Communicating well-being interventions: Experimental evidence on how labelling and the uncertainty of benefits impact the intention to participate

ealth education frequently relies on brief public-facing descriptions of interventions, yet evidence on how specific message features influence engagement remains limited. We test whether public-facing message features—programme labelling (“mindfulness”) and statements regarding the uncertainty of health benefits—shape intentions to join mindfulness-based programmes (MBPs). An experimental design (N=669) manipulated the programme label (mindfulness vs generic well-being intervention) and the manner in which the likelihood of well-being benefits was communicated (exact percentage improvement vs range of potential effects). Participants expressed similar interest in participating in both programmes (p=.318, partial η2=.002). Participant ratings of the likelihood of participating in the programme were not impacted by the use of a range, which indicated the uncertainty of effects (p=.788, partial η2<.001). These findings suggest that the influence of intervention labelling and the uncertainty of well-being benefits may be limited or context-dependent on participant intentions. This study contributes to health education research by experimentally evaluating assumptions about branding and precision in well-being communication, and by indicating that transparent disclosure of uncertainty—at least in numerical form—can be implemented without detectable reductions in stated willingness to engage in well-being interventions.