Search

Can perceived message effectiveness (PE) be considered a cause of actual effectiveness (AE)? If so, PE judgments can be used as valid indicators of the persuasiveness of messages in the preimplementation phase of campaigns. In addition, manipulating PE may be a viable persuasive strategy. But, if the reverse causal sequence obtains (AE→PE), then the strategy would be ineffective and the utility of PE in formative campaign research meaningless. Structural equation analysis of 2 cross-sectional data sets (N= 202 and 204) concerned with fear appeals favored the PE→AE hypothesis. Two additional studies (N= 140 and 237), which employed a total of 13 public service announcements (PSAs), returned the same result. A fifth experimental study (N= 119) which utilized 2 PSAs provided further indication that PE→AE but not the reverse. At least under the conditions that characterize formative research, PE may be viewed as a causal antecedent of AE.

Participants viewed eight PSAs, providing data on their cognitive and emotional responses to each, as well as judgments of the perceived effectiveness of the messages. They also responded to Carver and White’s (1994) BIS/BAS scales designed to measure individual differences in the behavioral inhibition and behavioral activation systems. Consistent with dualsystems theories of affect, the BIS scales predicted arousal of negative emotions, while BAS was associated with the elicitation of positive emotions. However, when predicting perceived message effectiveness, the positive affects showed variation in the sign and magnitude of the coefficients, as did the negative affects. This latter finding supports a discrete-emotions perspective. Knowledge that the two affect structures are appropriate to different conceptual domains (i.e., elicitation vs. effect) should enable researchers to formulate more precise questions regarding the role of affect in persuasion.

Empirical investigations of metaphor's persuasive effects have produced mixed results. In an effort to integrate the literature, we present a review and meta-analytic summary of existing studies. Six explanations for the potential suasory advantage of metaphor over literal language were reviewed: (a) pleasure or relief, (b) communicator credibility, (c) reduced counterarguments, (d) resource-matching, (e) stimulated elaboration, and (f) superior organization. Next, a meta-analysis was conducted and the impact of seven moderator variables was tested. The overall effect for the metaphor-literal comparison for attitude change was r = .07, which supported the claim that metaphors enhance persuasion. The effect rose to r = .42 under optimal conditions, when a single, nonextended metaphor was novel, had a familiar target, and was used early in a message. Metaphor appeared to exert a small effect on perceptions of source dynamism (r = .06), but showed no demonstrable impact on competence (r =−.01) or character (r =−.02). Of the six theories considered, the superior organization explanation of metaphor's persuasive impact was most supported by the results.

Relational framing theory asserts that dominance-submission and affiliation-disaffiliation tend to displace each other as frames for processing social interaction; involvement is argued to be a content-free intensifier variable that contributes to judgments of dominance or affiliation as a function of the salient relational frame. The present study seeks to replicate and extend previous tests of these claims by evaluating three hypotheses: (a) The differential salience of dominance-submission and affiliation-disaffiliation frames as a function of the type of social episode is robust across same-sex and cross-sex friendship dyads; (b) the magnitude of the association between involvement and dominance and affiliation varies as a function of frame salience instantiated by the type of episode; and (c) attachment anxiety is positively correlated with the perceived relevance of both dominance-submission and affiliation-disaffiliation to social episodes. Results are consistent with all three of the hypotheses, but relational framing is unrelated to subscales operationalizing the comfort with closeness dimension of attachment orientation.

A study was conducted to determine the effects of vocal cues on judgments of dominance in an interpersonal influence context. Physical measures of human vocal cues and participant ratings of dominance were obtained from videotapes of actors delivering short influence messages. After controlling for linguistic and visual content of messages, results indicated that mean amplitude and amplitude standard deviation were positively associated wit dominance judgments, whereas speech rate was negatively associated with dominance judgments. An unexpected interaction revealed that mean fundamental frequency (F 0 ) was positively associated with dominance judgments for male speakers but not significantly associated with dominance judgments for female speakers. F 0 standard deviation was not significantly associated with dominance judgments. Results support the conclusion that dominance judgments are inferred from multiple sources of information and that some vocal markers of dominance are more influential than others

We contend that communication episodes tend to focus interactants’attention on one or the other of two relational judgments: dominance or affiliation. Further, when one judgment is relatively more salient, individuals will use the salient judgment as the basis for inferring other aspects of the relationship. To test that notion, a judgment study was conducted in which participants viewed a set of influence messages that varied in degree of dominance and explicitness. The influence context was chosen because it naturally highlighted dominance. After viewing the messages, participants provided ratings of dominance, explicitness, and two aspects of affiliation: liking and involvement. When the resulting data were submitted to a structural equation analysis, it was found that judgments of liking depended on judgments of explicitness and dominance. Judgments of involvement depended on judgments of liking and dominance. Both findings support the claim that one relational judgment may provide the basis for another.

In this study, we examined the linkages between two important features of influence messages, explicitness and dominance, and emotional response. Two positions were considered. From politeness theory, we deduced that judgments of the politeness of the message would mediate the effects of message form on emotional response. Consideration of cognitive appraisal theories suggested judgments of goal blockage and legitimacy would assume the role of mediators. Participants took part in two role-plays in which they adopted the role of the influence target and listened to an audiotape of a request to change their behavior. Self-report and physiological data were gathered as indicators of their emotional responses to the influence messages. The findings indicated some support for both politeness and appraisal theories, but also suggested that neither one constituted a thorough explanation of the effects of influence messages on emotions.

The purpose of this investigation was to test two aspects of the self-perception theory account of the foot-in-the-door (FITD) phenomenon. The first aspect tested was the claim that the greater the quantity of behavior associated with the initial request, the greater the likelihood of compliance with the later request. Quantity of behavior was operation-alized as (a) request size and (b) active versus passive execution, that is, whether the target person actually carried out the request or simply agreed to do so. The second aspect tested was the claim that changes in self-perception mediate the FITD effect. A field experiment was conducted to address these concerns. The results showed that a self-inference explanation is viable; however, a strict self-perception account fails because neither request size nor execution showed any correspondence to attitudinal measures or to compliance with the second request. Implications for a self-inference explanation are discussed.

Expectancy theory suggests that people develop normative expectations about appropriateness of communication behavior that differ for males and females. Support was found for an interaction hypothesis predicting that males would be expected to use more verbally aggressive persuasive message strategies and would negatively violate expectations and be less persuasive when they deviated from such strategies. Moreover. females are expected to be less verbally aggressive and use more prosocial message strategies and are penalized for deviations from such an expected strategy. Manipulvltion checks indicated that people have clear differences in expected strategy use by males and females and that neither the psychological sex role nor biological sex of receivers alters ihose expectations. Results are discussed in terms of similarity to prior language research, as an extension of expectancy theory and as added knowledge about the effects of specific compliance-gaining message strategies.

Meta-analysis of the foot-in-the-door (FITD) and door-in-the-face (DITF) literatures showed both effects to be small (r = .17, .15 respectively), even under optimal conditions. Both require aprosocial topic in order to work. The amount of time between the first and second requests plays a different role in the operation of each of the two strategies. DITF was effective only when the delay between requests was brief. Effectiveness of FITD was unrelated to delay, but did depend on whether or not an incentive was provided with the first request. The positive relationship between effort and FITD predicted by self-perception theory was not found. Self-perception theory and reciprocal concessions theory, the theoretical perspectives usually applied to FITD and DITF respectively are examined in light of the findings and it is concluded that both are flawed seriously. Directions for future research are suggested.

This study focuses on those features of organizations and individuals that are associated with the development of romantic relationships among employees. Likelihood of romantic involvement was found to be negatively related to formalization and curvilinearly related to organizational size. Neither participativeness nor climate were associated with organizational romance. In addition, the data showed that women who were younger, newer, and of lower rank were most likely to enter into a relationship. Education was positively related to likelihood of romance for males, but not for females.