↓ Skip to main content

Affective Antecedents of the Perceived Effectiveness of Antidrug Advertisements: An Analysis of Adolescents’ Momentary and Retrospective Evaluations

Overview of attention for article published in Prevention Science, April 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Affective Antecedents of the Perceived Effectiveness of Antidrug Advertisements: An Analysis of Adolescents’ Momentary and Retrospective Evaluations
Published in
Prevention Science, April 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11121-011-0212-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marco C. Yzer, Kathleen D. Vohs, Monica Luciana, Bruce N. Cuthbert, Angus W. MacDonald

Abstract

Perceived message effectiveness is often used as a diagnostic tool to determine whether a health message is likely to be successful or needs modification before use in an intervention. Yet, published research on the antecedents of perceived effectiveness is scarce and, consequently, little is known about why a message is perceived to be effective or ineffective. The present study's aim was to identify and test the affective antecedents of perceived effectiveness of antidrug television messages in a sample of 190 adolescents in the 15-19 year age range. Factor-analytical tests of retrospective message evaluation items suggested two dimensions of perceived effectiveness, one that contained items such as convincingness whereas the other contained pleasantness items. Using retrospective data as well as real time valence and arousal ratings, we found that arousal underlies perceived convincingness and valence underlies perceived pleasantness. The results indicated activation of appetitive and defensive motivational systems, which suggests a clear motivational component to the concept of perceived message effectiveness.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 41 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 27%
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Master 6 14%
Professor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 16 36%
Psychology 13 30%
Unspecified 6 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 3 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 August 2016.
All research outputs
#3,254,963
of 8,282,830 outputs
Outputs from Prevention Science
#286
of 559 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,592
of 127,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Prevention Science
#10
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,282,830 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 60th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 559 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 127,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.