This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by SLATER, M. D. Articles by ROUNER, D. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Value-Affirmative and Value-Protective Processing of Alcohol Education Messages That Include Statistical Evidence or Anecdotes

DONNA ROUNER

This study of persuasion processes in a value-relevant context tests effects of the presence or absence of statistical evidence and the presence or absence of anecdotal evidence, crossed across three base messages regarding different alcohol use issues. Results suggest that a variant of central processing as described by Petty and Cacioppo (1986) was used: Involvement predicted greater message-relevant responses only when the message was congruent with recipients' own values regarding alcohol use. Among recipients for whom the message was value-congruent, messages with statistical evidence were rated more persuasive, more believable, and better written; anecdotal evidence had no effect. Among recipients for whom the message was value-discrepant, messages with anecdotal evidence were rated more persuasive, more believable, and (marginally) better written, and statistical evidence had no effect. Path analyses also suggest that peripheral-processing strategies are employed when the message is value-discrepant, and central-processing strategies are used when the message is value-congruent.

Communication Research, Vol. 23, No. 2, 210-235 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/009365096023002003


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Braverman Testimonials Versus Informational Persuasive Messages: The Moderating Effect of Delivery Mode and Personal Involvement Communication Research, October 1, 2008; 35(5): 666 - 694. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. J. Hinyard and M. W. Kreuter Using Narrative Communication as a Tool for Health Behavior Change: A Conceptual, Theoretical, and Empirical Overview Health Educ Behav, October 1, 2007; 34(5): 777 - 792. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Rodriguez The Impact of Risk Communication on the Acceptance of Irradiated Food Science Communication, June 1, 2007; 28(4): 476 - 500. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Werch, J. L. Grenard, J. Burnett, J. A. Watkins, S. Ames, and E. Jobli Translation as a Function of Modality: The Potential of Brief Interventions Eval Health Prof, March 1, 2006; 29(1): 89 - 125. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. Cho and F. J. Boster Development and Validation of Value-, Outcome-, and Impression-Relevant Involvement Scales Communication Research, April 1, 2005; 32(2): 235 - 264. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. David, K. Liu, and M. Myser Methodological Artifact or Persistent Bias?: Testing the Robustness of the Third-Person and Reverse Third-Person Effects for Alcohol Messages Communication Research, April 1, 2004; 31(2): 206 - 233. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Sprecker How Involvement, Citation Style, and Funding Source Affect the Credibility of University Scientists Science Communication, September 1, 2002; 24(1): 72 - 97. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. LEE and L. LEETS Persuasive Storytelling by Hate Groups Online: Examining Its Effects on Adolescents American Behavioral Scientist, February 1, 2002; 45(6): 927 - 957. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. N. Shelby Communication Quality Revisited: Exploring the Link with Persuasive Effects Journal of Business Communication, July 1, 1998; 35(3): 387 - 404. [Abstract] [PDF]