The amount of violent media that is consumed on a daily basis by the average American and the empirically proven effects associated with such regular consumption have led scholars to consider violent media a public health threat, the risks of which, the public may not even fully appreciate (Huesmann, Dubow, & Yang, 2013). Previous research in the field of public health communication has found that different forms of evidence in public health risk messages are more or less effective in changing behavior depending on individual recipient characteristics (de Wit, Das & Vet, 2008; Reinard, 1988; Slater & Rouner, 1996). The present research investigated the effectiveness of different forms of evidence (narrative or statistical) in decreasing violent media consumption by increasing an individual's risk perceptions and negative attitude associated with violent media. In accordance with the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991), it was hypothesized that these risk perceptions and attitudes would predict intentions toward violent media consumption, as well as subsequent consumption. The study was conducted via MTurk with a sample of one hundred and fifty participants (53% Male). Results showed that an individuals' violent media consumption predicted their attitude toward violent media (p = .035), and that their risk perception and attitude toward violent media significantly predicted their intentions to decrease violent media consumption (ps < .05). Though no significant difference was found between the effect of narrative and statistical evidence on general violent media consumption, exploratory analyses of effects on specific forms of media showed that narrative evidence resulted in a significant decrease in violent video game consumption (p = .042). Additionally, age predicted risk perception, the older the participant the less risk they perceived in violent media consumption (p = .010). Future research should investigate the effect of including all elements of the Theory of Planned Behavior on the ability of different evidence types to change behavior, and perhaps extend the time frame within which change is measured in order to maximize the ability to observe any true change in behavior.

Master of Arts / Department of Communication Studies, Theatre, and Dance / Nicole Laster / This study examines the effect of using a combination of narrative and statistical evidence on persuasion. Literature is divided on whether narrative or statistical evidence is more persuasive. There are a number of explanations to support both arguments, but arguing that one is superior may be flawed because these evidence types function differently and are not necessarily competitive. A few studies support the use of both narratives and statistics together, but none of these studies address the proportions when combining the two evidence types. This study fills the gap by creating messages with different degrees of anecdotal and statistical evidence. Conditions range from full anecdotal support to full statistical support and include three blended conditions (25/75, 50/50, 75/25). A total of 384 participants were surveyed via a national survey company. Results indicate that evidence type (narratives or statistics) and the various blends of evidence type do not change the persuasive effectiveness of a claim. While supporting persuasive claims with some kind of evidence is imperative, general populations do not favor one evidence type (narratives or statistics) over the other, and in fact, may be split in what they find more effective. Nor do people believe that evidence types function all that differently—at least when it comes to the support they provide for claims from livestock producers. Results, implications and recommendations for future research are discussed in detail.

No description available.