willingness to change
Post on 12-May-2015
619 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Lecture 5
Willingness to change
Today
Self-determination theory Reactance Forced compliance Empowerment
What do these concepts have in common? Control issue (internal or external) Motivation issue (intrinsic or extrinsic)
SDT and (sustainable) health behavior
Sustainable health behavior
According to SDT, maintenance of behaviours over time requires that patients internalize
values and skills for change, and experience self-determination.Ryan et al., 2008
AutonomyIntrinsicMotivation
IntrinsicMotivation
Dental hygiene (motivation continuum) Not brush your teeth Brush your teeth because your parents force you to Brush your teeth because you feel you have to (guilt) Brush your teeth because you do not want to have cavities Brush your teeth because you like to do it (self-
determined)
Induced (forced) compliance Let’s asume you have to do boring task for 1 hour
(e.g. take part in health screening test) You are offered either 1 euro or 20 euro to tell
others that this is enjoyable and intriguing (so, you have to ‘lie’)
Afterwards, you are asked how enjoyable this task was, and if you would do a similar task again (on a scale from -5 to 5).
What do you think increases the enjoyment of the task and your intention to do this again (offer of 1 euro or 20 euro)?
Forced compliance experiment: Results
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
enjoyable task? participatesimilar task?
1$ 20$
Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)Festinger & Carlsmith (1959)
So, undermining effect of extrinsic
rewards?
SDT and Obese
Intervention for obese children showed that
a focus on intrinsic goals of health rather
than extrinsic goal of attractiveness as
reasons for change resulted not only in
greater initial weight loss, but also better
maintenance over a two-year period
(Vansteenkiste, et al., 2007)
Competence (ability) For internalization to occur a person has to
experience the confidence and competence to change
Sense of competence is facilitated by autonomy
Competence alone is not sufficient to ensure adherence: it must be accompanied by volition or control
Relatedness
A sense of being respected,
understood, and cared for is
essential to forming the
experiences of connection and
trust for internalization to occur
The impact of relatedness on
people’s openness to
information and likelihood of
complying with
recommendations is thus high
Competence and Relatedness?
Bench stepping experiment (Chatzisarantis,
2007) Four conditions Neutral: participants were (simply) asked to practice
bench-stepping, 3 days per week, for at least 20 minutes each time, over the next 2 months, during their leisure time
Incomplete autonomy support: participants read txt about decision to practice bench-stepping (“the choice is up to you”) and signed consent form (“I truly choose to’” )
Complete autonomy support: same as above with addition of rationale (“doing this activity has been shown to be useful …”) and acknowledgement of feelings (“I know doing this activity is not much fun …”)
Controlling: Participants read txt “Now you do not have much choice and you should practice…
Results stepping experiment (Catzisarantis,
2007) Immediately after manipulation attitudes and intentions were measured
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Neutral Controlling incomplete complete
attitude
intention
Thou shalt not …
Psychological Reactance
If freedom to engage or not engage in a behavior is threatened or denied, motivational
arousal is prompted to restore lost freedom(Brehm & Brehm, 1981)
Threat to freedom Motivation to maintain personal freedom creates
resistance to persuasion. People feel free to hold particular attitudes, to
change their attitudes, or to avoid committing to any position
If a communicator threatens one’s freedom to disagree (“What I am going to tell you now, is very important and
you must agree! Smoking is bad for your health!”), then the ‘freedom to disagree’ can be reasserted by disagreeing (“I will listen but I will decide for myself whether I disagree or not! Smoking is not that bad!”)
Known as ‘boomerang effect’…
Threatened freedom experiment
(Silvia, 2006) Message: “Physical exercise is good for you!” followed by several arguments
Condition 1 ‘Threat at start’: “Here are my reasons… They’re good reasons, so I know you completely agree with all of them. Because when you think about it you are really forced to agree with me because this is a health issue”
Condition 2 ‘Threat at end’: “So those are my reasons… etc..”
Condition 3 ‘No threat’ Effect???
Results (Silvia, 2006)
3
4
5
No threat Threat atstart
Threat atend
Agreement
Credibility
Counterarguing
Source derogationSource derogation
Restoring threatened freedom
Restoring threatened freedom
Source derogation
Has long term implications for ongoing influence attempts, because the sources of a reactance producing messages may lose referent power
and credibility and thus suffer diminished future influence over their reactant audiences
(Miller et al., 2007)
Implicit and explicit (anti & pro) smoking
messages
2
3
implicit explicit
message evaluation
source evaluation
Higher score = More negative
Higher score = More negative
Implicit and explicit smoking messages
So when middle and high school-aged students are confronted with explicit (overtly persuasive) antismoking messages they are less likely to comply and more likely to engage in smoking
Moreover (!) when students are confronted with an explicit ‘prosmoking’ message they are more likely to reject smoking
Think about differences in ‘tone of voice’ (implicitness and explicitness) of health ads and commercial ads
Lexical concreteness Messages stated in concrete terms tend to
provide specific details (e.g. “sugar causes obesity and tooth decay”) as opposed to abstract vague generalities (“Sugar is bad for you”)
See similarity with ‘single action’ or ‘goal’ In contrast to the heated emotive responses
as a consequence of controlling language, higher levels of concreteness should pose no threat to self-determination or autonomy
Effects of controlling and concreteness
top related