The Persuasiveness of the Flu Vaccination Campaign Video
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/cv13x251Keywords:
Flu vaccination; Health campaign video; Persuasiveness.Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the effectiveness and persuasiveness of the health campaign video about flu vaccinations called No Time For Flu: 30. A survey that asks for people’s attitudes before and after watching the video, targeted to those people who haven’t taken the flu vaccines yet. Twenty-six participants were involved in the survey, including six males and twenty females. After watching the video, the result shows no significant change in people’s attitudes toward taking the flu vaccines. However, it helps raise people’s awareness of flu shots. Failure of the persuasive message designs of “gain-framed message,” “source similarity,” and “peripheral path” might contribute to the ineffectiveness of the video in persuading people. In future health promotion campaigns, to persuade people to take action, persuasive message designs like “loss-frame message” might be suggested for effectiveness. For future research in measuring the effectiveness of persuasive message design in health promotion campaigns, higher numbers of participants with broader races and occupations are suggested. Also, designing the survey in different periods of time for more generalizable results is recommended as well.
Downloads
References
[1] Bosone, L., & Martinez, F. (2017). When, how and why is loss-framing more effective than gain- and non-gain-framing in the promotion of detection behaviors? International Review of Social Psychology, 30(1), 184. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.15
[2] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022, October 4). Disease Burden of Flu. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved December 5, 2022, from https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html
[3] Lu, A. S. (2013). An experimental test of the persuasive effect of source similarity in narrative and nonnarrative health blogs. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(7). https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2386
[4] Noar, S. M., Grant Harrington,N., Van Stee, S. K., & Shemanski Aldrich, R. (2010). Tailored health communication to change lifestyle behaviors. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 5(2), 112–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/1559827610387255
[5] O'Keefe, D. J. (2016). Persuasion: Theory and research. SAGE Publications, Inc.
[6] O'Keefe, D. J. (2017). Message framing variations in health and risk messaging. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.308
[7] Perloff, R. M. (2021). The dynamics ofpersuasion: Communication and attitudes in the twenty-first century. Routledge.
[8] Ruijten, P. A. (2021). The similarity-attraction paradigm in persuasive technology: Effects of system and user personality on evaluations and persuasiveness of an interactive system. Behaviour & Information Technology, 40(8), 734–746.https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2020.1723701
[9] Tanner, A. R., Dorey, R. B., Brendish,N. J., & Clark, T. W. (2021). Influenza vaccination: Protecting the most vulnerable. European Respiratory Review, 30(159), 200258. https://doi.org/10.1183/16000617.0258-2020
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.






