Pink has long been the color of breast cancer awareness campaigns. Every October, during Breast Cancer Awareness Month, the pink ribbons, banners and advertisements are all intended to raise awareness about the disease that affects so many women around the globe. You are probably one of many who don the pink ribbon in October to show your support for the breast cancer cause.
However, a recent study suggests that the use of the color pink in breast cancer campaigns may not have the desired effect on women. Stefano Puntoni, associate professor of marketing management at the Rotterdam School of Management at Erasmus University, and his colleagues have found that using gender-directed campaigns, such as the color pink to target women, can actually trigger defense mechanisms and have a negative rather than positive effect.
In the study, Puntoni and colleagues conducted ten different experiments to show that "gender priming" - using gender cues - makes women less likely to donate to the breast cancer research and also less likely to believe that they could get breast cancer.
In the first experiment, 37 females were asked to look at a fake breast-cancer ad conveying certain facts about the disease. One group saw an ad that relied heavily on the use of the color pink, used female faces and included phrases directed specifically towards women before providing information about the cancer. The other group saw an ad that included the same exact information, but used more neutral colors and had no photos of women or gender directed phrases.
After showing the ads, the researchers examined women's own personal risk estimates for breast cancer on a scale from one to seven. Women who looked at the pink ad rated their risk of breast cancer as significantly lower than those who looked at the neutral one.
As a control, perceptions for gender-neutral diseases were also assessed. There were no differences for the gender-neutral ads: pink ads for diabetes, kidney failures and heart disease had no effect on female participants' risk perceptions compared with the same ads in neutral colors. This shows that the color pink made women feel less susceptible only to breast cancer, and not to non-gender-specific diseases.
Several variations of the experiment were carried out, with over 350 female participants. Each study yielded similar results that were determined to be statistically significant. In one of the studies, perceptions of another gender-specific disease were examined. In a control group of women shown a neutral ad about ovarian cancer, 77% of the subjects decided to donate to ovarian cancer research when prompted to donate money to a certain cancer. However, in the gender priming group, only 42% of women were willing to donate to ovarian cancer research.
Puntoni believes gender cues trigger strong denial mechanisms. Using pink raises the idea that breast cancer is a female problem - the color connects women to the threats. However, gender cues in advertising don't always trigger defense mechanisms; for instance, the color pink is effective in advertising lipstick. Puntoni also suggests pink may be suitable for raising breast cancer awareness among men because it will not usually set off defense mechanisms.
Other experts say that the findings may have implications for other health warnings, such as those against smoking. Beginning next year, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will require all cigarette packets to have graphic labels or images of damaged smokers' lungs. According to the study above, however, this may actually have a counter-effect. The use of these labels is intended to discourage smoking, but according to brain scans conducted in studies, the more graphic or horrifying the warning, the more people will to want to smoke. Instead of making smokers identify with the possibility of developing lung cancer, these images may trigger a defense mechanism, leaving smokers in denial and more likely to smoke heavily.
These recent findings imply that gender cues can be detrimental to advertising campaigns when attempting to make people identify with something that could harm them. Perhaps both breast cancer campaigns and anti-smoking warnings need to rethink their approach to how they spread their message.
Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The News-Letter.