Prevention Science

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 278–288 | Cite as

Affective Antecedents of the Perceived Effectiveness of Antidrug Advertisements: An Analysis of Adolescents’ Momentary and Retrospective Evaluations

  • Marco C. YzerEmail author
  • Kathleen D. Vohs
  • Monica Luciana
  • Bruce N. Cuthbert
  • Angus W. MacDonaldIII


Perceived message effectiveness is often used as a diagnostic tool to determine whether a health message is likely to be successful or needs modification before use in an intervention. Yet, published research on the antecedents of perceived effectiveness is scarce and, consequently, little is known about why a message is perceived to be effective or ineffective. The present study’s aim was to identify and test the affective antecedents of perceived effectiveness of antidrug television messages in a sample of 190 adolescents in the 15–19 year age range. Factor-analytical tests of retrospective message evaluation items suggested two dimensions of perceived effectiveness, one that contained items such as convincingness whereas the other contained pleasantness items. Using retrospective data as well as real time valence and arousal ratings, we found that arousal underlies perceived convincingness and valence underlies perceived pleasantness. The results indicated activation of appetitive and defensive motivational systems, which suggests a clear motivational component to the concept of perceived message effectiveness.


Perceived message effectiveness Drug use prevention Arousal Valence 


  1. Baumgartner, H., Sujan, M., & Padgett, D. (1997). Patterns of affective reactions to advertisements. The integration of moment-to-moment responses into overall judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 219–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck, K. H., & Frankel, A. (1981). A conceptualization of threat communications and preventive health behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 204–217.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biener, L. (2000). Adult and youth responses to the Massachusetts anti-tobacco television campaign. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 6, 40–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bless, H., Mackie, D. M., & Schwarz, N. (1992). Mood effects on encoding and judgmental processes in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 585–595.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bolls, P.D., Lang, A., & Potter, R.F. (2001). The effects of message valence and listener arousal on attention, memory, and facial muscular responses to radio advertisements. Communication Research, 28, 627–651.Google Scholar
  6. Bradley, M. M. (2009). Natural selective attention: Orienting and emotion. Psychophysiology, 46, 1–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradley, M. M., Codispoti, M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (2001). Emotion and motivation I: Defensive and appetitive reactions in picture processing. Emotion, 1, 276–298.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cesario, J., Grant, H., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). Regulatory fit and persuasion: Transfer from “feeling right.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 388–404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clore, G. L., & Schnall, S. (2005). The influence of affect on attitude. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 437–489). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Clore, G. L., Gasper, K., & Garvin, E. (2001). Affect as information. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Handbook of affect and social cognition (pp. 121–144). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Derzon, J. H., & Lipsey, M. W. (2002). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of mass-communication for changing substance-use knowledge, attitudes and behavior. In W. D. Crano & M. Burgoon (Eds.), Mass media and drug prevention: Classic and contemporary theories and research (pp. 231–258). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Dillard, J. P., & Peck, E. (2000). Affect and persuasion. Emotional responses to public service announcements. Communication Research, 27, 461–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dillard, J. P., Shen, L., & Vail, R. G. (2007a). Does perceived message effectiveness cause persuasion or vice versa? 17 consistent answers. Human Communication Research, 33, 467–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dillard, J. P., Weber, K., & Vail, R. G. (2007b). The relationship between the perceived and actual effectiveness of persuasive messages: A meta-analysis with implications for formative campaign research. The Journal of Communication, 57, 613–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fishbein, M., Triandis, H. C., Kanfer, F. H., Becker, M. H., Middlestadt, S. E., & Eichler, A. (2001). Factors influencing behavior and behavior change. In A. Baum, T. R. Revenson, & J. E. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of health psychology (pp. 3–17). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Fishbein, M., Hall-Jamieson, K., Zimmer, E., von Haeften, I., & Nabi, R. (2002). Avoiding the boomerang: Testing the relative effectiveness of antidrug public service announcements before a national campaign. American Journal of Public Health, 92, 238–245.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fredrickson, B. L., & Kahneman, D. (1993). Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 45–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hornik, R., Jacobsohn, L., Orwin, R., Piesse, A., & Kalton, G. (2008). Effects of the national youth anti-drug media campaign on youths. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 2229–2236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hullett, C. R., & Boster, F. J. (2001). Matching messages to the values underlying value-expressive and social-adjustive attitudes: Reconciling an old theory with a contemporary measurement approach. Communication Monographs, 68, 133–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2008). Monitoring the Future national results on adolescent drug use: Overview of key Findings, 2007 (NIH Publication No. 08–6418). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.Google Scholar
  21. Kahneman, D. (2000). Evaluation by moments: Past and future. In D. Kahneman & A. Tversky (Eds.), Choices, values, and frames (pp. 693–708). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lang, A. (2000). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. The Journal of Communication, 50, 46–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lang, A. (2006). Using the limited capacity model of motivated mediated message processing to design effective cancer communication messages. The Journal of Communication, 56, S57–S80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lang, A., Chung, Y., Lee, S., Schwartz, N., & Shin, M. (2005a). It’s an arousing, fast-paced kind of world: The effects of age and sensation seeking on the information processing of substance-abuse PSAs. Media Psychology, 7, 421–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lang, A., Chung, Y., Lee, S., & Zhao, X. (2005b). It’s the product: Do risky products compel attention and elicit arousal in media users? Health Communication, 17, 283–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Langleben, D. D., Loughead, J. W., Ruparel, K., Hakun, J. G., Busch-Winokur, S., Holloway, M. B., et al. (2009). Reduced prefrontal and temporal processing and recall of high “sensation value” ads. Neuroimage, 46, 219–225.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Larsen, R. J., & Diener, E. (1992). Promises and problems with the circumplex model of emotion. In M. S. Clark (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology: Emotion (Vol. 13, pp. 25–59). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Lavine, H., & Snyder, M. (1996). Cognitive processing and the functional matching effect in persuasion: The mediating role of subjective perceptions of message quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 580–604.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Luciana, M., Collins, P. F., Olson, E. A., & Schissel, A. M. (2009). Tower of London performance in healthy adolescents: The development of planning skills and associations with self-reported inattention and impulsivity. Developmental Neuropsychology, 34, 461–475.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mitchell, M. M. (2000). Able but not motivated? The relative effects of happy and sad moods on persuasive message processing. Communication Monographs, 67, 215–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Office of the Law Revision Counsel (2009). 21 USC Chapter 22—National Drug Control Policy. Retrieved October 12, 2009, from
  32. Pechmann, C., Zhao, G., Goldberg, M. E., & Reibling, E. T. (2003). What to convey in antismoking advertisements for adolescents: The use of protection motivation theory to identify effective message themes. Journal of Marketing, 67, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Poels, K., & Dewitte, S. (2008). Getting a line on print ads. Journal of Advertising, 37, 63–74.Google Scholar
  34. Redelmeier, D. A., & Kahneman, D. (1996). Patients’ memories of painful medical treatments: Real-time and retrospective evaluations of two minimally invasive procedures. Pain, 116, 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1161–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110, 145–172.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Russell, J. A., & Barrett, L. F. (1999). Core affect, prototypical emotional epdisodes, and other things called emotion: Dissecting the elephant. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 805–819.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schimmack, U., & Crites, S. L. (2005). The structure of affect. In D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 397–435). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  39. Schwartz, N., & Clore, G.L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: information and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513–523.Google Scholar
  40. Stead, M., Tagg, S., MacKintosh, A. M., & Eadie, D. R. (2005). Development and evaluation of a mass media theory of planned behaviour intervention to reduce speeding. Health Education Research, 20, 36–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2009). National survey on drug use and health, 2008 [Data file]. Retrieved from
  42. U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 Summary Tables (2010). Generated by Marco Yzer; using American FactFinder; <>; (12 December 2010).
  43. Watson, D. (2000). Mood and temperament. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  44. Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communication Monographs, 59, 329–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yzer, M. C., Cappella, J. N., Fishbein, M., Hornik, R., Sayeed, S., & Ahern, R. K. (2004). The role of distal variables in behavior change: Effects of adolescents’ risk for marijuana use on intention to use marijuana. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 1229–1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Prevention Research 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marco C. Yzer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kathleen D. Vohs
    • 1
  • Monica Luciana
    • 1
  • Bruce N. Cuthbert
    • 1
  • Angus W. MacDonaldIII
    • 1
  1. 1.SJMCUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations