THB JOURNAL OF ABNORMAL AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Vol. 48, No. i, 1053

EFFECTS OF FEAR-AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS

IRVING L. JANIS AND SEYMOUR FESHBACH
Yale University

T is generally recognized that when beliefs

and attitudes are modified, learning processes are involved in which motivational
factors play a primary role. Symbols in mass
communications can be manipulated in a
variety of ways so as to arouse socially
acquired motives such as need for achievement, group conformity, power-seeking, and
the more emotion-laden drives arising from
aggression, sympathy, guilt, and anxiety.
The present experiment was designed to
study the effects of one particular type of
motive-incentive variable in persuasive communications, namely, the arousal of fear or
anxiety by depicting potential dangers to
which the audience might be exposed.1 Fear
appeals of this sort are frequently used to
influence attitudes and behavior. For example, medical authorities sometimes try to
persuade people to visit cancer detection
clinics by pointing to the dangerous consequences of failing to detect the early symptoms of cancer; various political groups play
up the threat of war or totalitarianism in an
attempt to motivate adherence to their political program. Our interest in such attempts
is primarily that of determining the conditions under which the arousal of fear is effective or ineffective in eliciting changes in
beliefs, practices, and attitudes.
Implicit in the use of fear appeals is the
assumption that when emotional tension is
aroused, the audience will become more
highly motivated to accept the reassuring
beliefs or recommendations advocated by the

communicator. But the tendency to accept

reassuring ideas about ways and means of
warding off anticipated danger may not
always be the dominant reaction to a feararousing communication. Under certain conditions, other types of defensive reactions may
occur which could give rise to highly undesirable effects from the standpoint of the
communicator.
Clinical studies based on patients' reactions
to psychiatric treatment call attention to three
main types of emotional interference which
can prevent a person from being influenced
by verbal communications which deal with
anxiety-arousing topics.
1. When a communication touches off
intense feelings of anxiety, communicatees
will sometimes fail to pay attention to what
is being said. Inattentiveness may be a
motivated effort to avoid thoughts which
evoke incipient feelings of anxiety. This
defensive tendency may be manifested by
overt attempts to change the subject of conversation to a less disturbing topic. When
such attempts fail and anxiety mounts to a
very high level, attention disturbances may
become much more severe, e.g., "inability
to concentrate," "distractibility," or other
symptoms of the cognitive disorganization
temporarily produced by high emotional
tension (4).
2. When exposed to an anxiety-arousing
communication, communicatees will occasionally react to the unpleasant ("punishing")
experience by becoming aggressive toward
1
This study was conducted at Yale University as the communicator. If the communicator is
part of a coordinated program of research on attitude perceived as being responsible for producing
and opinion change, financed by a grant from the painful feelings, aggression is likely to take
Rockefeller Foundation. The attitude change research
project is under the general direction of Professor Carl the form of rejecting his statements.
I. Hovland, to whom the authors wish to express their
3. If a communication succeeds in arousing
appreciation for many valuable suggestions concerning intense anxiety and if the communicatee's
the design of the experiment. Special thanks are due
to Dr. Isador Hirschfeld of New York City and Dr. emotional tension is not readily reduced
Bert G. Anderson of the Yale Medical School for their either by the reassurances contained in the
helpful advice in connection with the preparation of the
illustrated talks on dental hygiene. The authors also communication or by self-delivered reassurwish to thank Dr. S. Willard Price, Superintendent of ances, the residual emotional tension may
Schools at Greenwich, Connecticut, and Mr. Andrew
Bella, Principal of the Greenwich High School, for their motivate defensive avoidances, i.e., attempts
to ward off subsequent exposures to the
generous cooperation.
78

EFFECTS OF FEAR-AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS

anxiety-arousing content. The experience of
being temporarily unable to terminate the
disturbing affective state elicited by a discussion of a potential threat can give rise to a
powerful incentive to avoid thinking or hearing about it again; this may ultimately result
in failing to recall what the communicator
said, losing interest in the topic, denying or
minimizing the importance of the threat.
The above reaction tendencies, while
formulated in general terms, take account
of three specific types of behavior observed
during psychoanalytic or psychotherapeutic
sessions (i, 2, 3). The first two refer to
immediate reactions that often occur when
a therapist gives an interpretation which
brings anxiety-laden thoughts or motives into
the patient's focus of awareness: (a) attention disturbances, blocking of associations,
mishearing, evasiveness, and similar forms
of "resistance"; and () argumentativeness,
defiance, contempt, and other manifestations
of reactive hostility directed toward the
therapist. The third refers to certain types
of subsequent "resistance," displayed during
the later course of treatment, as a carry-over
effect of the therapist's disturbing comments
or interpretations.
Although the three types of defensive behavior have been observed primarily in clinical studies of psychoneurotic patients (whose
anxiety reactions are generally linked with
unconscious conflicts), it seems probable that
similar reactions may occur among normal
persons during or after exposure to communications which make them acutely aware of
severe threats of external danger. Nevertheless, it remains an open question whether
such sources of emotional interference play
any significant role in determining the net
effectiveness of fear-arousing material in mass
communications, especially when the communications are presented in an impersonal
social setting where emotional responses of
the audience are likely to be greatly
attenuated.
The present experiment was designed to
investigate the consequences of using fear
appeals in persuasive communications that
are presented in an impersonal group situation. One of the main purposes was to
explore the potentially adverse effects which
might result from defensive reactions of the

79
sort previously noted in the more restricted
situation of psychotherapy.
METHOD

The experiment was designed so as to provide

measures of the effects of three different intensities
of "fear appeal" in a standard communication on
dental hygiene, presented to high school students.
The influence of the fear-arousing material was
investigated by means of a series of questionnaires
which provided data on emotional reactions to the
communication and on changes in dental hygiene
beliefs, practices, and attitudes.

The Three Forms of Communication

A 15-minute illustrated lecture was prepared in
three different forms, all of which contained the
same essential information about causes of tooth
decay and the same series of recommendations
concerning oral hygiene practices. The three (recorded) lectures were of approximately equal length
and were delivered in a standard manner by the
same speaker. Each recording was supplemented
by about 20 slides, which were shown on the screen
in a prearranged sequence, to illustrate various
points made by the speaker.
The three forms of the illustrated talk differed
only with respect to the amount of fear-arousing
material presented. Form i contained a strong fear
appeal, emphasizing the painful consequences of
tooth decay, diseased gums, and other dangers that
can result from improper dental hygiene. Form 2
presented a moderate appeal in which the dangers
were described in a milder and more factual manner. Form 3 presented a minimal appeal which
rarely alluded to the consequences of tooth neglect.
In Form 3, most of the fear-arousing material was
replaced by relatively neutral information dealing
with the growth and functions of the teeth. In all
other respects, however, Form 3 was identical with
Forms i and 2.
The fear appeals were designed to represent typical characteristics of mass communications which
attempt to stimulate emotional reactions in order to
motivate the audience to conform to a set of
recommendations. The main technique was that
of calling attention to the potential dangers that
can ensue from nonconformity. For example, the
Strong appeal contained such statements as the
following:
If you ever develop an infection of this kind from
improper care of your teeth, it will be an extremely
serious matter because these infections are really
dangerous. They can spread to your eyes, or your
heart, or your joints and cause secondary infections
which may lead to diseases such as arthritic paralysis,
kidney damage, or total blindness.

One of the main characteristics of the Strong

appeal was the use of personalized threat-references
explicitly directed to the audience, i.e., statements to
the effect that "this can happen to you." The
Moderate appeal, on the other hand, described the
dangerous consequences of improper oral hygiene
in a more factual way, using impersonal language.

IRVING L. JANIS AND SEYMOUR FESHBACH

8o

In the Minimal appeal, the limited discussion of

unfavorable consequences also used a purely factual
style.
The major differences in content are summarized
in Table i, which is based on a systematic content
analysis of the three recorded lectures. The data
in this table show how often each type of "threat"
was mentioned. It is apparent that the main difference between the Strong appeal and the Moderate
appeal was not so much in the total frequency of
threat references as in the variety and types of
threats that were emphasized. The Minimal
appeal, however, differed markedly from the other
two in that it contained relatively few threat references, almost all of which were restricted to
"cavities" or "tooth decay."
TABLE 1
CONTENT ANALYSIS OF THE THREE FORMS OF THE
COMMUNICATION: REFERENCES TO CONSEQUENCES OF IMPROPER CARE OF
THE TEETH
TYPE
OF
REFERENCE

FORM i FORM 2
FORMS
(STRONG (MODERATE (MINIMAL
APPEAL) APPEAL) APPEAL)

Pain from toothaches

Cancer, paralysis, blindness
or other secondary diseases
Having teeth pulled, cavities
drilled, or other painful
dental work
Having cavities filled or
having to go to the
dentist
Mouth infections: sore,
swollen, inflamed gums
Ugly or discolored teeth
"Decayed" teeth
"Cavities"
Total references to unfavorable consequences

ii

18
4

16

a
0

M
9

2
12
12

7i

49

6
9

18

One of the reasons for selecting dental hygiene

as a suitable topic for investigating the influence of
fear appeals was precisely because discussions of this
topic readily lend themselves to quantitative and
qualitative variations of the sort shown in Table I.
Moreover, because of the nature of the potential
dangers that are referred to, one could reasonably
expect the audience to be fairly responsive to such
variations in contentthe teeth and gums probably
represent an important component in the average
person's body image, and, according to psychoanalytic observations, the threat of damage to the
teeth and gums can sometimes evoke deep-seated
anxieties concerning body integrity. In any case,
by playing up the threat of pain, disease, and body
damage, the material introduced in Form I is probably representative of the more extreme forms of
fear appeals currently to be found in persuasive
communications presented via the press, radio, television, and other mass media.

The fear appeals did not rely exclusively upon

verbal material to convey the threatening consequences of nonconformity. In Form i, the slides
used to illustrate the lecture included a series of
eleven highly realistic photographs which vividly
portrayed tooth decay and mouth infections.
Form a, the Moderate appeal, included nine photographs which were milder examples of oral pathology than those used in Form i. In Form 3,
however, no realistic photographs of this kind were
presented: X-ray pictures, diagrams of cavities, and
photographs of completely healthy teeth were substituted for the photographs of oral pathology.

Subjects
The entire freshman class of a large Connecticut
high school was divided into four groups on a
random basis. Each of the three forms of the communication was given to a separate experimental
group; the fourth group was used as a control group
and was exposed to a similar communication on a
completely different topic (the structure and functioning of the human eye). Altogether there were
200 students in the experiment, with 50 in each
group.
The four groups were well equated with respect
to age, sex, educational level, and IQ. The mean
age for each group was approximately 15 years and
there were roughly equal numbers of boys and girls
in each group. The mean and standard deviation
of IQ scores, as measured by the Otis group test,
were almost identical in all four groups.

Administration of the Questionnaires

The first questionnaire, given one week before
the communication, was represented to the students
as a general health survey of high school students.
The key questions dealing with dental hygiene were
interspersed among questions dealing with many
other aspects of health and hygiene.
One week later the illustrated talks were given as
part of the school's hygiene program. Immediately
after the end of the communication, the students
in each group were asked to fill out a short questionnaire designed to provide data on immediate
effects of the communication, such as the amount
of information acquired, attitudes toward the communication, and emotional reactions. A follow-up
questionnaire was given one week later in order to
ascertain the carry-over effects of the different forms
of the communication.

RESULTS
Affective Reactions
Evidence that the three forms of the illustrated talk differed with respect to the
amount of emotional tension evoked during
the communication is presented in Table 2.
Immediately after exposure to the communication, the students were asked three questions concerning the feelings they had just

81

EFFECTS OF FEAR-AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS

TABLE 2
FEELINGS OF WORRY OR CONCERN EVOKED DURING THE COMMUNICATION
STRONG MODERATE
GROUP
GROUP
(AT=50) (JV=5o)

QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES
Felt worried-a "few times" or "many times"about own mouth condition
Felt "somewhat" or "very" worried about improper care o own teeth
Thought about condition of own teeth "most of the time"

74%
66%
42%

60%
36%
34%

MINIMAL
GROUP
(2V=50>
48%
34%
22%

experienced "while the illustrated talk was that you might develop diseased gums, how
being given." Their responses indicate that concerned or worried do you feel about it?
2. When you think about the possibility
the fear stimuli were successful in arousing
affective reactions. On each of the three that you might developed decayed teeth, how
questionnaire items shown in the table, the concerned or worried do you feel about it?
difference between the Strong group and the Since these questions made no reference to
Minimal group is reliable at beyond the .05 the illustrated talk, it was feasible to include
confidence level.2 The Moderate group con- them in the pre- and postcommunication
sistently falls in an intermediate position but questionnaires given to all four groups.
Systematic comparisons were made in
does not, in most instances, differ significantly
terms of the percentage in each group who
from the other two groups.
Further evidence of the effectiveness of the reported relatively high disturbance (i.e.,
fear-arousing material was obtained from "somewhat" or "very worried") in response
responses to the following two questions, to both questions. The results, presented in
each of which had a checklist of five answer Table 3, show a marked increase in affective
categories ranging from "Very worried" to disturbance among each of the three experimental groups, as compared with the control
"Not at all worried":
group.
Paralleling the results in Table's, the
i. When you think about the possibility
greatest increase is found in the Strong
8
All probability values reported in this paper are group. The difference between the Moderate
based on one tail of the theoretical distribution, since and the Minimal groups, however, is
the results were used to test specific hypotheses which
insignificant.
predict the direction of the differences.
TABLE 3
PERCENTAGE OP EACH GROUP WHO REPORTED FEELING SOMEWHAT OR VERY WORRIED ABOUT DECAYED TEETH
AND DISEASED GUMS

One week before the communication

Immediately after the communication
Change
GROUP
Strong vs. Control
Strong vs. Minimal
Strong vs. Moderate
Moderate vs. Control
Moderate vs. Minimal
Minimal vs. Control

STRONG
GROUP
(W=5o)

MODERATE
GROUP
(N=5o)

MINIMAL
GROUP
(N=5b)

34
76
+42%

24
5
+26%

22
46

CONTROL
GROUP
<JV=5o)

3o
38
+8%

+24%

RELIABILITY OF DIFFERENCE *

CR
3.06
1.59
1-37
1-54
0.17
1.43

p
<.OI

.06
.09
.06
43
.08

*The statistical test used was the critical ratio for reliability of differences in amount of change between
two independent samples, as described by Hovland, Lumsdaine, and Sheffield (5, p. 321).

82

IRVING L. JANIS AND SEYMOUR FESHBACH

appraisals of the communication. From the

results shown in Table 4, it is apparent that
the Strong group responded more favorably
than the other two groups.8
These findings imply that interest in the
communication and acceptance of its educational value were heightened by the Strong
appeal. But this conclusion applies only to
relatively impersonal, objective ratings of the
communication. Additional evidence presented in Table 5, based on questions which
elicited evaluations of a more subjective character, reveals a markedly different attitude
toward the communication among those exposed to the Strong appeal.
One of the additional questions was the
following: "Was there anything in the illustrated talk on dental hygiene that you disliked?" Unfavorable ("dislike") answers
were given by a reliably higher percentage of
students in the Strong group than in the
Moderate or Minimal groups (first row of
Table 5). A tabulation was also made of
the total number of students in each group
who gave complaints in their answers to
either of two open-end questions which asked
for criticisms of the illustrated talk. The
results on complaints about the unpleasant
character of the slides are shown in row two
of Table 5; the difference between the Strong
group and each of the other two groups is
Information Acquired
reliable at the .01 confidence level. Similarly,
Immediately after exposure to the illus- a reliably higher percentage of the Strong
trated talk, each experimental group was group complained about insufficient material
given an information test consisting of 23 on ways and means of preventing tooth and
separate items. The test was based on the gum disease (row three of Table 5).* The
factual assertions common to all three forms latter type of criticism often was accompanied
of the communication, including topics such by the suggestion that some of the disturbing
as the anatomical structure of the teeth, the material should be eliminated, as is illuscauses of cavities and of gum disease, the trated by the following comments from two
"correct" technique of toothbrushing, and
8
the type of toothbrush recommended by
The Strong group differs significantly
dental authorities. No significant differences from the Minimal group on five of the seven items
and from the Moderate group on three items; the
were found among the three experimental Moderate group does not differ reliably from the
groups with respect to information test Minimal group on any of the items.
4
In row three of Table 5, the difference between the
scores. Comparisons with the Control group
Strong and Moderate groups is reliable at the .01
show that the three forms of the dental confidence level, and the difference between the Strong
hygiene communication were equally effec- and Minimal groups is significant at the .08 level.
Other types of criticisms, in addition to those shown
tive in teaching the factual material.
in Table 5, were also tabulated. Most of these inyolved
In order to obtain an over-all estimate of
the relative degree of emotional arousal
evoked by the three forms of the communication, a total score was computed for each
individual in each experimental group, based
on answers to all five questions: two points
credit was given to each response specified
in Tables 2 and 3 as indicative of high disturbance; one point credit was given to
intermediate responses on the checklist; zero
credit was given for the last two response
categories in each check list, which uniformly
designated a relative absence of worry or
concern. Hence individual scores ranged
from zero to ten. The mean scores for the
Strong, Moderate and Minimal groups were
7.8, 6.6, and 5.9 respectively. The Strong
group differs reliably at the one per cent
confidence level from each of the other two
groups (t=2.T, and 3.6). The difference between the Moderate and Minimal groups
approaches reliability at the .08 confidence
level (t=i.4).
In general, the foregoing evidence indicates
that after exposure to the communications,
the Strong group felt more worried about the
condition of their teeth than did the other
two groups; the Moderate group, in turn,
tended to feel more worried than the Minimal group.

Attitude Toward the Communication

The questionnaire given immediately after
exposure to the illustrated talk included a
series of seven items concerning the students'

minor aspects of the presentation (e.g., "a movie would

have been better than slides") and were given by
approximately equal percentages of the three groups.
The vast majority of students in the Moderate and
Minimal groups expressed approval of the illustrated
talk or stated that they had no criticisms.

EFFECTS OF FEAR-AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS

83

TABLE 4
PERCENTAGE OF EACH GROUP WHO EXPRESSED STRONGLY FAVORABLE APPRAISALS os THE COMMUNICATION

APPRAISAL RESPONSE
The illustrated talk does a very good teaching job.
Most or all of it was interesting.
It was very easy to pay attention to what the speaker was saying.
My mind practically never wandered.
The slides do a very good job.
The speaker's voice was very good.
The illustrated talk definitely should be given to all Connecticut high schools.

students in the Strong group: "Leave out the

slides that show the rottiness of the teeth and
have more in about how to brush your teeth";
"I don't think you should have shown so
many gory pictures without showing more
to prevent it." Comments of this sort, together with the data presented in Table 5,
provide additional evidence of residual emotional tension. They imply that the Strong
appeal created a need for reassurance which
persisted after the communication was over,
despite the fact that the communication
contained a large number of reassuring
recommendations.
The apparent inconsistency between the
results in Tables 4 and 5 suggests that the
Strong appeal evoked a more mixed or
ambivalent attitude toward the communication than did the Moderate or Minimal
appeals. Some of the comments, particularly
about the slides, help to illuminate the differentiation between the individual's objective
evaluation of the communication and his
subjective response to it. The following
illustrative excerpts from the Strong group
were selected from the answers given to the
open-end question which asked for criticisms
and suggestions:

STRONG
GROUP

MODERATE
GROUP

MINIMAL
GROUP
(N=5>

62
80
74
58
52
66
74

50
68
36
46

40
64
42

20

22

56
58

58
70

I did not care for the "gory" illustrations of

decayed teeth and diseased mouths but I really think
that it did make me feel sure that I did not want
this to happen to me.
Some of the pictures went to the extremes but
they probably had an effect on most of the people
who wouldn't want their teeth to look like that.
I think it is good because it scares people when
they see the awful things that can happen.

Such comments not only attest to the motivational impact of the Strong appeal, but also
suggest one of the ways in which the discrepancy between subjective and objective
evaluations may have been reconciled. In
such cases, the ambivalence seems to have
been resolved by adopting an attitude to the
effect that "this is disagreeable medicine, but
it is good for us."
Conformity to Dented Hygiene Recommendations
The immediate effects of the illustrated
talks described above show the type of affective reactions evoked by the fear-arousing material but provide little information bearing
directly on attitude changes. The questionnaire administered one week later, however,
was designed to measure some of the major
carry-over effects of fear appeals, particularly

TABLE 5
PERCENTAGE OF EACH GROUP WHO EXPRESSED COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE COMMUNICATION

TYPE OP COMPLAINT
Disliked something in the illustrated talk.
The slides were too unpleasant ("horrible," "gory," "disgusting," etc.).
There was not enough material on prevention.

STRONG MODERATE
GROUP
GROUP
(JV=5o) (2V=5o)
28
34

MINIMAL
GROUP
(W=5o)

IRVING L. JANIS AND SEYMOUR FESHBACH

84

with respect to changes in dental hygiene

practices, beliefs, and preferences. The results provide an empirical basis for estimating
the degree to which such communications
succeed in modifying attitudes.
Personal practices were investigated by
asking the students to describe the way they
were currently brushing their teeth: the type
of stroke used, the amount of surface area
cleansed, the amount of force applied, the
length of time spent on brushing the teeth,
and the time of day that the teeth were
brushed. The same five questions were
asked one week before the communication

four groups had very low scores and the

group differences were insignificant. By
comparing the score that each individual
attained one week after the communication
with that attained two weeks earlier, it was
possible to determine for each group the
percentage who changed in the direction of
increased or decreased conformity.
The results, shown in Table 6, reveal that
the greatest amount of conformity was produced by the communication which contained the least amount of fear-arousing
material. The Strong group showed reliably
less change than the Minimal group; in fact,

TABLE 6
EFFECT OF THE ILLUSTRATED TALK ON CONFORMITY TO DENTAL HYGIENE

TYPE OF CHANGE
Increased conformity
Decreased conformity
No change
Net change in conformity

RECOMMENDATIONS

MODERATE
GROUP
(W=5o)

MINIMAL
GROUP
(JV=5o)

CONTROL
GROUP
(W=5o)

28%

44%

20%

22%

50%
14%
36%

22%
22%

STRONG
GROUP
(JV=5)

34%

52%

+8%

GROUP
Control vs. Minimal
Control vs. Moderate
Control vs. Strong
Strong vs. Moderate
Strong vs. Minimal
Moderate vs. Minimal

and again one week after. These questions

covered practices about which the following
specific recommendations were made in all
three forms of the illustrated talk: (a) the
teeth should be brushed with an up-and-down
(vertical) stroke; (b) the inner surface of the
teeth should be brushed as well as the outer
surface; (c) the teeth should be brushed
gently, using only a slight amount of force;
(d) in order to cleanse the teeth adequately,
one should spend about three minutes on
each brushing; (<?) in the morning, the teeth
should be brushed after breakfast (rather
than before).
Each student was given a score, ranging
from zero to five, which represented the
number of recommended practices on which
he conformed. Before exposure to the communication, the majority of students in all

+22%

56%
o%

+36%

RELIABILITY OF DIFFERENCE

CR

2-54
1.50
0.59
0.95
1.96
0.93

<. OI

.07

.38

17

.03
.18

the Strong group failed to differ significantly

from the Control group, whereas the Minimal group showed a highly reliable increase
in conformity as compared with the Control
group. The Moderate group falls in an
intermediate position, but does not differ
reliably from the Strong or Minimal groups.
Although there is some ambiguity with respect to the relative effectiveness of the
Moderate appeal, the data in Table 6 show a
fairly consistent trend which suggests that as
the amount of fear-arousing material is increased, conformity tends to decrease. In
contrast to the marked increase in conformity
produced by the Minimal appeal and the
fairly sizable increase produced by the Moderate appeal, the Strong appeal failed to
achieve any significant effect whatsoever.
One cannot be certain, of course, that the

EFFECTS OF FEAR-AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS

findings represent changes in overt behavioral
conformity, since the observations are based
on the 5s' own verbal reports. What remains
problematical, however, is whether the verbal
responses reflect only "lip-service" to the
recommendations or whether they also reflect
internalized attitudes that were actually carried out in action. The results, nevertheless, demonstrate that the Strong appeal was
markedly less effective than the Minimal
appeal, at least with respect to eliciting verbal
conformity.
Further evidence in support of the same
conclusion comes from responses pertinent to
a different type of dental hygiene behavior
which had also been recommended in the
illustrated talk.8 The students were asked to
give the approximate date on which they had
last gone to a dentist. The percentage in
each group whose answers indicated that they
had gone to the dentist during the week following exposure to the illustrated talk were
as follows: 10 per cent of the Strong group,
14 per cent of the Moderate group, 18 per cent
of the Minimal group, and 4 per cent of the
Control group. The percentage difference
between the Minimal group and the Control
group was found to be statistically reliable
at the .04 confidence level; none of the other
comparisons yielded reliable differences.
Although not conclusive evidence, these findings are in line with those in Table 6: the
Minimal appeal again appears to have been
superior with respect to eliciting conformity
to a recommended practice.
Beliefs Concerning the "Proper" Type of
Toothbrush
The illustrated talk presented an extensive
discussion of the "proper" type of toothbrush
recommended by dental authorities. Four
main characteristics were emphasized: (a)
the bristles should be of medium hardness,
(b) the brush should have three rows of
bristles, (c) the handle should be completely
straight, and (d) the brushing surface should
be completely straight. Personal beliefs concerning the desirability of these four charac5
In all three forms of the illustrated talk, an explicit
recommendation was made concerning the desirability
of obtaining advice from a dentist about one's own
toothbrushing technique. In addition, several references
were made to the importance of going to a dentist for
prompt treatment of cavities, before the decay spreads
to the inner layers of the tooth.

85

teristics were measured by four questions

which were included in the precommunication questionnaire as well as in the
questionnaire given one week after the communication. The main finding was that all
three experimental groups, as compared with
the Control group, showed a significant
change in the direction of accepting the conclusions presented in the communication.
Among the three experimental groups, there
were no significant differences with respect
to net changes. Nevertheless, as will be seen
in the next section, the fear-arousing material
appears to have had a considerable effect on
the degree to which the students adhered to
such beliefs in the face of counteracting
propaganda.
Resistance to Counteracting Propaganda
In addition to describing the four essential
characteristics of the "proper" toothbrush,
the illustrated talk contained numerous comments and illustrations to explain the need
for avoiding the "wrong" kind of toothbrush.
Much of the material on cavities and other
unpleasant consequences of tooth neglect was
presented in this context. The importance
of using the proper fond of toothbrush was
the theme that was most heavily emphasized
throughout the entire communication.
The key questionnaire item, designed to
determine initial attitudes before exposure to
the communication, was the following:
Please read the following statement carefully and
decide whether you believe it is true or false.
It does not matter what kind of toothbrush a
person uses. Any sort of toothbrush that is sold in
a drugstore will keep your teeth clean and healthy
if you use it regularly.
Do you think that this statement is true or false?
(Check one.)

One week after exposure to the communications, the question was asked again, in
essentially the same form, with the same
checklist of five answer categories (ranging
from "Feel certain that it is true" to "Feel
certain that it is false"). But in the postcommunication questionnaire, the question
was preceded by the following propaganda
material which contradicted the dominant
theme of the illustrated talk:
A well-known dentist recently made the following
statement:

86

IRVING L. JANIS AND SEYMOUR FESHBACH

Some dentists, including a number of so-called

"experts" on dental hygiene, claim it is important
to use a special type of toothbrush in order to clean
the teeth properly. But from my own experience,
I believe that there is no sound basis for that idea.
My honest opinion, as a dentist, is that it does not
matter what kind of toothbrush a person uses. Any
sort of toothbrush that is sold in a drugstore will
keep your teeth clean and healthyif you use it
regularly.

That this propaganda exposure had a pronounced effect is revealed by the attitude
changes shown by the Control group. A
statistically reliable change in the direction

definite answer emerges from the results in

Table 7, which shows the percentage of each
group who changed in the direction of agreement or disagreement with the counterpropaganda statement.
Before exposure to the illustrated talk, the
group differences were negligible: approximately 50 per cent of the students in each of
the four groups agreed with the statement
that "it does not matter what kind of toothbrush a person uses." But two weeks later
(immediately after exposure to the counter-

TABLE 7
EFFECT OP THE ILLUSTRATED TALK ON REACTIONS TO SUBSEQUENT COUNTERPROPAGANDA: NET PERCENTACI
OF EACH GROUP WHO CHANGED IN THE DIRECTION OF AGREEING WITH THE STATEMENT THAT
"!T DOES NOT MATTER WHAT KIND OF TOOTHBRUSH A PERSON USES"

TYPE OF CHANGE
More agreement
Less agreement
No change
Net change
Net effect of exposure to the illustrated talk
GROUP
Control vs. Minimal
Control vs. Moderate
Control vs. Strong
Strong vs. Moderate
Strong vs. Minimal
Moderate vs. Minimal

of more agreement with the counterpropaganda was found in the Control group.6
How effective were the three forms of the
illustrated talk in preventing students from
accepting the propaganda to which they were
exposed one week later? Did the fear appeals
augment or diminish the students' resistance
to the counteracting propaganda? A fairly
6
In the Control group, the percentage who disagreed
with the statement dropped from 54 to 34. This change
proved to be significant at below the .02 confidence
level, according to the formula described by Hovland,
Lumsdaine, and Sheffield (5, p. 319). The Control
group did not show any significant change on other
questions dealing with dental hygiene beliefs, preferences
or practices, all of which were presented in the final
questionnaire before the propaganda material was introduced. Consequently, it seems fairly safe to conclude
that the propaganda exposure was responsible for the
significant change displayed by the Control group.

STRONG
GROUP
(JV=5o)

MODERATE
GROUP
(JV=5o)

28
42
30
14

30
38
32

8
28

34

MINIMAL
GROUP
(JV=5o)

CONTROL
GROUP
(W=5o)

14

44
24
32

54
32
40
60

+ 20

RELIABILITY OF THE DIFFERENCES IN NET CHANGE

CR
p

3-66
2.05
1.71
0.36
2.03
1.66

<.OOI
.02
.05

.36
.02
.05

propaganda) there were marked and statistically reliable differences which indicate that
although all three forms of the illustrated
talk had some influence, the Minimal appeal
was most effective in producing resistance to
the counterpropaganda. Thus, the results
suggest that under conditions where people
will be exposed to competing communications dealing with the same issues, the use of
a strong fear appeal will tend to be less effective than a minimal appeal in producing
stable and persistent attitude changes.
Some clues to mediating processes were
detected in the students' responses to an openend question which asked them to "give the
reason" for their answers to the key attitude
item on which the results in Table 7 are
based. A systematic analysis was made of

EFFECTS OF FEAR-AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS

the write-in answers given by those students
who had disagreed with the counterpropaganda. In their refutations, some of the
students made use of material that had been
presented one week earlier, either by referring
to the illustrated talk as an authoritative
source or by citing one of the main arguments
presented in the illustrated talk. From the
results presented in the first two rows of
Table 8, it is apparent that such refutations
were given more frequently by the Minimal
group than by the other experimental groups.
The comparatively low frequency of such
answers in the Strong and Moderate groups
was not compensated for by an increase in
any other type of specific reasons, as indicated
by the results in the last row of the table.7

87

were inclined to avoid recalling the content

of the fear-arousing communication.
DISCUSSION
The results in the preceding sections indicate that the Minimal appeal was the most
effective form of the communication in that
it elicited (a) more resistance to subsequent
counterpropaganda and (b) a higher incidence of verbal adherence, and perhaps a
greater degree of behavioral conformity, to a
set of recommended practices. The absence
of any significant differences on other indicators of preferences and beliefs implies that
the Moderate and Strong appeals had no
unique positive effects that would compensate for the observed detrimental effects.

TABLE 8
TYPES OF REFUTATION GIVEN BY STUDENTS WHO DISAGREED WITH THE COUNTERPROPAGANDA

TYPE OF REFUTATION
Explicit reference to the illustrated talk as an authoritative source for the opposite conclusion
One or more arguments cited that had been presented
in the illustrated talk
One or more arguments cited that contradicted the
content of the illustrated talk
No answer or no specific reason given

Although the group differences are not

uniformly reliable, they reveal a consistent
trend which suggests an "avoidance" tendency among the students who had been
exposed to the fear appeals. Apparently, even
those who resisted the counterpropaganda
T
On the first type of reason (reference to the illustrated talk), the only difference large enough to approach
statistical reliability was that between the Minimal
group and the Control group (p=.o8). On the second
type of reason (arguments cited from the illustrated
talk), the difference between the Minimal group and
the Control group was found to be highly reliable
(/>=:. 03) while the difference between the Minimal
and Moderate groups approached statistical reliability
(/>=.o8). The Control group differed reliably from
each of the experimental groups (at beyond the .10
confidence level) with respect to giving arguments
which contradicted those contained in the illustrated
talk (row three of the table). None of the other
percentage differences in Table 8 were large enough
to be significant at the .10 confidence level. (In some
columns, the percentages add up to more than 100 per
cent because a few students gave more than one type
of refutation.)

STRONG
GROUP

MODERATE
GROUP

MINIMAL
GROUP

CONTROL
GROUP

7%

14%

1 8%

43%

38%

59%

28%

o%
50%

52%

0%

o%
36%

22%

0%

Thus, the findings consistently indicate that

inclusion of the fear-arousing material not
only failed to increase the effectiveness of the
communication, but actually interfered with
its over-all success.
The outcome of the present experiment by
no means precludes the possibility that, under
certain conditions, fear appeals may prove to
be highly successful. For instance, the Strong
appeal was found to be maximally effective
in arousing interest and in eliciting a high
degree of emotional tension. The evocation
of such reactions might augment the effectiveness of mass communications which are
designed to instigate prompt audience action,
such as donating money or volunteering to
perform a group task. But if the communication is intended to create more sustained
preferences or attitudes, the achievement of
positive effects probably depends upon a
number of different factors. Our experi-

IRVING L. JANIS AND SEYMOUR FESHBACH

mental results suggest that in the latter case,
a relatively low degree of fear arousal is
likely to be the optimal level, that an appeal
which is too strong will tend to evoke some
form of interference which reduces the effectiveness of the communication. The findings
definitely contradict the assumption that as
the dosage of fear-arousing stimuli (in a mass
communication) is increased, the audience
will become more highly motivated to accept
the reasssuring recommendations contained
in the communication. Beneficial motivating
effects probably occur when a relatively slight
amount of fear-arousing material is inserted;
Lut for communications of the sort used in
the present experiment, the optimal dosage
appears to be far below the level of the
strongest fear appeals that a communicator
could use if he chose to do so.
Before examining the implications of the
findings in more detail, it is necessary to take
account of the problems of generalizing from
the findings of the present study. The
present experiment shows the effects of only
one type of communication, presented in an
educational setting to a student audience.
Until replications are carried outusing other
media, topics, and fear-eliciting stimuli, in a
variety of communication settings, with different audiences, etc.one cannot be certain
that the conclusions hold true for other situations. The results from a single experiment
are obviously not sufficient for drawing broad
generalizations concerning the entire range
of fear-arousing communications which are
currently being brought to the focus of public
attention. Nor can unreplicated results be
relied upon for extracting dependable rubrics
that could be applied by educators, editors,
public relations experts, propagandists, or
other communication specialists who face the
practical problems of selecting appropriate
appeals for motivating mass audiences.
Nevertheless, the present experiment helps
to elucidate the potentially unfavorable effects
that may result from mass communications
which play up ominous threats, alarming
contingencies, or signs of impending danger.
For instance, the findings tend to bear out
some of the points raised concerning the need
for careful pretesting and for other cautions
when warnings about the dangers of atomic
bombing are presented in civilian defense

communications that are intended to prepare

the public for coping with wartime emergencies (6). Moreover, despite our inability
to specify the range of communications to
which our conclusions would apply, we can
derive tentative inferences that may have important theoretical implications with respect
to the dynamics of "normal" fear reactions.
We turn now to a central question posed
by the experimental findings: Why is it that
the fear-arousing stimuli resulted in less
adherence to recommended practices and less
resistance to counterpropaganda ? Although
our experiment cannot give a definitive
answer, it provides some suggestive leads
concerning potential sources of emotional
interference.
In the introduction, we have described
three forms of "resistance" frequently observed in psychotherapy that might also
occur among normal personalities exposed to
mass communications which evoke strong
fear or anxiety: (a) inattentiveness during
the communication session, () rejection of
the communicator's statements motivated by
reactive aggression, and (c) subsequent defensive avoidance motivated by residual emotional tension. We shall discuss briefly the
pertinent findings from the present experiment with a view to making a preliminary
assessment of the importance of each of the
three types of interfering reactions.
i. Our results provide no evidence that a
strong fear appeal produces inattentiveness or
any form of distraction that would interfere
with learning efficiency during the communication session. The three forms of the communication were found to be equally effective
in teaching the factual material on dental
hygiene, as measured by a comprehensive
information test given immediately after
exposure to the communication. Beliefs concerning the desirable characteristics of the
"proper" type of toothbrush were also
acquired equally well. One might even surmise (from the results in Table 4) that the
Strong appeal may have had a beneficial effect
on attention, because a significantly higher
percentage of the Strong group reported that
(a) it was very easy to pay attention to what
the speaker was saying and (b) they experienced very little "mind-wandering."
The absence of any observable reduction of

EFFECTS OF FEAR-AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS

learning efficiency is consistent with numerous clinical observations which imply that
normal personalities can ordinarily tolerate
unpleasant information concerning potential
threats to the self without manifesting any
marked impairment of "ego" functions. Our
findings definitely suggest that the use of
fear-arousing material of the sort presented
in the illustrated talks would rarely give rise
to any interference with the audience's ability
to learn the content of the communication.
It is necessary to bear in mind, however,
that in the present experiment the communication was given to a "captive" classroom
audience. When people are at home listening
to the radio, or in any situation where they
feel free to choose whether or not to terminate the communication exposure, the use of
strong emotional appeals might often have
drastic effects on sustained attention. Consequently, the tentative generalization concerning the low probability of inattentiveness
would be expected to apply primarily to those
fear-arousing communications which are presented under conditions where social norms
or situational constraints prevent the audience
from directing attention elsewhere.
Even with a "captive" audience, it is quite
possible that under certain extreme conditions
a strong fear appeal might interfere with
learning efficiency. For instance, the same
sort of temporary cognitive impairment that
is sometimes observed when verbal stimuli
happen to touch off unconscious personal
conflicts or emotional "complexes" might also
occur when a mass communication elicits
sharp awareness of unexpected danger, particularly when the audience immediately
perceives the threat to be imminent and
inescapable. Hence, the inferences from our
experimental findings probably should be
restricted to fear appeals which deal with
remote threats or with relatively familiar
dangers that are perceived to be avoidable.
2. The fact that the Strong group expressed
the greatest amount of subjective dislike of
the illustrated talk and made the most complaints about its content could be construed
as suggesting a potentially aggressive attitude.
But if the aggressive reactions aroused by the
use of the Strong fear appeal were intense
enough to motivate rejection of the conclusions, one would not expect to find this group

89

giving the most favorable appraisals of the

interest value of the illustrated talk, of the
quality of its presentation, and of its over-all
educational success. Thus, although the possibility of suppressed aggression cannot be
precluded, it seems unlikely that this factor
was a major source of emotional interference.
In drawing this tentative conclusion, however, we do not intend to minimize the
importance of aggression as a potential source
of interference. In the present experiment,
the communication was administered as an
official part of the school's hygiene program
and contained recommendations that were
obviously intended to be beneficial to the
audience. Under markedly different conditions, where the auspices and intent of the
communication are perceived to be less benign, the audience would probably be less
disposed to suppress or control aggressive reactions. The low level of verbalized aggression observed in the present study, however,,
suggests that in the absence of cues which
arouse the audience's suspicions, some factor
other than reactive hostility may be a much
more important source of interference.
3. Subsequent defensive avoidance arising
from residual emotional tension seems to be
the most likely explanation of the outcome of
the present study. We have seen, from the data
on immediate affective reactions, that the disturbing feelings which had been aroused
during the illustrated talk tended to persist
after the communication had ended, despitethe reassuring recommendations which had
been presented. The analysis of complaints,
made by the three experimental groups
(Table 5) provides additional evidence that
the need for reassurance persisted primarily
among the students who had been exposed
to the Strong appeal. Such findings support
the following hypothesis: When a mass communication is designed to influence an audience to adopt specific ways and means of
averting a threat, the use of a strong fear
appeal, as against a milder one, increases the
livelihood that the audience will be left in a
state of emotional tension which is not fully
relieved by rehearsing the reassuring recommendations contained in the communication.
This hypothesis is compatible with the general assumption that when a person is exposed
to signs of "threat," the greater the intensity

90

IRVING L. JANIS AND SEYMOUR FESHBACH

of the fear reaction evoked, the greater the

likelihood that his emotional tension will
persist after the external stimulus has
terminated.
Whether or not the above hypothesis is
correct, the fact remains that "unreduced"
emotional tension was manifested immediately after the communication predominantly
by the group exposed to the Strong appeal.
Our findings on subsequent reactions provide
some suggestive evidence concerning the
consequences of experiencing this type of
residual tension. In general, the evidence
appears to be consistent with the following
hypothesis: When fear is strongly aroused
but is not fully relieved by the reassurances
contained in a mass communication, the
audience will become motivated to ignore or
to minimize the importance of the threat.
This hypothesis could be regarded as a
special case of the following general proposition which pertains to the effects of human
exposure to any fear-producing stimulus:
other things being equal, the more persistent
the fear reaction, the greater will be the
(acquired) motivation to avoid subsequent
exposures to internal and external cues which
were present at the time the fear reaction was
aroused. This proposition is based on the
postulate that fear is a stimulus-producing
response which has the functional properties
of a drive (2, 7).8
8
In the sphere of human communication, the key
theoretical assumption could be formulated as follows:
If rehearsal of the reassuring statements contained in a
communication fails to alleviate the emotional tension
elicited by the use of a fear appeal, the audience will
be motivated to continue trying out other (symbolic or
overt) responses until one occurs which succeeds in
reducing fear to a tolerable level. Thus, a strong fear
appeal which is intended to motivate the audience to
take account of a realistic threat of danger could have
the paradoxical effect of motivating the audience to
ignore the threat or to adopt "magical," "wishful" or
other types of reassuring beliefs that are antithetical to
the communicator's intentions. Moreover, according to
the same theoretical assumption, when a communication
produces a high degree of persistent fear, the audience
will be motivated to engage in overt escape activities,
some of which may prove to be incompatible with the
protective actions recommended by the communicator.
Unintended effects of this kind can be regarded as
spontaneous "defensive" reactions which are motivated
by residual emotional tension. In the present experiment, it would be expected that, in addition to the
tendency to avoid thinking about the threat, other
defensive reactions would also occur. For example,
following exposure to the Strong appeal, some of the
students may have succeeded in alleviating their residual
emotional tension through spontaneous interpersonal
communication with fellow students.

In the context of the present experiment,

one would predict that the group displaying
the greatest degree of residual fear would be
most strongly motivated to ward off those
internal symbolic cuessuch as anticipations
of the threatening consequences of improper
dental hygienewhich were salient during
and immediately after the communication.
This prediction seems to be fairly well borne
out by the evidence on carry-over effects, particularly by the finding that the greatest
degree of resistance to the subsequent counterpropaganda was shown by the group
which had been least motivated by fear. The
use of the Strong appeal, as against the
Minimal one, evidently resulted in less rejection of a subsequent communication which
discounted and contradicted what was said
in the original communication. In effect, the
second communication asserted that one
could ignore the alleged consequences of
using the wrong type of toothbrush, and, in
that sense, minimized the dangers which previously had been heavily emphasized by the
fear-arousing communication.
The results obtained from the students'
reports on their dental hygiene practices could
be interpreted as supporting another prediction from the same hypothesis. It would be
expected that those students who changed
their practices, after having heard and seen
one of the three forms of the illustrated talk,
were motivated to do so because they recalled
some of the verbal material which had been
given in support of the recommendations,
most of which referred to the unfavorable
consequences of continuing to do the
"wrong" thing. In theoretical terms, one
might say that their conformity to the recommendations was mediated by symbolic responses which had been learned during the
communication. The mediating responses
(anticipations, thoughts, or images) acquired
from any one of the three forms of the illustrated talk would frequently have, as their
content, some reference to unpleasant consequences for the self, and consequently would
cue off a resolution or an overt action that
would be accompanied by anticipated success
in warding off the threat. But defensive
avoidance of the mediating responses would
reduce the amount of conformity to whatever
protective action is recommended by the

EFFECTS OF FEAR-AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS

fear-arousing communication. Hence the
prediction would be that when rehearsal of
statements concerning potential danger is
accompanied by strong emotional tension
during and after the communication, the
audience will become motivated to avoid recalling those statements on later occasions
when appropriate action could ordinarily be
carried out. An inhibiting motivation of
this kind acquired from the illustrated talk
would tend to prevent the students from
adopting the recommended changes in their
toothbrushing habits because they would fail
to think about the unpleasant consequences
of improper dental hygiene at times when
they subsequently perform the act of brushing their teeth.
Much more direct evidence in support of
the "defensive avoidance" hypothesis comes
from the analysis of spontaneous write-in
answers in which the students explained why
they disagreed with the counterpropaganda
(Table 8). Those who had been exposed to
the least amount of fear-arousing material
were the ones who were most likely to refer
to the illustrated talk as an authoritative
source and to make use of its arguments.
The relative absence of such references in
the spontaneous answers given by those who
had been exposed to the Moderate and
Strong appeals implies a tendency to avoid
recalling the content of the fear-arousing
communication.
Although the various pieces of evidence
discussed above seem to fit together, they
cannot be regarded as a conclusive demonstration of the defensive avoidance hypothesis. What our findings clearly show is that
a strong fear appeal can be markedly less
effective than a minimal appeal, at least under
the limited conditions represented in our
experiment. Exactly which conditions and
which mediating mechanisms are responsible
for this outcome will remain problematical
until further investigations are carried out.
Nevertheless, so far as the present findings
go, they consistently support the conclusion
that the use of a strong fear appeal will tend
to reduce the over-all success of a persuasive
communication, if it evokes a high degree of
emotional tension without adequately satisfying the need for reassurance.

91

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The experiment was designed to investigate
the effects of persuasive communications
which attempt to motivate people to conform
with a set of recommendations by stimulating
fear reactions. An illustrated lecture on
dental hygiene was prepared in three different forms, representing three different intensities of fear appeal: the Strong appeal
emphasized and graphically illustrated the
threat of pain, disease, and body damage; the
Moderate appeal described the same dangers
in a milder and more factual manner; the
Minimal appeal rarely referred to the unpleasant consequences of improper dental
hygiene. Although differing in the amount
of fear-arousing material presented, the three
forms of the communication contained the
same essential information and the same set
of recommendations.
Equivalent groups of high school students
were exposed to the three different forms of
the communication as part of the school's
hygiene program. In addition, the experiment included an equated control group
which was not exposed to the dental hygiene
communication but was given a similar
communication on an irrelevant topic. Altogether there were 200 students in the experiment, with 50 in each group. A questionnaire
containing a series of items on dental hygiene
beliefs, practices, and attitudes was administered to all four groups one week before the
communications were presented. In order to
observe the changes produced by the illustrated talk, postcommunication questionnaires were given immediately after exposure
and again one week later.
1. The fear appeals were successful in
arousing affective reactions. Immediately
after the communication, the group exposed
to the Strong appeal reported feeling more
worried about the condition of their teeth
than did the other groups. The Moderate
appeal, in turn, evoked a higher incidence of
"worry" reactions than did the Minimal
appeal.
2. The three forms of the illustrated talk
were equally effective with respect to (a)
teaching the factual content of the communication, as assessed by an information
test, and (b) modifying beliefs concerning
four specific characteristics of the "proper"

IRVING L. JANIS AND SEYMOUR FESHBACH

type of toothbrush. The evidence indicates
that the emotional reactions aroused by the
Strong appeal did not produce inattentiveness
or reduce learning efficiency.
3. As compared with the other two forms
of the communication, the Strong appeal
evoked a more mixed or ambivalent attitude
toward the communication. The students
exposed to the Strong appeal were more
likely than the others to give favorable appraisals concerning the interest value and the
quality of the presentation. Nevertheless,
they showed the greatest amount of subjective
dislike of the communication and made more
complaints about the content.
4. From an analysis of the changes in each
individual's reports about his current toothbrushing practices, it was found that the
greatest amount of conformity to the communicator's recommendations was produced
by the Minimal appeal. The Strong appeal
failed to produce any significant change in
dental hygiene practices, whereas the Minimal appeal resulted in a reliable increase in
conformity, as compared with the Control
group. Similar findings also emerged from
an analysis of responses which indicated
whether the students had gone to a dentist
during the week following exposure to the
illustrated talk, reflecting conformity to
another recommendation made by the communicator. The evidence strongly suggests
that as the amount of fear-arousing material
is increased, conformity to recommended
(protective) actions tends to decrease.
5. One week after the illustrated talk had
been presented, exposure to counterpropaganda (which contradicted the main theme
of the original communication) produced a
greater effect on attitudes in the Control
group than in the three experimental groups.
The Minimal appeal, however, proved to be
the most effective form of the illustrated talk
with respect to producing resistance to the
counterpropaganda. The results tend to support the conclusion that under conditions

where people are exposed to competing communications dealing with the same issues, the
use of a strong fear appeal is less successful
than a minimal appeal in producing stable
and persistent attitude changes.
6. The main conclusion which emerges
from the entire set of findings is that the
over-all effectiveness of a persuasive communication will tend to be reduced by the
use of a strong fear appeal, if it evokes a
high degree of emotional tension without adequately satisfying the need for reassurance.
The evidence from the present experiment
appears to be consistent with the following
two explanatory hypotheses:
a. When a mass communication is designed to influence an audience to adopt
specific ways and means of averting a threat,
the use of a strong fear appeal, as against a
milder one, increases the likelihood that the
audience will be left in a state of emotional
tension which is not fully relieved by rehearsing the reassuring recommendations contained in the communication.
b. When fear is strongly aroused but is not
fully relieved by the reassurances contained
in a mass communication, the audience will
become motivated to ignore or to minimize
the importance of the threat.
REFERENCES
1. ALEXANDER, F., & FRENCH, T. M. Psychoanalytic
therapy. New York: Ronald, 1946.
2. DOLLARD, J., & MILLER, N. E. Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950.
3. FENICHEL, O. Problems of psychoanalytic technique.
New York: Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 1941.
4. HANFMANN, EUGENIA. Psychological approaches to
the study of anxiety. In P. H. Hoch and J.
Zubin (Eds.), Anxiety. New York: Grune &
Stratton, 1950. Pp. 51-69.
5. HOVLAND, C. I., LUMSDAINE, A. A., & SHEFFIELD,

F. D. Experiments on mass communication.

Princeton: Princeton Univer. Press, 1949.
6. JANIS, I. L. Air war and emotional stress. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1951.
7. MOWRER, O. H. Learning theory and personality
dynamics: Selected papers. New York: Ronald,
1950.
Received March 14, 1952.