Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparing Mean Scales of the EPPM constructs before and after the intervention within control, GFM and LFM groups

From: Impacts of gain versus loss frame messages about beverages on boy students, an application of extended parallel process model

Group Variable Before
Mean (SD)
After
Mean (SD)
P*
Control Perceived efficacy 19.66 (5.08) 20.29 (4.98) .26
  Perceived response efficacy 10.07 (2.69) 10.40 (2.78) .26
  Perceived Self-efficacy 9.59 (3.36) 9.89 (3.05) .44
  Perceived threat 18.80 (3.14) 18.95 (3.72) .71
  Perceived susceptibility 8.43 (2.55) 8.17 (2.16) .35
  Perceived severity 10.19 (1.94) 10.76 (2.73) .93
  Intention 9.25 (3.80) 9.63 (2.51) .37
  Daily SSBs consumption (glasses) 2.95 (2.54) 2.43 (1.87) .13
Gain frame message Perceived efficacy 19.62 (4.51) 22.43 (4.08)  < .001
  Perceived response efficacy 9.79 (2.56) 11.31 (2.48)  < .001
  Perceived Self-efficacy 9.80 (2.65) 11.12 (2.39)  < .001
  Perceived threat 18.36 (3.06) 19.32 (3.47) .023
  Perceived Susceptibility 7.72 (2.88) 7.57 (2.35) .66
  Perceived severity 10.64 (1.22) 11.74 (2.57) .001
  Intention 9.09 (3.56) 9.00 (3.69) .83
  Daily SSBs consumption (glasses) 2.31 (2.06) 2.12 (2.11) .54
Loss frame message Perceived efficacy 20.24 (4.54) 22.57 (4.78)  < .001
  Perceived response efficacy 10.45 (2.43) 11.60 (2.47)  < .001
  Perceived Self-efficacy 9.84 (3.37) 10.95 (3.26) .021
  Perceived threat 18.01 (2.79) 21.26 (3.67)  < .001
  Perceived Susceptibility 7.85 (2.28) 8.34 (2.12) .07
  Perceived severity 10.19 (1.52) 12.86 (2.69)  < .001
  Intention 8.90 (3.19) 8.05 (3.04) .04
  Daily SSBs consumption (glasses) 3.00 (3.01) 2.38 (1.73) .16
  1. *Paired t test