The present data pertains to a study where participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: (1) video contemplation and (2) control. Specifically, we prompted contemplation of debt-related issues by asking participants to watch a video. This video presented an expert in financial advice discussing why avoiding debt makes that situation worse (i.e., prompting contemplation the cons of avoiding debt) and that solutions/advice are available (i.e., prompting contemplation of the pros of getting help). This study quantifies the effect of watching a video on debt-related issues on the likelihood of viewing (or not) their risk of debt. This lead to our second task-specific hypothesis: Prompting participants to contemplate the cons of avoiding and pros of not avoiding debt-related information via video would decrease the likelihood that they would avoid debt-related information. Despite personal debt being an ever increasing problem within our society the psychological understanding of debt and interventions to the problem remain elusive. The present project provides a novel solution by using insights from those with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, who are known to excessively monitor (eg, "Did I turn the oven off?"), and apply this to those who don’t monitor their finances. The research will examine which cognitive factors explain why debtors fail to adequately monitor their debt. Then examine debtors’ attentional biases with debt-related stimuli and how this relates to how they monitor their finances. This information will be used to modify how debtors interact with debt-related stimuli, and quantify its influence on financial behaviours. Finally, this will be applied to the design of a Manage Your Debt Application System (MYDAS) mobile phone intervention which aims to improve how debtors monitor their debt. This research will have the following implications: (1) Science: By providing an empirical understanding of the thought process of debtors and an intervention to change those thought processes key to debt. (2) Society: By providing new tools to identify problem debtors and interventions (MYDAS) the research will benefit debtors (reduce debt), creditors (repayment) and debt agencies.

Apparatus, Design, and Procedure Qualtrics software (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) was used to collect the data. This study employed the same design, randomization procedure, and dependent measure of Study 1. The primary methodological difference between Studies 1 and 2 was that the former prompted contemplation via questionnaire where we now used a video. We now asked participants to watch a short (32 s) video and consider how the contents of the video applied to them. In this video chief executive of the Citizens Advice, Gullian Guy discussed why avoiding debt makes it worse (i.e., prompting contemplation the cons of avoiding debt) and what solutions/advice are available (i.e., prompting contemplation of the pros of getting help). Specifically, she identified and provided solutions to the three components (i.e., threatens beliefs, negative emotions, undesired behaviors) that Howell and Shepperd (2013) identified as necessary for motivating avoidant behavior: (i) Debt denial/avoidance/shame: avoiding debt makes the problem worse and that being ashamed may contribute to this avoidance, (ii) Debt advice awareness/access: people do not know what debt advice is available or how to access it, and (iii) Timely intervention works best: the earlier people get debt advice the less likely they are to get into even more serious debt. As a result, this video remains analogous to the previous contemplation research as it prompts participants to consider the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral outcomes of avoidance generally (i.e., Howell and Shepperd, 2013) and debt specifically. After participants viewed the video they completed the same dependent measure used in Study 1. Participants in the control condition were not exposed to any intervention prior to the dependent variable.