The recent increase in media
coverage and concern about the possible spread of the Ebola virus in the United
States raises many questions about the role of fear in health
communication. For years, health
communicators have been using fear appeals to change behaviors and raise
awareness of health issues like HIV/AIDS.
Even though fear appeals continue to be used in messaging, I think there
are still many questions and conflicting views about their effectiveness. When is fear an effective strategy? When is it inappropriate to use fear to
encourage the public to reduce risky or
undesirable behaviors?
Green and Witte (2006) provide
support for the effectiveness of fear appeals.
The study employed fear appeals to reduce risky behaviors associated
with HIV/AIDS in Africa. Interestingly,
many experts were opposed to using the same messaging in United States due to a
concern with causing reactance. Green
and Witte (2006) argued that, at that time, the use of fear appeals in HIV/AIDS
messaging in the United States was discouraged due to concerns of the messages
impeding on Americans beliefs about freedom and post-revolution sex values.
Unlike Green and Witte (2006) which
found fear appeals to be effective among individuals living in Africa, other
studies like Muthusamy, Levine, and Weber (2009) argue against the use of fear
appeals. Muthusamy, Levine, and Weber
(2009) claims that fear appeals are ill advised and ineffective in some
situations. The study employed fear
appeals in HIV/AIDS messaging among individuals living in Namibia (Muthusamy,
Levine, & Weber, 2009). Findings
suggest that the fear appeals were ineffective when individuals were already
experiencing high fear before exposure to the experimental messages (Muthusamy,
Levine, & Weber, 2009).
How does the past literature on
fear appeals and HIV/AIDS inform decisions and perceptions on the use of fear
to encourage individuals to reduce risky behaviors related to Ebola? Some have gone as far as to draw parallels
between the potential threat of Ebola and the global HIV/AIDS epidemic. One of
the controversial topics currently being covered by the media is the need to
implement travel restrictions for individuals living in the United States who
have been exposed to the virus and those traveling from West Africa. One of the main arguments against such
restrictions is that they will increase fear among Americans and cause individuals
to start hiding symptoms and not disclosing where they have traveled.
Hopefully, the virus can be
contained. In the unfortunate, yet
conceivable, chance that Ebola continues to spread, what approach should be
applied to messaging? I am sure the
answer to this question is not simple.
The problem is complicated and challenging because if messaging does not
induce some level of fear, individuals may not feel that they are susceptible. If fear is heightened by isolating individuals
and restricting certain known freedoms, stigmas and negative perceptions may be
linked to the virus and individuals suffering from its symptoms. In short, to be effectively managed, the
Ebola threat requires a strategic communication plan that acknowledges all
possible consequences and reactions. What are your thoughts?
Fear is without a doubt something that is being used in the case of the Ebola outbreak. I have seen tons of news articles about the "atmosphere of fear" as they are calling it, and about the state of terror and anxiety that people around the United States (and even around the world) are living in. I think that a certain level of fear is necessary in order to have people comply with safe behaviors so that it doesn't become an even bigger problem or outbreak, but too much fear can create hysteria, which would not be beneficial in this case.
ReplyDeleteFear can be very counter-productive too!! There is a substantial body of research in "unintended effects of communication" and fear appeals campaigns account for many unintended effects which are not necessarily good!
ReplyDeleteCan the "atmosphere of fear' contribute to positive behaviors? How about increased hand washing, for instance? Is it just America? How has the rest of the world reacted? What is the relationship between the media and public or individual opinion in those countries? Is this fear a U.S. thing? Or a human thing? Sorry, I like to play the devil's advocate-- is some fear or concern normal? Is it okay to be concerned about your safety? When does concern become stigmatization? When it constrains the agency of those stigmatized?
ReplyDelete