Choose Your Own Emotion: Predictors of Selective Exposure to Emotion-Inducing Climate Messages

The contemporary high-choice media landscape offers users considerable latitude to select media content. When it comes to media messaging about science issues like climate change, it is unclear whether audiences gravitate toward different kinds of emotionally evocative messages and what psychosocial factors underlie those preferences. Here, we presented young adults (N = 1,493) with three climate change videos to choose from (“funny,” “scary,” “informational”) and found more participants selected funny content than scary or informational. Contradicting hypotheses derived from mood management theory, negative mood was associated with selecting the scary video. Conservatives preferred the funny and scary video to the informational video, but gender identity was the strongest predictor of selective exposure with women preferring funny and scary videos to informational.</p

Supplemental Material, MFQ_Paper_v3_Supplemental_Material_SPPS - All Things Being Equal: Distinguishing Proportionality and Equity in Moral Reasoning

Supplemental Material, MFQ_Paper_v3_Supplemental_Material_SPPS for All Things Being Equal: Distinguishing Proportionality and Equity in Moral Reasoning by Chris Skurka, Liana B. Winett, Hannah Jarman-Miller and Jeff Niederdeppe in Social Psychological and Personality Science</p

Effects of messages on support for naloxone distribution and other overdose mortality prevention policies compared to the no-exposure control group.

<p>*P ≤ 0.05 compared to the no-exposure control group using logistic regression</p><p>** P ≤ 0.01 compared to the no-exposure control group using logistic regression</p><p>*** P ≤ 0.001 compared to the no-exposure control group using logistic regression</p><p>^aPercent support for policies calculated as percentage of sample responding 5, 6, or 7 on the seven point scale for each measure (i.e., somewhat favor, favor, or strongly favor)</p><p>Effects of messages on support for naloxone distribution and other overdose mortality prevention policies compared to the no-exposure control group.</p

Distribution of beliefs about why government should or should not regulate e-cigarettes.

<p>Distribution of beliefs about why government should or should not regulate e-cigarettes.</p

Un-weighted and weighted characteristics of survey participants compared with national rates (N = 1,598).

<p>Note: GfK sample weights used to calculate descriptive statistics. For socio-demographic characteristics, comparison data extracted from the March 2013 Current Population Survey.</p><p>Un-weighted and weighted characteristics of survey participants compared with national rates (N = 1,598).</p

Adjusted regression analyses predicting policy support scale with pro-regulation beliefs (why government should regulate) and anti-regulation beliefs (why government should not regulate).

Adjusted regression analyses predicting policy support scale with pro-regulation beliefs (why government should regulate) and anti-regulation beliefs (why government should not regulate).</p

Messaging to Increase Public Support for Naloxone Distribution Policies in the United States: Results from a Randomized Survey Experiment

<div><p>Background</p><p>Barriers to public support for naloxone distribution include lack of knowledge, concerns about potential unintended consequences, and lack of sympathy for people at risk of overdose.</p><p>Methods</p><p>A randomized survey experiment was conducted with a nationally-representative web-based survey research panel (GfK KnowledgePanel). Participants were randomly assigned to read different messages alone or in combination: 1) factual information about naloxone; 2) pre-emptive refutation of potential concerns about naloxone distribution; and 3) a sympathetic narrative about a mother whose daughter died of an opioid overdose. Participants were then asked if they support or oppose policies related to naloxone distribution. For each policy item, logistic regression models were used to test the effect of each message exposure compared with the no-exposure control group.</p><p>Results</p><p>The final sample consisted of 1,598 participants (completion rate: 72.6%). Factual information and the sympathetic narrative alone each led to higher support for training first responders to use naloxone, providing naloxone to friends and family members of people using opioids, and passing laws to protect people who administer naloxone. Participants receiving the combination of the sympathetic narrative and factual information, compared to factual information alone, were more likely to support all policies: providing naloxone to friends and family members (OR: 2.0 [95% CI: 1.4 to 2.9]), training first responders to use naloxone (OR: 2.0 [95% CI: 1.2 to 3.4]), passing laws to protect people if they administer naloxone (OR: 1.5 [95% CI: 1.04 to 2.2]), and passing laws to protect people if they call for medical help for an overdose (OR: 1.7 [95% CI: 1.2 to 2.5]).</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>All messages increased public support, but combining factual information and the sympathetic narrative was most effective. Public support for naloxone distribution can be improved through education and sympathetic portrayals of the population who stands to benefit from these policies.</p></div

Effects of messages on beliefs about naloxone distribution compared to the no-exposure control group.

<p>*P ≤ 0.05 compared to the no-exposure control group using logistic regression</p><p>** P ≤ 0.01 compared to the no-exposure control group using logistic regression</p><p>*** P ≤ 0.001 compared to the no-exposure control group using logistic regression</p><p>^aPercent agreeing with beliefs calculated as percentage of sample responding 5, 6, or 7 on the seven point scale for each measure (i.e., somewhat agree, agree, or strongly agree)</p><p>Effects of messages on beliefs about naloxone distribution compared to the no-exposure control group.</p

Effects of factual information, a sympathetic narrative, or both on beliefs about naloxone distribution.

<p>Effects of factual information, a sympathetic narrative, or both on beliefs about naloxone distribution.</p

Sample Characteristics (N = 582).

<p>Sample Characteristics (N = 582).</p