"Think" versus "Feel" framing effects in persuasion

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 443-454

  Mayer, Nicole D ^a   Tormala, Zakary L ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Affect; Cognition; Fluency; Framing; Matching; Persuasion

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMOTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; THINKING;

EMOTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; THINKING;

EID: 77950316472     PISSN: 01461672     EISSN: 15527433     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146167210362981     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Argo, J.J., Zhu, R.J., & Dahl, D.W. (2008). Fact or fiction: An investigation of empathy differences in response to emotional melodramatic entertainment. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 614-623.
2. Bornstein, R.F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289.
3. Briñol, P., Petty, R.E., & Tormala, Z.L. (2006). The malleable meaning of subjective ease. Psychological Science, 17, 200-206.
4. Brody, L.R., & Hall, J.A. (2000). Gender, emotion, and expression. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions: Part IV. Social/personality issues (pp. 325-414). New York: Guilford.
5. Bullis, C., & Horn, C. (1995). Get a little closer: Further examination of nonverbal comforting strategies. Communication Reports, 18, 10-17.
6. Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.E., Feinstein, J.A., & Jarvis, W.B.G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197-253.
7. Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.E., & Kao, C.F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307.
8. Cesario, J., & Higgins, E.T. (2008). Making message recipients feel right: How nonverbal cues can increase persuasion. Psychological Science, 19, 415-420.
9. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G., & Aiken, L.S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Crites, S.L., Fabrigar, L.R., & Petty, R.E. (1994). Measuring the affective and cognitive properties of attitudes: Conceptual and methodological issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 619-634.
11. Cross, S.E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Selfconstruals and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5-37.
12. DeBono, K.G., & Packer, M. (1991). The effects of advertising appeal on perceptions of product quality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 194-200.
13. Drolet, A., & Aaker, J. (2002). Off-target? Changing cognitive-based attitudes. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12, 59-68.
14. Eagly, A.H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408-423.
15. Edwards, K. (1990). The interplay of affect and cognition in attitude formation and change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 202-216.
16. Fabrigar, L.R., & Petty, R.E. (1999). The role of the affective and cognitive bases of attitudes in susceptibility to affectively and cognitively based persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 363-381.
17. Fischer, A.H., & Manstead, A.S.R. (2000). The relation between gender and emotion in different cultures. In A. H. Fischer (Ed.), Gender and emotion: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 71-94). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18. Fisher, R.J., & Dubé, L. (2005). Gender differences in response to emotional advertising: A social desirability perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 850-858.
19. Fitzsimons, G.M., Chartrand, T.L., & Fitzsimons, G.J. (2008). Automatic effects of brand exposure on motivated behavior: How Apple makes you think different. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 21-35.
20. Gross, J.J., & John, O.P. (1998). Mapping the domain of expressivity: Multimethod evidence for a hierarchical model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 170-191.
21. Haddock, G., Maio, G.R., Arnold, K., & Huskinson, T. (2008). Should persuasion be affective or cognitive? The moderating effects of need for affect and need for cognition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 769-778.
22. Hall, J.A., & Schmid Mast, M. (2008). Are women always more interpersonally sensitive than men? Impact of goals and content domain. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 144-155.
23. Lee, A.Y., & Aaker, J.L. (2004). Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 205-218.
24. Lee, A.Y., & Labroo, A.A. (2004). The effect of conceptual and perceptual fluency on brand evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 41, 151-165.
25. Mackie, D.M., Worth, L.T., & Asuncion, A.G. (1990). Processing of persuasive in-group messages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 812-822.
26. Maio, G.R., & Esses, V.M. (2001). The need for affect: Individual differences in the motivation to approach or avoid emotions. Journal of Personality, 69, 583-615.
27. Maio, G.R., & Haddock, G. (2007). Attitude change. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: A handbook of basic principles (pp. 565-586). New York: Guilford.
28. Millar, M.G., & Millar, K.U. (1990). Attitude change as a function of attitude type and argument type. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 217-228.
29. Muller, D., Judd, C.M., & Yzerbyt, V.Y. (2005). When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 852-863.
30. Petty, R.E., Briñol, P., & Tormala, Z.L. (2002). Thought confidence as a determinant of persuasion: The self-validation hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 722-741.
31. Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915-1926.
32. Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York / Berlin: Springer/ Verlag.
33. Petty, R.E., & Wegener, D.T. (1998). Matching versus mismatching attitude functions: Implications for scrutiny of persuasive messages. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 227-240.
34. Preacher, K.J., Rucker, D.D., & Hayes, A.F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185-227.
35. Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is beauty in the perceiver's processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 364-382.
36. Rothman, A.J., Martino, S.C., Bedell, B.T., Detweiler, J.B., & Salovey, P. (1999). The systematic influence of gain- and loss-framed messages on interest in and use of different types of health behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1355-1369.
37. Schwarz, N. (2004). Metacognitive experiences in consumer judgment and decision making. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 332-348.
38. See, Y.H.M., Petty, R.E., & Fabrigar, L.R. (2008). Affective and cognitive meta-bases of attitudes: Unique effects on information interest and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 938-955.
39. Sherman, J.W., Lee, A.Y., Bessenoff, G.R., & Frost, L.A. (1998). Stereotype efficiency reconsidered: Encoding flexibility under cognitive load. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 589-606.
40. Shrout, P.E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445.
41. Tormala, Z.L., Rucker, D.D., & Seger, C.R. (2008). When increased confidence yields increased thought: A confidence-matching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 141-147.
42. Unkelbach, C. (2006). The learned interpretation of cognitive fluency. Psychological Science, 17, 339-345.
43. Updegraff, J.A., Sherman, D.K., Luyster, F.S., & Mann, T.L. (2007). The effects of message quality and congruency on perceptions of tailored health communications. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 249-257.
44. Wheeler, S.C., DeMarree, K.G., & Petty, R.E. (2008). A match made in the laboratory: Persuasion and matches to primed traits and stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1035-1047.
45. Wheeler, S.C., Petty, R.E., & Bizer, G.Y. (2005). Self-schema matching and attitude change: Situational and dispositional determinants of message elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 787-797.
46. Whittlesea, B.W.A. (1993). Illusions of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1235-1253.
47. Winkielman, P., & Cacioppo, J.T. (2001). Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 989-1000.