Isabelle Milhabet

Quand l'engagement précède l'appel à la peur : une forme de communication engageante

Behavioural change can be obtained notably by using commitment (Kiesler, 1971) or persuasion. These two approaches can complement each other in some situations and be in opposition in others. We suppose that commitment to a non-healthy behaviour inhibits the persuasive effects of a message of fear appeal whereas commitment to a healthy behaviour increases them. We propose two experiments in which smokers were committed to a nonhealthy or healthy behaviour before reading a message (fear appeal vs neutral). The results partially support our hypotheses. Indeed, commitment to a non-healthy behaviour does not impede adoption of the preventive initiative whereas commitment to a healthy behaviour facilitates it.

Comparison of the Screening Practices of Unaffected Noncarriers under 40 and between 40 and 49 in BRCA1/2 Families

This study aimed to 1) compare the cancer screening practices of unaffected noncarrier women under 40 and those aged 40 to 49, following the age-based medical screening guidelines, and 2) consider the way the patients justified their practices of screening or over-screening. For this study, 131 unaffected noncarriers—77 women under age 40 and 54 between 40 and 49, all belonging to a BRCA1/2 family—responded to a questionnaire on breast or ovarian cancer screenings they had undergone since receiving their negative genetic test results, their motives for seeking these screenings, and their intentions to pursue these screenings in the future. Unaffected noncarriers under age 40 admitted practices that could be qualified as over-screening. Apart from mammogram and breast ultrasounds, which the women under 40 reported seeking less often, these women’s screening practices were comparable to those of women between 40 and 49. Cancer prevention and a family history of cancer were the two most frequently cited justifications for pursuing these screenings. We suggest that health care professionals discuss with women under 50 the ineffectiveness of breast and ovarian cancer screenings so that they will adapt their practices to conform to medical guidelines and limit their exposure to the potentially negative impacts of early cancer screening.

The relationship between social status and the components of agency

ABSTRACT Building on the two fundamental dimensions of social judgment distinguishing communion from agency, the purpose of the present work was to show that the strength of the relationship between social status and agency depends on specific components at issue: assertiveness, competence, and effort. Four experimental studies were conducted using two complementary paradigms. In Studies 1 and 2, we manipulated social status, and participants had to rate the target on competence, assertiveness, and effort. In Studies 3 and 4, we reversed the design. Results consistently showed that social status was primarily related to assertiveness, somewhat related to competence, and only slightly related to effort. The present research provides a better understanding of how the dimensions of social judgment are used to explain differences in social status.

Comparative pessimism or optimism: depressed mood, risk-taking, social utility and desirability

Comparative optimism can be defined as a self-serving, asymmetric judgment of the future. It is often thought to be beneficial and socially accepted, whereas comparative pessimism is correlated with depression and socially rejected. Our goal was to examine the social acceptance of comparative optimism and the social rejection of comparative pessimism in two dimensions of social judgment, social desirability and social utility, considering the attributions of dysphoria and risk-taking potential (studies 2 and 3) on outlooks on the future. In three experiments, the participants assessed either one (study 1) or several (studies 2 and 3) fictional targets in two dimensions, social utility and social desirability. Targets exhibiting comparatively optimistic or pessimistic outlooks on the future were presented as non-depressed, depressed, or neither (control condition) (study 1); non-depressed or depressed (study 2); and non-depressed or in control condition (study 3). Two significant results were obtained: (1) social rejection of comparative pessimism in the social desirability dimension, which can be explained by its depressive feature; and (2) comparative optimism was socially accepted on the social utility dimension, which can be explained by the perception that comparatively optimistic individuals are potential risk-takers.