ArticleEnvironmental health and preventive medicine2022
Development of a rating scale for measuring resistance to persuasive health messages.
Article in Environmental health and preventive medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quantifying ecological intelligence: building metrics for the green brain capital model-a systematic review.BMJ mental health · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness of using humor appeal in health promotion materials: evidence from an experimental study in Japan.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPretesting is the key to understanding how the intended audience will react to the message. Resistant reactions affect message processing or can lead to undesirable boomerang effects. The objective of this study was to develop a rating scale for measuring active (reactance) and passive (disengagement) resistance to persuasive health messages.
methodsSix candidate items (3 items for disengagement and 3 items for reactance) were generated based on literature review. A web-based survey was conducted among Japanese adults aged 25-64 years to verify the reliability and validity of the 6-item resistance scale. Participants were asked to rate one of the advance care planning (ACP) promotion messages. All scale items were scored on a 1-to-5 point Likert scale and they were averaged to produce the resistance score.
resultsExplanatory factor analysis revealed a two-factor solution that agreed with the disengagement and reactance domains, respectively. Correlation coefficients between each set of items ranged between 0.30-0.69. Cronbach alpha (0.86) indicated satisfactory internal consistency of the set of items. Confirmatory factor analysis showed a good fit of the two-factor model with CFI = 0.998, SRMR = 0.011, and RMSEA = 0.041. The resistance score showed a moderate positive correlation with negative emotional responses (displeasure γ = 0.55, anger γ = 0.53) and was significantly inversely related to the persuasiveness score (γ = -0.50). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the odds ratio for ACP intention per 1-point increase in the resistance score was 0.47 (95% confidence interval 0.40-0.56) with adjustment for the persuasiveness score.
conclusionThe 6-item resistance scale exhibited adequate reliability and validity for measuring audience resistance when applied to the ACP promotion messages in Japanese people. The scale will be useful for pretesting health messages to make them more acceptable to the intended audience.
trial registrationNot applicable; this is not a report of intervention trial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.