Nanne K. de Vries

Anticipated regret and time perspective: changing sexual risk-taking behavior

In two studies we test the effects of anticipated affective reactions such as regret on behavioral expectations and behavior. These effects were examined in the context of sexual risk-taking behavior. More specifically, we tested the impact of the anticipated feelings associated with unsafe sex on sexual risk-taking behavior. We assumed a difference between the feelings ahout unsafe sex and the feelings people anticipate to have after this behavior. Two studies tested the hypothesis that respondents who are induced to focus on their anticipated, post-behavioral feelings are more likely to report negative feelings such as regret and to adopt safer sexual practices than respondents who are asked to focus on their feelings about the behavior itself. Study 1 shows that anticipated feelings after unsafe sex were more negative than feelings about the behavioral act itself, and that respondents who were asked to consider these anticipated feelings expressed stronger expectations to reduce their risk in future interactions. Thus, asking respondents to take a wider time perspective, and to consider the feelings they would have after having had unsafe sex, resulted in ‘safer’ behavioral expectations. Study 2 replicates the findings of Study 1, and also yielded a reliable effect of the time perspective manipulation on actual, self-reported behavior. Respondents who were asked to report on their anticipated feelings after unsafe sex showed less risky behavior in the five months following the experiment than the remaining respondents. Thus, the induced focus on post-behavioral emotions increased the likelihood of preventive behavior. Implications of these findings for behavioral intervention programs are discussed.

Expectancy-Value models of health behaviour: the role of salience and anticipated affect

Abstract Expectancy-value models of health behaviour are based upon the assumption that this behaviour is determined by a subjective cost-benefit analysis. Generally, these models emphasize cognitive appraisal processes focusing on the likelihood and evaluation of the consequences of health-related behavioural practices. A first potential shortcoming of applications of these models concerns their neglect of the cognitive limitations of the human decision maker. This is reflected in the tendency to incorporate many possible costs and benefits when assessing individual attitudes. We propose that the concept “dimensional salience” could help to assess the individuals he of reference within which behavioural alternatives are judged, and help to provide a more realistic description of the individual decision making process that takes account of the limitations of our information processing capacity. A second shortcoming of expectancy-value approaches concerns the limited attention paid to the anticipation of ...

Attributions of responsibility and affective reactions to decision outcomes.

Immediate affective reactions to outcomes are more intense following decisions to act than following decisions not to act. This finding holds for both positive and negative outcomes. We relate this actor-effect to attribution theory and argue that decision makers are seen as more responsible for outcomes when these are the result of a decision to act as compared to a decision not to act. Experiment 1 (N = 80) tests the main assumption underlying our reasoning and shows that affective reactions to decision outcomes are indeed more intense when the decision maker is seen as more responsible. Experiment 2 (N = 40) tests whether the actor effect can be predicted on the basis of differential attributions following action and inaction. Participants read vignettes in which active and passive actors obtained a positive or negative outcome. Action resulted in more intense affect than inaction, and positive outcomes resulted in more intense affect than negative outcomes. Experiment 2 further shows that responsibility attributions and affective reactions to outcomes are highly correlated; that is, more extreme affective reactions are associated with more internal attributions. We discuss the implications for research on post-decisional reactions.

Convergent and divergent processing of majority and minority arguments: effects on focal and related attitudes

This research concerned attitude change towards a majority or minority position as a function of convergent and divergent message processing. Results of a 2 (majority/minority support for persuasive arguments) x 3 (convergent/divergent/no-processing instructions) experiment showed that recipients identified more with a majority rather than minority, and identification was positively correlated with articles on the focal, but not the related issue. More importantly, results showed that in the no-processing condition, counter-attitudinal majority arguments produced more positive attitudes on the focal rather than related issue, minority arguments had no effects on either issue. A similar pattern emerged under convergent processing: major it!, support produced more positive attitudes on focal than related issues, while minority support had no effect on either issue. Divergent processing instructions, finally, produced more positive attitudes on the related issue than on the focal issue, especially in the case of minority support. Unexpectedly, majority arguments under divergent processing had ilo effect on focal or related attitudes whatsoever. Overall, results support the conclusion that majority arguments affect attitudes on focal issues more than on related issues because of convergent message processing, while minority arguments affect attitudes on related issues more than on focal issues because of divergent message processing and a desire to avoid identification with the source. Copyright (C) 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The structure of attitudes: attribute importance, accessibility and judgment.

Two studies related attribute importance to accessibility and speed of judgment. Attitudes were assessed by a direct attitude measure and a modal set of 15 attributes. Attributes were rated in terms of their probability and desirability. Subsequently, participants were required to select the five attributes they considered to be most important. Results of Study 1 (dealing with attitudes towards condom use) show that individually selected, important attributes are more easily retrieved and judged faster than non-selected, less important attributes. Judging attributes took less time than evaluating ones overall attitude, suggesting a bottom-up process in which the various attributes are combined to form an overall attitude. Study 2 (dealing with attitudes towards smoking) extends these findings and also addresses the stability of attitude structure. Important attributes were again associated with reduced response times, and attribute-related judgments took less time than judging ones overall attitude. Accessibility of important attributes remained stable over time as indicated by the results of a lexical decision task one week later. Finally, important attributes were also recalled better than less important attributes. Implications for research on attitude structure are discussed.

Attitudes towards smoking and the subjective importance of attributes: implications for changing risk-benefit ratios

This study examines the role of attribute importance in expectancy-value models. Attitudes towards smoking were assessed by a) a direct attitude measure (four semantic differentials) and b) a series of 15 attribute statements. These attributes (negative and positive consequences of smoking) were rated in terms of their probability and desirability. Attitude scores were derived by summing (over the various possible attributes) the perceived probability multiplied by the desirability of each attribute. Subsequently, participants were asked to select the five attributes they considered to be most important to their attitude towards smoking. Results show that smokers and non-smokers differ considerably in their selection of important attributes, and vary in the importance assigned to the positive and negative outcomes of smoking. Smokers tend to emphasize short-term benefits, while non-smokers stress the longer-term health consequences. Moreover, attitudinal differences between the two groups were more pronou...