THE INFLUENCE OF FEAR APPEAL APPROACHES AND PERCEIVED RISK ON GENERATION Y CONSUMERS’ PROTECTION MOTIVATION Stephanie Bührer Submitted in fulfilment towards the degree of MCom (Masters) Business Management in Economic and Management Sciences at the University of Stellenbosch Supervisors: Mrs Lucea Toerien Professor Christo Boshoff Date: March 2016 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za DECLARATION By submitting this thesis electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explicitly otherwise stated), that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not infringe any third party rights and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Date: March 2016 Copyright © 2016 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved i Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za ABSTRACT Statement-based fear appeals have been used widely in social marketing in an attempt to change undesirable human behaviour. Despite the extensive use of this approach, fear appeal effectiveness has often been called into question given the defensive reactions that fear-based messages may arouse. To reduce the occurrence of these defensive mechanisms, a new fear appeal approach, which has recently demonstrated its success in increasing risk perceptions and reducing short-term smoking behaviour, has been suggested: the use of question-based warnings. Considering the recent success of this approach in the realm of cigarette smoking, this study extended the use of question- based warnings to a different context, namely drinking-and-driving. Moreover, literature pertaining to the different types of perceived risks, and which is most effective in altering males‟ and females‟ protection motivation, has resulted in contrasting results. Consequently, this study wanted to address this gap in the literature. Against this background, the primary objectives of this study were to investigate whether different fear appeal approaches (i.e. question- and statement-based warnings), different types of perceived risk (i.e. physical and social risks) and gender, as well as the combined interaction between these variables, would influence generation Y consumers‟ protection motivation differently. Secondary objectives included investigating the impact of these variables on each component of the Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) Model; that is perceived vulnerability, severity, fear, response efficacy, self-efficacy and behavioural intent. A four-group, post-test only experiment was conducted, with a total sample of 1203 respondents. A convenience sampling procedure was used. The results indicated that different fear appeal approaches did not influence generation Y consumers‟ protection motivation differently, while the opposite was found for different types of perceived risk and gender. Based on these results, further research should be conducted to investigate the effectiveness of alternate fear appeal approaches. Additionally, while physical risks were found to be more effective than social risks in altering consumers‟ protection motivation, further research should be conducted to investigate which risk is more effective for the different genders. Finally, gender was shown to be an important factor in the perceived effectiveness of drinking-and-driving fear appeals. ii Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za On the whole, three points should be taken away from this study. Firstly, given the relative ineffectiveness of both question- and statement-based warnings, either approach can be used in social marketing. However, where an anti-drinking-and-driving campaign wants to overcome the negative effects that overexposure and desensitisation can have on its effectiveness, question-based warnings should be used. Secondly, until such time as a more effective alternative has been found, anti-drinking-and-driving campaigns should continue to make use of physical risks. Finally, gender should always be an important consideration in both the design and implementation of a road-based social marketing campaign. iii Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za OPSOMMING Stelling-gebaseerde vreesberoepe is reeds wyd in sosiale bemarking gebruik om ongewenste gedrag te verander. Ten spyte van die uitgebreide gebruik van hierdie benadering, word die effektiwiteit van vreesberoepe gereeld bevraagteken as gevolg van die verdedigende reaksies wat baie vrees-gebaseerde boodskappe wek. Om die voorkoms van hierdie verdedigende meganismes te verminder, word „n nuwe vreesberoep-benadering, wat ook reeds sukses met die verhoging van risikopersepsies en die vermindering van korttermyn-rookgedrag gedemonstreer het, voorgestel: die gebruik van vraag-gebaseerde waarskuwings. Gegewe die sukses van hierdie benadering in die area van sigaretrook, het hierdie studie probeer om die gebruik van vraag-gebaseerde waarskuwings uit te brei na „n ander konteks, naamlik drink-en- bestuur. Verder het die literatuur met betrekking tot die verskillende tipes waargenome risiko, en watter risiko die effektiefste is in die verandering van mans en vroue se beskermingsmotivering, gelei tot kontrasterende resultate. Gevolglik wou hierdie studie dié gaping in die literatuur aanspreek. Dus ondersoek die primêre doelwitte van hierdie studie of verskillende vreesberoep- benaderings (naamlik vraag- en stelling-gebaseerde waarskuwings), verskillende tipes waargenome risiko (naamlik fisiese en sosiale risiko's) en geslag, asook die gekombineerde interaksie tussen hierdie veranderlikes, verbruikers se beskermingsmotivering verskillend beïnvloed. Die sekondêre doelwitte het ingesluit om die impak van hierdie veranderlikes op elke komponent van die Beskermingsmotiveringsteorie-model (BMT) te ondersoek; dit wil sê waargenome kwesbaarheid, erns, vrees, reaksie-doeltreffendheid, selfdoeltreffendheid en gedragsvoorneme. „n Vier-groep, post-toets-alleenlike eksperiment is uitgevoer, met „n totale streekproef van 1203 respondente. Gerieflikheidsteekproefneming is benut. Die resultate het aangedui dat verskillende vreesberoep-benaderings nie generasie Y verbruikers se beskermingsmotivering verskillend beïnvloed nie, terwyl die teenoorgestelde gevind is vir verskillende tipes waargenome risiko en geslag. Gebaseer op hierdie resultate behoort toekomstige navorsing gedoen te word om die effektiwiteit van alternatiewe vreesberoep-benaderings te ondersoek. Aangesien fisiese risiko bevind is om meer effektief te wees as sosiale risiko in die verandering van verbruikers se beskermingsmotivering, moet verdere navorsing ook gedoen word om te iv Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za ondersoek watter risiko meer effektief is vir die verskillende geslagte. Laastens het geslag na vore gekom as 'n belangrike faktor in die waargenome doeltreffendheid van drink-en-bestuur-vreesberoepe. In geheel kan drie punte van hierdie studie weggeneem word. Eerstens, gegewe die relatiewe oneffektiwiteit van beide vraag- en stelling-gebaseerde vreesberoepe, kan beide benaderings gebruik word in sosiale bemarking. Waar ʼn nie-drink-en-bestuur veldtog wel die negatiewe effekte van oormatige blootstelling en desensitisering wil voorkom, moet vraag-gebaseerde waarskuwings gebruik word. Tweedens, tot en met die tyd waar ʼn meer effektiewe alternatief gevind is, moet nie-drink-en-bestuur veldtogte van fisiese risiko‟s gebruik maak. Laastens moet geslag altyd in oorweging geneem word tydens die ontwerp en implementering van pad-gebaseerde sosiale bemarkingveldtog. v Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za KEYWORDS Fear Appeals Perceived Risk Protection Motivation Question-based Warnings Social Marketing Statement-based Warnings vi Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS “Challenges are what makes life interesting, and overcoming them is what makes life meaningful” – Joshua J. Marine This past year has truly been a remarkable experience and although challenging at times, I was able to grow on both a personal and academic level. However, this dissertation would not have been possible without a number of people within whom I found continued strength and support. I would therefore like to acknowledge the following individuals: To my two supervisors, it truly was an honour to work with the both of you. Your continued guidance and expertise made this dissertation possible and for that I cannot express my gratitude enough. I will forever be grateful for the impact you‟ve had on me. To Mrs Lucea Toerien, who was always so reassuring and calm in my moments of doubt, thank you for your constant support and kindness throughout the year. Your knowledge throughout this process has been extremely valuable and I have truly learnt so much from you. To Prof Christo Boshoff, thank you for assisting in the organisation of financial support, without which this year wouldn‟t have been possible. Your constant encouragement and belief in me, sincerely means a lot. To Prof Martin Kidd, thank you for your willingness to always answer my many statistics- related questions, as well as to Allison Mlitwa, for your assistance in the sampling of this study. Penultimately, a massive thank you to my family and friends. Your unwavering understanding, support and late night readings of my chapters have been invaluable and I am truly blessed to be surrounded by such love. To my parents, Daniel and Jan thank you for absolutely everything you do and have done for me. I love you all tremendously. Finally, I would also like to acknowledge the NRF who helped to fund this research. vii Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW ........................................................... 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2 SOCIAL MARKETING ................................................................................................ 1 1.3 FEAR APPEALS ........................................................................................................ 2 (a) Understanding Fear Appeals: Protection Motivation Theory ................................. 3 1.3.1 Ineffective Nature of Fear Appeals ....................................................................... 4 1.3.2 Different Fear Appeal Approaches ....................................................................... 5 1.3.3 Perceived Risk ..................................................................................................... 7 1.4 THE CONTEXT OF THE STUDY ............................................................................... 9 1.5 PROBLEM STATEMENT ......................................................................................... 11 1.6 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................... 12 1.7 HYPOTHESES ......................................................................................................... 14 1.8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 15 1.8.1 Secondary Research .......................................................................................... 15 1.8.2 Primary Research .............................................................................................. 15 (a) Qualitative Research ...................................................................................... 16 (b) Quantitative Research .................................................................................... 16 1.8.3 Sampling Process .............................................................................................. 17 (a) The Target Population .................................................................................... 17 (b) Sampling Method ........................................................................................... 17 (c) Sample Unit Selection Process and Fieldwork ............................................... 18 viii Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za (d) Validity of the Study ....................................................................................... 18 1.8.4 Data Analysis ..................................................................................................... 19 1.8.5 Results ............................................................................................................... 19 1.9 ORIENTATION OF THE STUDY .............................................................................. 19 CHAPTER 2: MARKETING COMMUNICATION AND BEHAVIOUR CHANGE ............ 21 2.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 21 2.2 MARKETING ............................................................................................................ 21 2.2.1 What Can Be Marketed ...................................................................................... 22 2.2.2 Considerations When Marketing: The Marketing Mix ......................................... 23 2.3 MARKETING COMMUNICATION ............................................................................ 25 2.3.1 The Components of the Marketing Communication Model ................................. 26 (a) The Sender .................................................................................................... 26 (b) The Medium ................................................................................................... 27 (c) The Receiver.................................................................................................. 28 2.3.2 Advertisements: Marketing‟s Persuasive Messages ........................................... 29 (a) The Elaboration Likelihood Model .................................................................. 29 (b) Message Acceptance: Adapting Message Characteristics ............................. 32 (i) Language Use ............................................................................................... 32 (ii) Message Framing .......................................................................................... 33 (iii) Message Tailoring ......................................................................................... 34 (c) Message Acceptance: External Characteristics .............................................. 35 ix