Persuasive Oral Hygiene Communications in Uruguay and Spain LA COMMUNICATIONS D'HYGIENE BUCCO-DENTAIRE PERSUASIVES EN URUGUAY ET L'ESPAGNE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This experimental intervention study examined the extent to which the persuasive effects of positively and negatively framed messages designed to promote oral hygiene behavior, were moderated by individual differences. Firstly, two measure of regulatory focus (i.e., promotion and prevention focus) were tested as moderators. Secondly, two contextual individual differences (i.e, level of education and country) were tested as moderators. One hundred and fifty five dental patients who visited a dental faculty in Montevideo (Uruguay) and a dental faculty in Valencia (Spain) participated in this study. They were at each faculty randomly assigned to the positive or the negative frame condition and completed a multiple culturally adapted questionnaire. The results showed that regulatory focus and level of education moderated the persuasive effects of both message frames, but that the direction of the moderation depended on country. This study illustrates that message framing effects in a naturalistic setting, just before the examination or treatment started, can have differential effects depending on the individual's regulatory focus, education level and the country in which it is applied. Although not all results patterns could be explained satisfactorily, the patterns strongly suggest that messages tailored to individual differences may be more effective than a so called 'one-size fits all' approach. Key words: Regulatory focus; Message framing; Persuasive communication; Oral hygiene; Contextual differences Resume: Cette intervention experimentale a examine la mesure a lequel les effets persuasifs positif et negatifs encadres des messages concus pour promouvoir le comportement d'hygiene bucco-dentaire, ont ete modere par des differences individuelles. Premierement, deux mesure de centre reglementaire (c'est-a-dire, la promotion et le centre de prevention) a ete evaluee comme des moderateurs. Deuxiemement, deux differentes individuelles contextuelles (soit, le niveau d'education et le pays) ont ete evaluees comme des moderateurs. Cent cinquante-cinq patients dentaires qui ont visite une faculte dentaire a Montevideo (l'Uruguay) et une faculte dentaire a Valence (l'Espagne) ont participe a cette etude.Dans chaque faculte leur ont ete assignee aleatoirement au positif ou negatif de la condition de cadre et ont complete un questionnaire de culture multiple adapte. Les resultats ont montre que le centre reglementaire et le niveau d'education ont modere les effets persuasifs des messages des cadres, mais que la direction de la moderation depend du pays. Cette etude illustre ce message en encadrant des effets dans un cadre naturaliste, juste avant l'examen ou le traitement commence, peut avoir des effets differentiels selon le centre reglementaire de l'individu, le niveau d'education et le pays dans lequel il est applique. Bien que ce n'est pas tous les resultats de modeles peuvent etre expliques d'une maniere satisfaisante, les modeles suggerent fortement que les messages faconnes aux differences individuelles puissent etre plus efficaces qu'une approche appele ' une taille convient a tout '. Mots-cles: Centre reglementaire; Cadrage de message; Communication persuasive; Hygiene bucco-dentaire; Differences contextuelles INTRODUCTION Although adequate daily home oral care and regular visits to a dental hygienist or dentist are the best guarantee for maintaining oral health, many people fail to adequately take care of their teeth (Syrjala, Knuuttila, and Syrjala, 1992a, b): Non-compliance with oral self-care recommendations is a major problem in preventive dentistry (Sniehotta, Araujo Soares, and Dombrowski, 2007). One of the first steps in the promotion of oral health is the use of oral health messages aiming to persuade individuals to change their unhealthy oral habits or their inadequate oral hygiene behavior. Persuasive messages mostly include outcomes of adequate oral self-care, and overall, these outcomes can be presented in two distinct ways. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".