The purpose of this study is to examine the effects and persuasive mechanisms of expository and narrative HPV vaccine messages targeted toward young men. The researcher used the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s HPV facts for men as a framework for the expository message condition. He also created two similar but distinct narratives that focused on HPV and men. The first narrative was informed by narrative persuasion studies in the social sciences and was labeled the academic narrative. The second narrative incorporated important elements of storytelling from literary theory and was labeled the classic narrative. A comparison condition, which presented a testimonial from a testicular cancer survivor, was also employed to compare against the effectiveness of the three experimental conditions. In the experiment, 258 men ages 18-26 were assigned randomly to the expository, academic narrative, classic narrative, or comparison conditions. Outcome measures related to the persuasive effects of the messages were attitudes toward talking to healthcare providers about the HPV vaccine and receptiveness to the HPV vaccine. Outcome measures related to the persuasive mechanisms of expository messages were argument strength, source credibility, and emotional arousal. Outcome measures related to the persuasive mechanisms of narrative messages were perceived realism, transportation, identification, and emotional arousal. Hypotheses predicted that argument strength and source credibility would predict changes in knowledge, attitudes, and vaccine receptiveness in the expository condition, whereas perceived realism, transportation, and identification would predict similar changes in the narrative conditions. An additional hypothesis predicted that emotional arousal would affect the persuasion process differently in the expository and narrative conditions. Results indicated that transportation, identification, and emotional arousal were stronger in the narrative conditions, but these variables did not predict persuasive outcomes. Conversely, perceived realism and source credibility had unexpected persuasive effects in both expository and narrative conditions. Implications of the findings and directions for future research are discussed.

In this study we explored some of the factors associated with biased processing of attitude-relevant information. We were particularly interested in the possibility that a self-affirmation, by reducing self-evaluative concerns, might increase participants' willingness to impartially evaluate information that conflicts with their current views. We examined students' reactions to arguments about increasing tuition as a function of four factors: attitude importance, argument strength, the congruence of arguments with existing attitudes, and our experimental manipulation of affirmation. We found that affirmation reduced biased evaluation only for participants who rated the issue as important. We also found that affirmation dramatically impacted the perception of argument strength. Stronger counterattitudinal arguments were rejected by non-affirmed participants, who did not distinguish them from weak arguments, presumably because of the esteem threat posed by a strong ideological challenge. Affirmed participants, though, evaluated strong counterattitudinal arguments more positively.

In this study we explored some of the factors associated with biased processing of attitude-relevant information. We were particularly interested in the possibility that a self-affirmation, by reducing self-evaluative concerns, might increase participants' willingness to impartially evaluate information that conflicts with their current views. We examined students' reactions to arguments about increasing tuition as a function of four factors: attitude importance, argument strength, the congruence of arguments with existing attitudes, and our experimental manipulation of affirmation. We found that affirmation reduced biased evaluation only for participants who rated the issue as important. We also found that affirmation dramatically impacted the perception of argument strength. Stronger counterattitudinal arguments were rejected by non-affirmed participants, who did not distinguish them from weak arguments, presumably because of the esteem threat posed by a strong ideological challenge. Affirmed participants, though, evaluated strong counterattitudinal arguments more positively.

The HPV vaccine represents an important step in the primary prevention of cervical cancer, yet uptake rates for the vaccine remain below what is needed to establish "herd immunity" from the virus. While many studies have examined both psychosocial and communication factors affecting HPV vaccination decisions, this study adopts a unique approach to understand the communication environment within which this health decision happens, such as the many and sometimes conflicting messages about vaccine efficacy and safety guiding young women's decisions. Using the message convergence framework, this project identifies how further study of converging and diverging messages in the communication environment in which young women make their vaccination decision can extend research in considering optimal communication strategies to enhance demand for HPV vaccination. In Study 1, 39 unvaccinated women participated in qualitative interviews and were asked questions in order to understand the important elements of the HPV vaccination communication environment that affected their decision (i.e., common sources and content of messages, how they discussed these messages "interacting" and influencing their decision). Study 2 builds on the findings of Study 1 by employing an experimental design to test different message convergence conditions on women's intent to vaccinate (e.g., what happens when a doctor and a family member give conflicting information and recommendations about HPV vaccination?). Three hundred and nine unvaccinated women were randomly assigned to one of nine experimental message conditions and then assessed on behavioral intentions. Support was found for the message convergence framework. This project represents the first formal testing of the message convergence framework and the first time it has been used in the health context. The findings from these studies are discussed in terms of the implications for future cervical cancer research and prevention campaigns, as well as the utility of the message convergence framework for other health communication research topics in which researchers are seeking to better understand and consider the communication environment when designing health behavior interventions.