The effects of message features: Content, structure, and style

The SAGE Handbook of Persuasion: Developments in Theory and Practice

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 20-35

  Shen, Lijiang ^a   Bigsby, Elisabeth ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84949774138     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4135/9781452218410.n2     Document Type: Chapter

References (88)

1. Allen, M. (1991). Meta-analysis comparing the persuasiveness of one-sided and two-sided messages. Western Journal of Communication, 55, 390-404.
2. Allen, M. (1998). Comparing the persuasive effectiveness of one- and two-sided messages. In M. Allen & R. W. Preiss (eds.), Persuasion: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 87-98). Cresskill, MJ: Hampton Press.
3. Allen, M., & Preiss, R. W. (1997). Comparing the persuasiveness of narrative and statistical evidence using meta-analysis. Communication Research Reports, 4, 125-131.
4. Areni, C. S., & Sparks, J. R. (2005). Language power and persuasion. Psychology & Marketing, 22, 507-525. doi:10.1002/mar.20071 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mar.20071
5. Aristotle. (1952). Poetics. (I. Bywater, Trans.). In W. D. Ross (ed.), The works of Aristotle: Rhetorica, de rhetorica ad Alexandrum, poetica. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
6. Bowers, J. W., & Osborn, M. M. (1966). Attitudinal effects of selected types of concluding metaphors in persuasive speeches. Speech Monographs, 33, 147-155. doi:10.1080/03637756609375490 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637756609375490
7. Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York, NY: Academic Press.
8. Brehm, S. S., & Brehm, J. W. (1981). Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control. New York, NY: Academic Press.
9. Burleson, B. R. (1992). Taking communication seriously. Communication Monographs, 59, 79-86. doi:10.1080/03637759209376250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637759209376250
10. Burrell, N. A., & Koper, R. J. (1998). The efficacy of powerful/powerless language on attitude and source credibility. In M. Allen & R. W. Preiss (eds.), Persuasion: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 203-215). Cresskill, MJ: Hampton Press.
11. Callister, M. A., & Stern, L. A. (2007). The role of visual hyperbole in advertising effectiveness. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 29, 1-14. doi:10.1080/10641734.2007.10505212 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10641734.2007.10505212
12. Colston, H. L., & Keller, S. B. (1998). You'll never believe this: Irony and hyperbole in expressing surprise. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 499-513. doi:10.1023/A:1023229304509 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1023229304509
13. Cruz, M. (1998). Explicit and implicit conclusions in persuasive messages. In M. Allen, & R. W. Preiss (eds.), Persuasion: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 217-230). Cresskill, MJ: Hampton Press.
14. Das, E., de Wit, J., & Stroebe, W. (2003). Fear appeals motivates acceptance of action recommendations: Evidence for a positive bias in the processing of persuasive messages. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 650-664. doi:10.1177/0146167203029005009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029005009
15. Dillard, J.P., & Pfau, M. (2002). Introduction. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. ix-xx). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781412976046 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412976046
16. Eisend, M. (2006). Two-sided advertising: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 23, 187-198. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.11.001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2005.11.001
17. Fine, B. (1957). Conclusion-drawing, communicator credibility, and anxiety as factors in opinion change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 54, 369-374.
18. Geiger, S., & Reeves, B. (1993). The effects of scene changes and semantic relatedness on attention to television. Communication Research, 20, 155-175. doi:10.1177/009365093020002001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365093020002001
19. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0702_3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0702_3
20. Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199-241). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21. Gilkinson, H., Paulson, S. F., & Sikkink, D. E. (1954). Effects of order and authority in an argumentative speech. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 40, 183-192. doi:10.1080/00335635409381969 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00335635409381969
22. Gulley, H. E., & Berlo, D. K. (1956). Effect of intercellular and intracellular speech structure on attitude change and learning. Speech Monographs, 23, 288-297. doi:10.1080/03637755609375186 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637755609375186
23. Hale, J. L., Lemieux, R., & Mongeau, P. A. (1995). Cognitive processing of fear-arousing message content. Communication Research, 22, 459-474. doi:10.1177/009365095022004004 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365095022004004
24. Hornikx, J. (2005). A review of experimental research on the relative persuasiveness of anecdotal, statistical, causal, and expert evidence. Studies in Communication Sciences, 5, 205-216.
25. Hosman, L. A. (2002). Language and persuasion. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (eds.). The handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 371-390). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26. Hosman, L. A., & Siltanen, S. A. (2006). Powerful and powerless language forms: Their consequences for impression formation, attributions of control of self and control of others, cognitive responses, and message memory. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 25, 33-46. doi:10.1177/0261927X05284477 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261927X05284477
27. Hovland, C., & Mandell, V. (1952). An experimental comparison of conclusion-drawing by the communicator and by the audience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 581-588.
28. Hullett, C. R. (2005). The impact of mood on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 32, 423-442. doi:10.1177/0093650205277317 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650205277317
29. Kamalski, J., Lentz, L., Sanders, T., & Zwaan, R. A. (2008). The forewarning effect of coherence markers in persuasive discourse: Evidence from persuasion and processing. Discourse Processes, 45, 545-579. doi:10.1080/01638530802069983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01638530802069983
30. Kardes, F. (1988). Spontaneous inference processes in advertising: The effects of conclusion omission and involvement on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 225-233. doi:10.1086/209159 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/209159
31. Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman's place. New York, NY: Harper and Row. doi:10.1017/S0047404500000051 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500000051
32. Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33. Lang, A. (2000). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. Journal of Communication, 50, 46-70. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02833.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02833.x
34. Latimer, A. E., Salovey, P., & Rothman, A. J. (2007). The effectiveness of gain-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behavior: Is all hope lost? Journal of Health Communication, 12, 645-649. doi:10.1080/10810730701619695 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10810730701619695
35. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
36. Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science; selected theoretical papers (D. Cartwright, Ed., pp. 188-237). New York, NY: Harper and Row.
37. Lowrey, T. M., & Shrum, L. J. (2007). Phonetic symbolism and brand name preference. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 406-414. doi:10.1086/518530 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/518530
38. MacCormac, E. (1985). A cognitive theory of metaphor. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Maheswaran, D., & Meyers-Levy, J. (1990). The influence of message framing and issue involvement. Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 361-367. doi:10.2307/3172593 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3172593
40. Mann, T., Sherman, D., & Updegraff, J. (2004). Dispositional motivations and message framing: A test of the congruency hypothesis in college students. Health Psychology, 23, 330-334. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.23.3.330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.23.3.330
41. McGuire, W. J. (1968). Personality and attitude change: An information processing theory. In A. G. Greenwald, T. C. Brock, and T. M. Ostrom (eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 171-196). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
42. McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (eds.), Handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 233-346). New York, NY: Random House.
43. McGuire, W. J. (1989). Theoretical foundations of campaigns. In R. E. Rice & C. K. Atkin (eds.), Public communication campaigns (2nd ed., pp. 43-65). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781452233260 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452233260
44. McQuarrie, E. F., & Mick, D. G. (1999). Visual rhetoric in advertising: Text-interpretive, experimental, and reader-response analyses. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 37-54. doi:10.1086/209549 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/209549
45. Millar, M. G. & Millar, K. (2000). Promoting safe driving behavior: The influence of message framing and issue involvement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 853-866. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02827.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02827.x
46. Miller, G. R., & Burgoon, M. (1978). Persuasion research: Review and commentary. In B. D. Ruben (ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 2, pp. 29-47). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
47. Mio, J. S. (1996). Metaphor, politics, and persuasion. In J. S. Mio & A. N. Katz (eds.), Metaphor: Implications and applications (pp. 127-146). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
48. Morgan, S. E., Palmgreen, P., Stephenson, M. T., Hoyle, R. H., & Lorch, E. P. (2003). Associations between message features and subjective evaluations of the sensation value of antidrug public service announcements. Journal of Communication, 53, 512-526. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02605.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2003.tb02605.x
49. Nabi, R. L. (2003). Exploring the framing effects of emotion: Do discrete emotions differentially influence information accessibility, information seeking, and policy preference? Communication Research, 30, 224-247. doi:10.1177/0093650202250881 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650202250881
50. O'Barr, W. (1982). Linguistic evidence: Language, power, and strategy in the courtroom. New York, NY: Academic Press. doi:10.3758/BF03213829 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03213829
51. O'Keefe, D. J. (1997). Standpoint explicitness and persuasive effect: A meta-analytic review of the effects of varying conclusion articulation in persuasive messages. Argumentation and Advocacy, 34, 1-12.
52. O'Keefe, D. J. (1999). How to handle opposing arguments in persuasive messages: A meta-analytic review of effects of one-sided and two-sided messages. In M. E. Roloff (ed.), Communication yearbook 22 (pp. 209-249). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
53. O'Keefe, D. J. (2002). Persuasion: Theory and research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54. O'Keefe, D. J. (2003). Message properties, mediating states, and manipulation checks: Claims, evidence, and data analysis in experimental persuasive message effects research. Communication Theory, 13, 251-274. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2003.tb00292.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2003.tb00292.x
55. O'Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2006). The advantages of compliance or the disadvantages of noncompliance? A meta-analytic review of the relative persuasive effectiveness of gain-framed and lossframed messages. In C. S. Beck (ed.), Communication yearbook 30 (pp. 1-44). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
56. O'Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2007). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Health Communication, 12, 623-644. doi:10.1080/10810730701615198 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10810730701615198
57. O'Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2008). Do loss-framed persuasive messages engender greater message processing than do gain-framed messages? A meta-analytic view. Communication Studies, 59, 51-67. doi:10.1080/10510970701849388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10510970701849388
58. O'Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2009). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease detection behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Communication, 59, 296-316. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01417.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01417.x
59. Ortony, A. (1979). Beyond literal similarity. Psychological Review, 86, 161-180. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.86.3.161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.86.3.161
60. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). New York, NY: Academic Press.
61. Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 323-390). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
62. Reinard, J. C. (1998). The persuasive effects of testimonial assertion evidence. In M. Allen, & R. W. Preiss (eds.), Persuasion: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 69-86). Cresskill, MJ: Hampton Press.
63. Reinhart, A. M., Marshall, H. M., Feeley, T. H., & Tutzauer, F. (2007). The persuasive effects of message framing on organ donation: The mediating role of psychological reactance. Communication Monographs, 74, 229-255. doi:10.1080/03637750701397098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637750701397098
64. Reynolds, R. A., & Reynolds, J. L. (2002). Evidence. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (eds.). The handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 427-444). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
65. Rothman, A. J., Bartels, R. D., Wlaschin, J., & Salovey, P. (2006). The strategic use of gain- and lossframed messages to promote healthy behavior: How theory can inform practice. Journal of Communication, 56, S202-S220.
66. Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 3-19. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3
67. Rothman, A. J., Salovey, P., Antone, C., Keough, K., & Martin, C. D. (1993). The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 408-433. doi:10.1006/jesp.1993.1019 http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1993.1019
68. Rothman, A. J., & Updegraff, J. A. (2010). Specifying when and how gain- and loss-framed messages motivate healthy behavior: An integrated approach. In G. Keren (ed.), Perspectives on framing (pp. 257-277). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
69. Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296-320. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2
70. Salovey, P., Schneider, T. R., & Apanovitch, A. M. (2002). Message framing in the prevention and early detection of illness. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau, (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 391-406). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781412976046 http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412976046
71. Sanders, T., & Spooren, W. (2007). Discourse and text structure. In H. Cuyckens & D. Geeraerts (eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 1414-1446). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
72. Sawyer, A., & Howard, D. (1991). Effects of omitting conclusions in advertisement to involved and uninvolved audiences. Journal of Marketing Research, 28, 467-474. doi:10.2307/3172786 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3172786
73. Schneider, T. R., Salovey, P., Apanovitch, A. M., Pizarro, J., McCarthy, D., Zullo, J. & Rothman, A. (2001). The effect of message framing and ethnic targeting on mammography use among low-income women. Health Psychology, 20, 256-266. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.20.4.256 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.20.4.256
74. Shen, L., & Dillard, J. P. (2007). The influence of BIS/BAS and message framing on the processing of persuasive health messages. Communication Research, 34, 433-467. doi:10.1177/0093650207302787 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650207302787
75. Shen, L., & Dillard J. P. (2009). Message frames interact with motivational systems to determine depth of message processing. Health Communication, 24, 504-514. doi:10.1080/10410230903104897 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10410230903104897
76. Sikkink, D. (1956). An experimental study of the effects on the listener of anti-climax order and authority in an argumentative speech. Southern Speech Journal, 22, 73-78. doi:10.1080/10417945609371433 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10417945609371433
77. Slater, M. D., Karan, D. N., Rouner, D., & Walters, D. (2002). Effects of threatening visuals and announcer differences on responses to televised alcohol warnings. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 30, 27-49. doi:10.1080/00909880216575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00909880216575
78. Sopory, P. & Dillard, J. P. (2002). The persuasive effects of metaphor: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 28, 382-419. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00813.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00813.x
79. Sponberg, H. (1946). A study of the relative effectiveness of climax and anti-climax order in an argumentative speech. Speech Monographs, 1, 35-44.
80. Stephenson, M. T., & Palmgreen, P. (2001). Sensation seeking, perceived message sensation value, personal involvement, and processing of antimarijuana PSAs. Communication Monographs, 68, 49-71. doi:10.1080/03637750128051 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637750128051
81. Tao, C., & Bucy, E. P. (2007). Conceptualizing media stimuli in experimental research: Psychological versus attribute-based definitions. Human Communication Research, 33, 397-426. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00305.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00305.x
82. Toulmin, S. (1969). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511840005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005
83. Tubbs, S. (1968). Explicit versus implicit conclusions and audience commitment. Speech Monographs, 35, 14-19. doi:10.1080/03637756809375561 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637756809375561
84. Weiss, W., & Steenbock, S. (1965). The influence on communication effectiveness of explicitly urging action and policy consequences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 396-406. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(65)90017-X http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031%2865%2990017-X
85. Whaley, B. B., & Wagner, L. S. (2000). Rebuttal analogy in persuasive messages: Communicator likability and cognitive responses. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 19, 66-84. doi:10.1177/0261927X00019001004 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261927X00019001004
86. Witte, K. (1994). Fear control and danger control: A test of the extended parallel process model (EPPM). Communication Monographs, 61, 113-134. doi:10.1080/03637759409376328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637759409376328
87. Yan, C., Dillard, J. P., & Shen, F. (2010). The effects of mood, message framing, and behavioral advocacy on persuasion. Journal of Communication, 60, 344-363. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01485.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01485.x
88. Yorkston, E., & Menon, G. (2004). A sound idea: Phonetic effects of brand names on consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 43-51. doi:10.1086/383422 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/383422