and that is what it means to cope. Coping can be healthy and productive, or destructive and unhealthy. It is recommended that an individual cope in ways that will be beneficial and healthy. "Managing your stress well can help you feel better physically and psychologically and it can impact your ability to perform your best."

Behavior change, in context of public health, refers to efforts put in place to change people's personal habits and attitudes, to prevent disease. Behavior change in public health can take place at several levels and is known as social and behavior change (SBC). More and more, efforts focus on prevention of disease to save healthcare care costs. This is particularly important in low and middle income countries, where supply side health interventions have come under increased scrutiny because of the cost.

In psychology, self-efficacy is an individual's belief in their capacity to act in the ways necessary to reach specific goals. The concept was originally proposed by the psychologist Albert Bandura.

The term eustress means "beneficial stress"—either psychological, physical, or biochemical/radiological (hormesis).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Lazarus</span> American psychologist (1922–2002)

Richard S. Lazarus was an American psychologist who began rising to prominence in the 1960s. A Review of General Psychology survey, published in 2002, ranked Lazarus as the 80th most cited psychologist of the 20th century. He was well renowned for his theory of cognitive-mediational theory within emotion.

Appraisal theory is the theory in psychology that emotions are extracted from our evaluations of events that cause specific reactions in different people. Essentially, our appraisal of a situation causes an emotional, or affective, response that is going to be based on that appraisal. An example of this is going on a first date. If the date is perceived as positive, one might feel happiness, joy, giddiness, excitement, and/or anticipation, because they have appraised this event as one that could have positive long-term effects, i.e. starting a new relationship, engagement, or even marriage. On the other hand, if the date is perceived negatively, then our emotions, as a result, might include dejection, sadness, emptiness, or fear. Reasoning and understanding of one's emotional reaction becomes important for future appraisals as well. The important aspect of the appraisal theory is that it accounts for individual variability in emotional reactions to the same event.

Fear appeal is a term used in psychology, sociology and marketing. It generally describes a strategy for motivating people to take a particular action, endorse a particular policy, or buy a particular product, by arousing fear. A well-known example in television advertising was a commercial employing the musical jingle: "Never pick up a stranger, pick up Prestone anti-freeze." This was accompanied by images of shadowy strangers (hitchhikers) who would presumably do one harm if picked up. The commercial's main appeal was not to the positive features of Prestone anti-freeze, but to the fear of what a "strange" brand might do.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Determination</span> Positive emotional feeling

Determination is a positive emotional feeling that promotes persevering towards a difficult goal in spite of obstacles. Determination occurs prior to goal attainment and serves to motivate behavior that will help achieve one's goal.

The extended parallel process model (EPPM) is a fear appeal theory developed by communications scholar Kim Witte that illustrates how individuals react to fear-inducing messages. Witte subsequently published an initial test of the model in Communication Monographs.

Cognitive appraisal is the subjective interpretation made by an individual to stimuli in the environment. It is a component in a variety of theories relating to stress, mental health, coping, and emotion. It is most notably used in the transactional model of stress and coping, introduced in a 1984 publication by Richard Lazarus and Susan Folkman. In this theory, cognitive appraisal is defined as the way in which an individual responds to and interprets stressors in life. A variety of mental disorders have been observed as having abnormal patterns of cognitive appraisal in those affected by the disorder. Other work has detailed how personality can influence the way in which individuals cognitively appraise a situation.

Psychological hardiness, alternatively referred to as personality hardiness or cognitive hardiness in the literature, is a personality style first introduced by Suzanne C. Kobasa in 1979. Kobasa described a pattern of personality characteristics that distinguished managers and executives who remained healthy under life stress, as compared to those who developed health problems. In the following years, the concept of hardiness was further elaborated in a book and a series of research reports by Salvatore Maddi, Kobasa and their graduate students at the University of Chicago.

An important part of the heritage of family resilience is the concept of individual psychological resilience which originates from work with children focusing on what helped them become resilient in the face of adversity. Individual resilience emerged primarily in the field of developmental psychopathology as scholars sought to identify the characteristics of children that allowed them to function "OK" after adversity. Individual resilience gradually moved into understanding the processes associated with overcoming adversity, then into prevention and intervention and now focuses on examining how factors at multiple levels of the system and using interdisciplinary approaches promote resilience. Resilience also has origins to the field of positive psychology. The term resilience gradually changed definitions and meanings, from a personality trait to a dynamic process of families, individuals, and communities.

A behavior change method, or behavior change technique, is a theory-based method for changing one or several determinants of behavior such as a person's attitude or self-efficacy. Such behavior change methods are used in behavior change interventions. Although of course attempts to influence people's attitude and other psychological determinants were much older, especially the definition developed in the late nineties yielded useful insights, in particular four important benefits:

  1. It developed a generic, abstract vocabulary that facilitated discussion of the active ingredients of an intervention
  2. It emphasized the distinction between behavior change methods and practical applications of these methods
  3. It included the concept of 'parameters for effectiveness', important conditions for effectiveness often neglected
  4. It drew attention to the fact that behavior change methods influence specific determinants.

A health campaign is a type of media campaign which attempts to promote public health by making new health interventions available. The organizers of a health campaign frequently use education along with an opportunity to participate further, such as when a vaccination campaign seeks both to educate the public about a vaccine and provide the vaccine to people who want it. When a health campaign has international relevance it may be called a global health campaign.

Adaptive performance in the work environment refers to adjusting to and understanding change in the workplace. An employee who is versatile is valued and important in the success of an organization. Employers seek employees with high adaptability, due to the positive outcomes that follow, such as excellent work performance, work attitude, and ability to handle stress. Employees, who display high adaptive performance in an organization, tend to have more advantages in career opportunities unlike employees who are not adaptable to change. In previous literature, Pulakos and colleagues established eight dimensions of adaptive performance.

Kim Witte is a communications scholar with an emphasis on the area of fear appeals called “scare tactics”. In 2015 Witte is a professor who teaches graduate courses at Michigan State University.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fear pattern</span> Advertising technique

In advertising, a fear pattern is a sequence of fear arousal and fear reduction that is felt by the viewing audience when exposed to an advertisement, which attempts to threaten the audience by presenting a negative physical, psychological or social consequence that is likely to occur if they engage in a particular behaviour. Fear appeals are commonly used in social marketing campaigns. These are sometimes called “threat appeals”, however the label “fear appeals” is justified if the appeal can be shown to arouse fear.

Self-blame is a cognitive process in which an individual attributes the occurrence of a stressful event to oneself. The direction of blame often has implications for individuals’ emotions and behaviors during and following stressful situations. Self-blame is a common reaction to stressful events and has certain effects on how individuals adapt. Types of self-blame are hypothesized to contribute to depression, and self-blame is a component of self-directed emotions like guilt and self-disgust. Because of self-blame's commonality in response to stress and its role in emotion, self-blame should be examined using psychology's perspectives on stress and coping. This article will attempt to give an overview of the contemporary study on self-blame in psychology.

Susan Kleppner Folkman is an American psychologist, author, and emerita professor of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF). She is internationally recognized for her contributions to the field of psychological stress and coping. Her 1984 book Stress, Appraisal and Coping alongside Richard S. Lazarus, is the most widely cited academic book in its field, and the 17th most cited book in social science.

References

  1. 1 2 Rogers, R. W. (1975). "A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change". Journal of Psychology. 91 (1): 93–114. doi:10.1080/00223980.1975.9915803. PMID   28136248.
  2. ↑ Rogers, R.W. (1983). Cognitive and physiological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: A Revised theory of protection motivation. In J. Cacioppo & R. Petty (Eds.), Social Psychophysiology. New York: Guilford Press.
  3. ↑ Pechmann, C; Goldberg, M; Reibling, E (2003). "What to convey in antismoking advertisements for adolescents: The use of protection motivation theory to identify effective message themes". Journal of Marketing. 67 (2): 1–18. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.67.2.1.18607 .
  4. ↑ Maddux, J.E.; Rogers, R. W. (1983). "Protection motivation theory and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 19 (5): 469–479. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(83)90023-9.
  5. ↑ Monat, A, & Lazarus, R (1991). Stress and coping: an anthology .New York: Columbia University Press .
  6. ↑ Plotnikoff, Ronald C.; Trinh, Linda (1 April 2010). "Protection Motivation Theory". Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews. 38 (2): 91–98. doi: 10.1097/JES.0b013e3181d49612 . PMID   20335741.
  7. ↑ Prentice-Dunn, S, Mcmath, B, & Cramer, R (2009). Protection motivation theory and stages of change in sun protective behavior. Journal of Health Psychology , 14.
  8. ↑ Lazarus, R, & Folkman, S (1984). Stress, apprasisal, and coping.New York: Springer Publishing Company, Inc. .
  9. ↑ Van der velde, F.W.; van der Plight, J. (1991). "AIDS-related health behavior: Coping, protection, motivation, and previous behavior" (PDF). Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 14 (5): 429–451. doi:10.1007/bf00845103. PMID   1744908.
  10. ↑ Lwin, M, & Saw, S (2007). Protecting children from myopia: A PMT perspective for improving health marketing communications. Journal of Health Communication, 12.
  11. 1 2 3 Floyd, D. L.; Prentice; Dunn, S.; Rogers, R. W. (2000). "A meta‐analysis of research on protection motivation theory". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 30 (2): 407–429. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02323.x.
  12. ↑ Milne, S.; Sheeran, P.; Orbell, S. (2000). "Prediction and intervention in health‐related behavior: A meta‐analytic review of protection motivation theory". Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 30 (1): 106–143. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02308.x.
  13. ↑ Boer, H.; Mashamba, M. T. (2005). "Psychosocial correlates of HIV protection motivation among black adolescents in Venda, South Africa". AIDS Education and Prevention. 17 (6): 590–602. doi:10.1521/aeap.2005.17.6.590. PMID   16398579.
  14. ↑ Herath, T.; Rao, H. R. (2009). "Protection motivation and deterrence: a framework for security policy compliance in organisations". European Journal of Information Systems. 18 (2): 106–125. doi:10.1057/ejis.2009.6.
  15. ↑ Ifinedo, P (2012). "Understanding information systems security policy compliance: An integration of the theory of planned behavior and the protection motivation theory". Computers & Security. 31 (1): 83–95. doi:10.1016/j.cose.2011.10.007.
  16. ↑ Johnston, A. C.; Warkentin, M. (2010). "Fear appeals and information security behaviors: an empirical study". MIS Quarterly. 34 (3): 549–566. doi:10.2307/25750691. JSTOR   25750691.
  17. ↑ Lee, D.; Larose, R.; Rifon, N. (2008). "Keeping our network safe: a model of online protection behaviour". Behaviour & Information Technology. 27 (5): 445–454. doi:10.1080/01449290600879344.
  18. ↑ Clay Posey, Tom L. Roberts, and Paul Benjamin Lowry (2015). "The impact of organizational commitment on insiders’ motivation to protect organizational information assets," Journal of Management Information Systems (JMIS) (forthcoming, accepted 06-Aug-2015).
  19. ↑ Jenkins, Jeffrey L.; Grimes, Mark; Proudfoot, Jeff; Benjamin Lowry, Paul (2014). "Improving password cybersecurity through inexpensive and minimally invasive means: Detecting and deterring password reuse through keystroke-dynamics monitoring and just-in-time warnings". Information Technology for Development. 20 (2): 196–213. doi:10.1080/02681102.2013.814040.
  20. ↑ Clay Posey, Tom L. Roberts, Paul Benjamin Lowry, James Courtney, and Rebecca J. Bennett (2011). "Motivating the insider to protect organizational information assets: Evidence from protection motivation theory and rival explanations," Proceedings of the Dewald Roode Workshop in Information Systems Security 2011, IFIP WG 8.11 / 11.13, Blacksburg, VA, September 22–23, pp. 1–51.
  21. ↑ Nehme, Alaa; George, Joey F. (2022). "Approaching IT Security & Avoiding Threats in the Smart Home Context" (PDF). Journal of Management Information Systems. 39 (4): 1184–1214. doi:10.1080/07421222.2022.2127449.
  22. ↑ Boss, Scott R.; Galletta, Dennis F.; Benjamin Lowry, Paul; Moody, Gregory D.; Polak, Peter (2015). "What do users have to fear? Using fear appeals to engender threats and fear that motivate protective behaviors in users". MIS Quarterly. 39 (4): 837–864. doi:10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.4.5. SSRN   2607190.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.