Evaluating the message or the messenger? Implications for self-validation in persuasion

Does Considering the Consequences of Selective Exposure Help Reduce Selective Exposure Behaviors?

Selective exposure (the tendency to avoid information one disagrees with) is particularly easy to do and leads to problematic outcomes. This study investigated if personally relevant message frames would increase participant engagement and agreement when reading a counterattitudinal message. Participants (N = 180) were randomly assigned into one of three message frames: the idea attack frame asked participants to recall a time their ideas were attacked or summarily dismissed; the unable to defend position frame asked participants to recall a time they were vulnerable due to a lack of knowledge; and an irrelevant-frame control. Participants then read a counterattitudinal message about increasing internet service taxes. Next, participants rated their message agreement, and self-perceived engagement level. Although the messages did not influence agreement, the unable to defend position and the idea attack frames influenced participants to be more engaged with the message. This suggests that people are motivated to engage more with a counterattitudinal message when they are reminded of a time in which they were vulnerable due to a lack of knowledge or when others were summarily dismissive of their own ideas. Overall, both frames showed some promise and should be explored further.

Sequential information processing in persuasion

We present a theory of sequential information processing in persuasion (SIP). It extends assumptions of the heuristic-systematic model, in particular the idea that information encountered early in a persuasion situation may affect the processing of subsequent information. SIP also builds on the abstraction from content-related dichotomies in accord with the parametric unimodel of social judgment. SIP features one constitutional axiom and three main postulates: (A) Persuasion is the sequential processing of information that is relevant to judgment formation. (1) Inferences drawn from initial information may bias the processing of subsequent information if they are either activated rules or valence expectations that are relevant to the subsequent information. (2) Inferences drawn from initial information are resistant to change. Thus, the interpretation of subsequent information is assimilated to inferences drawn from the initial information. Or, if assimilation is impossible, contrast effects occur. (3) The overall effect of a persuasion attempt corresponds to the recipient’s judgment at the moment the processing of information is terminated. We illustrate how our predictions for assimilation and contrast effects may be tested by presenting results from an experiment (N = 216) in which we presented exactly the same arguments but varied the processing sequence. We discuss theoretical and applied implications of sequence effects for persuasion phenomena, as well as challenges for further research developing and testing the theory.

Meta-Cognition Predicts Attitude Depolarization and Intentions to Engage With the Opposition Following Pro-Attitudinal Advocacy

Abstract. Across two studies we show that attitudes can paradoxically depolarize when people advocate for their own opinions. In Study 1 ( n = 276), we show that attitude depolarization is driven by how much meta-cognitive confidence people place in their advocacy attempt, such that those who experience low confidence during advocacy are more likely to depolarize. In Study 2 ( n = 495), we show that meta-cognitive confidence predicts communicative intentions, such as intentions to engage with those holding dissimilar views. In Study 2, we also show that the confidence–polarization and confidence–engagement links are unaffected by audience attitudes, but are moderated by Need-for-Cognition. The findings suggest that confidence and level of elaboration may predict some self-persuasive effects of pro-attitudinal advocacy.

Influences of Position Justification on Perceived Bias: Immediate Effects and Carryover Across Persuasive Messages

The current research examined how people infer whether novel sources are biased based on their ability to justify their position. Across nine studies, when sources provided weak versus strong arguments, message recipients perceived the source as more biased. This effect held controlling for other possible inferences, such as lack of expertise or untrustworthiness. This research also examined whether perceived source bias on one message can carry over to ambiguously related future persuasive messages. Studies 6 to 8 demonstrated that perceivers use both the perceived bias from an initial message and the argument quality of the second message to determine a source's bias on the new topic. Finally, perceived bias carried over from an initial message can influence persuasion on a second topic (Study 9). Ultimately, the present work provides insight into factors that affect perceived bias and the dynamic consequences of those perceptions.

Lay concepts of source likeability, trustworthiness, expertise, and power: A prototype analysis

Previous research on persuasion has used researcher-generated exemplars to manipulate source characteristics such as likeability, trustworthiness, expertise, or power. This approach has been fruitful, but it relies to some degree on an overlap between researcher understanding of these variables and lay understanding of these variables. Additionally, these exemplar manipulations may have unintentionally affected multiple characteristics and may be limited to certain topics or time periods. In the current work, we sought to provide persuasion researchers with a methodological tool to increase construct and potentially external validity by conducting a prototype analysis of the four traditional source characteristics: likeability, trustworthiness, expertise, and power. This bottom-up approach provided insight into the ways in which recipients perceive sources and allowed us to examine relations between the characteristics. Moving forward, a bottom-up understanding of source characteristics will allow researchers to more effectively develop manipulations that might transcend time and topic as well as isolate their effects to the intended source characteristic.

Why moral advocacy leads to polarization and proselytization: The role of self-persuasion

This research is the first to examine the effects of moral versus practical pro-attitudinal advocacy in the context of self-persuasion. We validate a novel advocacy paradigm aimed at uncovering why moral advocacy leads to polarization and proselytization. We investigate four distinct possibilities: (1) expression of moral foundational values (harm, fairness, loyalty, authority, purity), (2) reliance on moral systems (deontology and consequentialism), (3) expression of moral outrage, (4) increased confidence in one’s advocacy attempt. In Study 1 (N = 255) we find differences between moral and practical advocacy on the five moral foundations, deontology, and moral outrage. In Study 2 (N = 218) we replicate these differences, but find that only the expression of moral foundations is consequential in predicting attitude polarization. In Study 3 (N = 115) we replicate the effect of moral foundations on proselytization. Our findings suggest that practical compared to moral advocacy may attenuate polarization and proselytization. This carries implications for how advocacy can be re-framed in ways which minimize social conflict.

Positive Stereotype Validation: The Bolstering Effects of Activating Positive Stereotypes After Intellectual Performance

Past research has found that members of stigmatized groups may feel more certain of poor performance when negative stereotypes are made accessible after finishing a task (i.e., stereotype validation). However, no research to date has identified the potential effects of activating positive stereotypes after performance. Based on past research and theory, we hypothesized that such positive stereotype validation may serve to bolster-rather than hinder-important beliefs related to one's abilities and future task performance. Across three studies, the accessibility of positive group stereotypes was manipulated after participants completed an initial test on a topic. Consistent with predictions, the activation of positive, self-relevant stereotypes after the initial test was found to increase how certain participants were that they performed well on it. Furthermore, these increases in evaluative certainty predicted more positive ability beliefs, higher expectations for future performance, and better performance on a follow-up test that participants completed.

Attitudes and Attitude Change

This review covers research on attitudes and attitude change published between 2010 and 2017. We characterize this period as one of significant progress toward an understanding of how attitudes form and change in three critical contexts. The first context is the person, as attitudes change in connection to values, general goals, language, emotions, and human development. The second context is social relationships, which link attitude change to the communicator of persuasive messages, social media, and culture. The third context is sociohistorical and highlights the influence of unique events, including sociopolitical, economic, and climatic occurrences. In conclusion, many important recent findings reflect the fact that holism, with a focus on situating attitudes within their personal, social, and historical contexts, has become the zeitgeist of attitude research during this period.