Who is a credible source of preventive advice? An experimental vignette study of general public attitudes towards role expansion in health and social care

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the general public’s source credibility attitudes towards health and social care professionals when giving advice associated with their ‘traditional role’ versus an ‘expanded health behaviour change’ role, to facilitate the implementation of the health behaviour change agenda. Design: A 3x3 experimental between-subjects vignette questionnaire study with nine scenarios in which a general practitioner (GP), health visitor, or firefighter offered advice on either stopping smoking, preventing cot death, or fire safety. Combinations were either congruent with a traditional role (e.g., health visitor and cot death) or an expanded role (e.g., firefighter and stopping smoking). Methods: Adults were recruited from metropolitan locations in northern England. Participants were randomized to one scenario and complete a validated 18-item source credibility questionnaire. Factor analysis explored source credibility components; ratings for traditional and expanded role scenarios were compared using Mann–Whitney tests. Results: 369 participants completed the questionnaire (49.3% women, 64% White British, age range: 16–83). Factor analysis confirmed three source credibility dimensions: competence, caring, and trustworthiness. Ratings were generally high across professions and scenarios; participants rated professionals as significantly more ‘competent’ where scenarios related to their traditional roles than expanded roles (U 9778.5, p