When confronted with uncertainty, some people are more accepting of uncertainty, while others are more avoidant. Individuals high in uncertainty avoidance tend to rely on specific and detailed information to avoid threats, whereas those low in uncertainty avoidance are more tolerant of ambiguity. Messages that employ fear appeals or hope appeals evoke fear and/or hope, both of which are uncertainty-based emotions. Also, emotional appeals include efficacy messages, which are essential to the success of persuasion. This study tested the appraisal processes of the Extended Parallel Processing Model and Theory of Persuasive Hope and investigated the association between efficacy specificity and uncertainty avoidance level within the two appeal types and how such variables interact to be more or less persuasive as well as behavioral intentions following exposure to fear or hope appeal messages. Individuals with low/high uncertainty avoidance participated in this study’s online experiment and surveys. People high in UA had higher behavioral intentions with fear appeals, and hope appeals were more effective than fear for people with low UA. High UA people saw any type of messages assigned to them as highly persuasive while the appeal type and the degree of efficacy specificity mattered to or brought greater effects on low UA people. The interactions of UA, emotional appeal type, and perceived efficacy specificity showed that, overall, hope appeals with specific efficacy messages were the most persuasive regardless of individuals’ uncertainty avoidance levels.
Read
