Protection Motivation Theory and Skin Cancer Risk: The Role of Individual Differences in Responses to Persuasive Appeals

By Ben F. Mcmath, S. Prentice-Dunn. 2005

117 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6d019b8f538d9a531b64514fd00b6f70b7eba5e8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

1. C. Abraham
2. A. Good
3. Susan Michie
4. Benjamin Gardner
5. Martin S. Hagger
6. I. Ajzen

In Sociology and Political Science

1. C. Abraham
2. A. Good

Citations in the corpus

• Appealing to fear: A Meta-Analysis of Fear Appeal Effectiveness and Theories (2015, unknown): “….35 86 I N N Y R PP N SEE S 100 I — Lwin and Malik (2014) 1: With wii .10 199 AI N Y N R PP N SEE L 42 C E 2: Without wii Ϫ.24 199 AI N Y N R PP N SEE L 42 C E McMath and Prentice-Dunn (2005) 1.06 196 I Y Y N R PP N SEH S 74 I E Meijnders et al. (2001a) 1: Weak arguments Ϫ.27 54 AI N Y N O PP N —”
• Measuring defensive responses to threatening messages: a meta-analysis of measures (2007, methodology): “In several cases measures of susceptibility and/or severity were included as manipulation checks (e.g., McKay et al., 2004; McMath & Prentice-Dunn, 2005; Prentice-Dunn, Floyd, & Flournoy, 2001).”