Identifying the Most Autonomy-Supportive Message Frame in Digital Health Communication: A 2x2 Between-Subjects Experiment

Eline Suzanne Smit, Chamoetal Zeidler, Ken Resnicow, Hein de Vries, Eline Suzanne Smit, Chamoetal Zeidler, Ken Resnicow, Hein de Vries

Abstract

Background: The effectiveness of digital health communication may be increased by enhancing autonomy supportiveness.

Objective: This study aimed to identify the most autonomy-supportive message frame within an intervention for increasing vegetable intake by testing the effect of the following 2 strategies: (1) using autonomy-supportive language and (2) providing choice.

Methods: A Web-based 2 (autonomy-supportive vs controlling language)×2 (choice vs no choice) experiment was conducted among 526 participants, recruited via a research panel. The main outcome measures were perceived autonomy support (measured using the Virtual Care Climate Questionnaire, answered with scores 1 to 5), perceived relevance (measured with one question, answered with scores 1 to 5), and overall evaluation of the intervention (measured with 1 open-ended question, answered with scores 1 to 10).

Results: Choice had a significant positive effect on the overall evaluation of the intervention (b=.12; P=.003), whereas for participants with a high need for autonomy, there was a significant positive effect on perceived relevance (b=.13; P=.02). The positive effect of choice on perceived autonomy support approached significance (b=.07; P=.07). No significant effects on any of the three outcomes were observed for language.

Conclusions: Results suggest that provision of choice rather than the use of autonomy-supportive language can be an easy-to-implement strategy to increase the effectiveness of digital forms of health communication, especially for people with a high need for autonomy.

Keywords: health behavior; health communication; health promotion; healthy diet; internet; personal autonomy; self-determination theory.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

©Eline Suzanne Suzanne Smit, Chamoetal Zeidler, Ken Resnicow, Hein de Vries. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 30.10.2019.

References

    1. Lustria ML, Noar SM, Cortese J, van Stee SK, Glueckauf RL, Lee J. A meta-analysis of web-delivered tailored health behavior change interventions. J Health Commun. 2013;18(9):1039–69. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2013.768727.
    1. Schulz DN, Smit ES, Stanczyk NE, Kremers SP, de Vries H, Evers SM. Economic evaluation of a web-based tailored lifestyle intervention for adults: findings regarding cost-effectiveness and cost-utility from a randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(3):e91. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3159.
    1. Cheung KL, Wijnen B, de Vries H. A review of the theoretical basis, effects, and cost effectiveness of online smoking cessation interventions in the Netherlands: a mixed-methods approach. J Med Internet Res. 2017 Jun 23;19(6):e230. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7209.
    1. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999 Sep;89(9):1322–7. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.89.9.1322.
    1. Rimer BK, Kreuter MW. Advancing tailored health communication: a persuasion and message effects perspective. J Communication. 2006 Aug;56(s1):S184–201. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00289.x.
    1. Smit ES, Linn AJ, van Weert JC. Taking online computer-tailoring forward: the potential of tailoring the message frame and delivery mode of online health behaviour change interventions. Eur Health Psychol. 2015;17(1):25–31.
    1. Ng JY, Ntoumanis N, Thøgersen-Ntoumani C, Deci EL, Ryan RM, Duda JL, Williams GC. Self-determination theory applied to health contexts: a meta-analysis. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012 Jul;7(4):325–40. doi: 10.1177/1745691612447309.
    1. Patrick H, Canevello A. Methodological overview of a self-determination theory-based computerized intervention to promote leisure-time physical activity. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2011 Jan;12(1):13–9. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.04.011.
    1. Deci EL, Eghrari H, Patrick BC, Leone DR. Facilitating internalization: the self-determination theory perspective. J Pers. 1994 Mar;62(1):119–42. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1994.tb00797.x.
    1. Williams GC, Cox EM, Kouides R, Deci EL. Presenting the facts about smoking to adolescents: effects of an autonomy-supportive style. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1999 Sep;153(9):959–64. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.153.9.959.
    1. Williams GC, Niemiec CP, Elliot AJ, LaGuardia JG, Gorin AA, Rigby CS. Virtual Look AHEAD program: initial support for a partly virtualized intensive lifestyle intervention in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2014 Aug;37(8):e169–70. doi: 10.2337/dc14-0831.
    1. Deci EL, Ryan RM. The general causality orientations scale: self-determination in personality. ‎J Res Pers. 1985 Jun;19(2):109–34. doi: 10.1016/0092-6566(85)90023-6.
    1. de Vries H, Mudde A, Leijs I, Charlton A, Vartiainen E, Buijs G, Clemente MP, Storm H, González NA, Nebot M, Prins T, Kremers S. The European smoking prevention framework approach (EFSA): an example of integral prevention. Health Educ Res. 2003 Oct;18(5):611–26. doi: 10.1093/her/cyg031.
    1. Gillison FB, Rouse P, Standage M, Sebire SJ, Ryan RM. A meta-analysis of techniques to promote motivation for health behaviour change from a self-determination theory perspective. Health Psychol Rev. 2019 Mar;13(1):110–30. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2018.1534071.
    1. Altendorf MB, van Weert JC, Hoving C, Smit ES. Should or could? Testing the use of autonomy-supportive language and the provision of choice in online computer-tailored alcohol reduction communication. Digit Health. 2019;5:2055207619832767. doi: 10.1177/2055207619832767.
    1. de Vries H, Brug J. Computer-tailored interventions motivating people to adopt health promoting behaviours: introduction to a new approach. Patient Educ Couns. 1999 Feb;36(2):99–105.
    1. Strecher VJ, McClure JB, Alexander GL, Chakraborty B, Nair VN, Konkel JM, Greene SM, Couper M, Carlier C, Wiese C, Little R, Pomerleau C, Pomerleau O. The role of engagement in a tailored web-based smoking cessation program: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2008;10(5):e36. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1002.
    1. Dijkstra A. Working mechanisms of computer-tailored health education: evidence from smoking cessation. Health Educ Res. 2005 Oct;20(5):527–39. doi: 10.1093/her/cyh014.
    1. Levinson W, Kao A, Kuby A, Thisted RA. Not all patients want to participate in decision making. A national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med. 2005 Jun;20(6):531–5. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.04101.x.
    1. Resnicow K, Zhou Y, Hawley S, Jimbo M, Ruffin MT, Davis RE, Shires D, Lafata JE. Communication preference moderates the effect of a tailored intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening among African Americans. Patient Educ Couns. 2014 Dec;97(3):370–5. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2014.08.013.
    1. Kreuter MW, Farrell DW, Olevitch LR, Brennan LK. Tailoring Health Messages: Customizing Communication with Computer Technology. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1999.
    1. Resnicow K, Davis RE, Zhang G, Konkel J, Strecher VJ, Shaikh AR, Tolsma D, Calvi J, Alexander G, Anderson JP, Wiese C. Tailoring a fruit and vegetable intervention on novel motivational constructs: results of a randomized study. Ann Behav Med. 2008 Apr;35(2):159–69. doi: 10.1007/s12160-008-9028-9.
    1. Schulz DN, Kremers SP, Vandelanotte C, van Adrichem MJ, Schneider F, Candel MJ, de Vries H. Effects of a web-based tailored multiple-lifestyle intervention for adults: a two-year randomized controlled trial comparing sequential and simultaneous delivery modes. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(1):e26. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3094.
    1. PanelClix - Het grootste Panel van Nederland. [2016-06-15]. .
    1. Brink L, Postma-Smeets A, Stafleu A, Wolvers D. The Netherlands Nutrition Centre Foundation. 2016. [2019-09-05]. Richtlijnen Schijf van Vijf. .
    1. Williams GG, Gagné M, Ryan RM, Deci EL. Facilitating autonomous motivation for smoking cessation. Health Psychol. 2002 Jan;21(1):40–50. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.21.1.40.
    1. National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. 2005. [2017-07-12]. [Indicators of the Public Health Monitor] .
    1. Smit ES, Dima AL, Immerzeel SA, van den Putte B, Williams GC. The virtual care climate questionnaire: development and validation of a questionnaire measuring perceived support for autonomy in a virtual care setting. J Med Internet Res. 2017 May 8;19(5):e155. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6714.
    1. Patall EA, Cooper H, Robinson JC. The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related outcomes: a meta-analysis of research findings. Psychol Bull. 2008 Mar;134(2):270–300. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.270.
    1. Kalyanaraman S, Sundar SS. The psychological appeal of personalized content in web portals: does customization affect attitudes and behavior? J Commun. 2006 Mar;56(1):110–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00006.x.
    1. Sundar SS, Bellur S, Jia H. Motivational Technologies: A Theoretical Framework for Designing Preventive Health Applications. Proceedings of the International Conference on Persuasive Technology; PERSUASIVE'12; June 6-8, 2012; Linköping, Sweden. 2012. pp. 112–22.
    1. Jenkins M, Dragojevic M. Explaining the process of resistance to persuasion. Commun Res. 2011;40(4):559–90. doi: 10.1177/0093650211420136.
    1. Brehm JW. A Theory of Psychological Reactance. Oxford, England: Academic Press; 1966.
    1. Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In: Kuhl J, Beckmann J, editors. Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer; 1985. pp. 11–39.
    1. Vangeli E, Stapleton J, Smit ES, Borland R, West R. Predictors of attempts to stop smoking and their success in adult general population samples: a systematic review. Addiction. 2011 Dec;106(12):2110–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2011.03565.x.
    1. Smit ES, Hoving C, Schelleman-Offermans K, West R, de Vries H. Predictors of successful and unsuccessful quit attempts among smokers motivated to quit. Addict Behav. 2014 Sep;39(9):1318–24. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.04.017.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere