ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
This collection includes most of the ASU Theses and Dissertations from 2011 to present. ASU Theses and Dissertations are available in downloadable PDF format; however, a small percentage of items are under embargo. Information about the dissertations/theses includes degree information, committee members, an abstract, supporting data or media.
In addition to the electronic theses found in the ASU Digital Repository, ASU Theses and Dissertations can be found in the ASU Library Catalog.
Dissertations and Theses granted by Arizona State University are archived and made available through a joint effort of the ASU Graduate College and the ASU Libraries. For more information or questions about this collection contact or visit the Digital Repository ETD Library Guide or contact the ASU Graduate College at gradformat@asu.edu.
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Communication
- Creators: Margolis, Eric
Methods: Parents of children six months to five years old (N = 975) were randomly exposed to one of four high-threat/high-efficacy messages (narrative, statistical, combined, control) and completed a follow-up survey. Differences between message conditions were assessed with one-way ANOVAs, and binary logistic regressions were used to show how constructs predicted intentions.
Results: There were no significant differences in the ANOVA results at p = .05 for EPPM variables or risk EPPM variables. There was a significant difference between message conditions for perceived manipulation (p = 0.026), authority, (p = 0.024), character (p = 0.037), attention (p < .000), and emotion (p < .000). The EPPM model and perceptions of message model (positively), and the risk EPPM model and fear control model (negatively), predicted intentions to vaccinate. Significant predictor variables in each model at p < .05 were severity (aOR = 1.83), response efficacy (aOR = 4.33), risk susceptibility (aOR = 0.53), risk fear (aOR = 0.74), issue derogation (aOR = 0.63), perceived manipulation (aOR = 0.64), character (aOR = 2.00), and personal relevance (aOR = 1.88). In a multivariate model of the significant predictors, only response efficacy significantly predicted intentions to vaccinate (aOR = 3.43). Compared to the control, none of the experimental messages significantly predicted intentions to vaccinate. The narrative and combined conditions significantly predicted intentions to search online (aOR = 2.37), and the combined condition significantly predicted intentions to talk to family/friends (aOR = 2.66).
Conclusions: The EPPM may not be effective in context of a two-way threat. Additional constructs that may be useful in the EPPM model are perceptions of the message and fear control variables. One-shot flu vaccine messages will be unlikely to directly influence vaccination rates; however they may increase information-seeking behavior. The impact of seeking more information on vaccination uptake requires further research. Flu vaccine messages should be presented in combined form. Future studies should focus on strategies to increase perceptions of the effectiveness of the flu vaccine.
Three conceptual constructs, each composed of three categories, that described the different (im)migrant experiences in this study emerged through data analysis. The first of these conceptual constructs was the racialized/ing (im)migrant experience that categorically was divided into systemic exclusions, liminal exclusions, and micro-social contextual exclusions. The second concept that emerged was the passed/ing (im)migrant experience where (im)migrant university students shared that they felt they had a systemic pathway to citizenship and/or that their immigration authorization gave them privilege. This concept was also categorically divided into systemic inclusions, liminal inclusions, and micro-social contextual inclusions. The last concept was the negotiated/ing (im)migrant experience, which described ways that (im)migrant university students negotiated their space/place in the public sphere while attending a large, public university in Arizona. As with the other two concepts, three categories emerged in relation to negotiated/ing (im)migrant experience: systemic negotiations, liminal negotiations, and micro-social contextual negotiations. It is (im)migrant university student experiences that give individuals a better understanding of the complexities that surround immigration. The (im)migrant narratives also highlight that inclusion and exclusion from the public sphere is a complex and dynamic process because all (im)migrant students, including U.S. citizens, experienced moments of inclusion and exclusion from the U.S. public sphere.