SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Abstract

The role of counterfactual thinking as an effective antismoking communications strategy is examined. Specifically, this study investigates how various types of counterfactual thoughts, generated in response to a detrimental smoking scenario, impact individuals' affective evaluations of the scenario, as well as their willingness to participate in a smoking-related behavioral test, a lung-capacity test. This is tested in three experiments, which differ in the timing of gathering individuals' willingness to participate in the lung-capacity test. Experiment 1 collected individuals' willingness to participate in the test shortly after the counterfactual task, whereas Experiments 2 and 3 made this assessment 2 and 7 days following the counterfactual task (respectively). The results of all three experiments indicated that although upward counterfactuals had a negative impact on individuals' affective evaluations of the scenario, they had no effect on participants' willingness to schedule a lung- capacity test. Alternatively, additive counterfactuals did have a significant impact on individuals' preparative actions, despite having no influence on their affective evaluations. This effect, however, decreased with time. By demonstrating that counterfactual thinking may significantly influence smoking-related behaviors, this study's findings contribute to and extend prior counterfactual and antismoking research. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.