Through the use of fear appeals, the purpose of the study, “Preventing the Spread Of Genital Warts”, is to decrease the spread of genital warts. The authors of the study used the EPPM, as a guide to understand why fear appeal campaigns tend to not work in certain public health issues. The purpose of this study relates to the EPPM because genital warts are a public health risk. By testing five hypotheses, supporting facts were found that predicted when and under what specific conditions fear appeal campaigns worked, more specifically genital warts. Considering that genital warts has been seen to cause more severe health implications for women, only females were asked to participate in the study. A total of 219 college females participated in the study. Women for the first three conditions, or hypotheses, were recruited through campus activities or from intro classes on campus. All women were approached in person and asked to be a part of an STD prevention study; In turn, if the individual agreed, they were given 1 of 3 randomly selected packets, containing a cover letter describing the study, a blank envelope, and either packet 1, 2, or 3. Packet 1 contained both the fear appeal message and a questionnaire; packet 2 contained only the fear appeal message; and packet 3 contained only a questionnaire. Students who received packet 1 and 2 were asked to read their message carefully while underlining important passages; and those who received an immediate posttest filled out the questionnaire. Afterward, the participants were told that in approximately 2 weeks they would be receiving a follow-up questionnaire, to assess any further comments or concerns about genital warts. The students were then asked to write their name and address on the envelope (a respondent identification number matching the message/questionnaire they received) was already written on the envelope provided. The EPPM validates crucial points in the genital wart issue. The primary results of the study were successfully attained through danger control outcomes, with the use of high-threat, high efficacy messages to prevent the spread of genital warts thus promoting condom usage. Through response efficacy the participants of the study, who were exposed to the genital warts message, were seen to have significantly higher intentions. This can be explained because of mediation between message framing and intention, and linked with response efficacy.
The implications of the study, genital warts, show that fear appeal campaigns can be effective in decreasing the spread of genital warts following 2 conditions: 1. Campaigns should focus on convincing sexually active individuals that they are susceptible to contracting genital warts and also make them believe that genital warts are severe and a harmful disease; 2. To make this motivation work properly, all fear appeal campaigns should be accompanied by high efficacy messages regarding the recommended response. The messages must contain strong efficacy, emphasizing on how condoms can effectively decrease the spread of genital warts, thus increasing response efficacy. If it appears that low efficacy perceptions cannot be sufficiently addressed in a public health campaign, one should avoid using fear appeals in that certain health campaign. This specific study provides overall advice on how to effectively use fear appeals in health promotion and disease prevention campaigns; demonstrates that through the use of fear appeal campaigns, multiple outcomes can occur, some of which interfere with desired behavior change; the study shows how campaigns can fail for a variety of reasons; and a final implication that this study provides is limited support for the EPPM as a theoretical framework for the effective use of fear appeals. In all 5 tested hypotheses, the EPPM received general support in this study. In general the fear message worked and effectively promoted health-productive behavior in those women with high efficacy however it failed for those women with low efficacy perceptions.
