Extending the explanatory utility of the EPPM beyond fear-based persuasion

In the 20 years since its inception, the EPPM has attracted much empirical support. Currently, and unsurprisingly given that is a model of fear-based persuasion, the EPPM’s explanatory utility has been based only upon fear-based messages. However, an argument is put forth herein, which draws upon existing evidence, that the EPPM may be an efficacious framework for explaining the persuasive process and outcomes of emotion-based messages more broadly when such messages are addressing serious health topics. For the current study, four different types of emotional appeals were purposefully devised and included a fear, an annoyance/agitation, a pride, and a humour-based message. All messages addressed the serious health issue of road safety, and in particular the risky behaviour of speeding. Participants (N = 551) were exposed to only one of the four messages and subsequently provided responses within a survey. A series of 2 (threat: low, high) x 2 (efficacy: low, high) analysis of variance was conducted for each of the appeals based on the EPPM’s message outcomes of acceptance and rejection. Support was found for the EPPM with a number of main effects of threat and efficacy emerging, reflecting that, irrespective of emotional appeal type, high levels of threat and efficacy enhanced message outcomes via maximising acceptance and minimising rejection. Theoretically, the findings provide support for the explanatory utility of the EPPM for emotion-based health messages more broadly. In an applied sense, the findings highlight the value of adopting the EPPM as a framework when devising and evaluating emotion-based health messages for serious health topics.