Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Marketing Letters 1/2016

01.03.2016

“Top 10” reasons: When adding persuasive arguments reduces persuasion

verfasst von: Kimberlee Weaver, Stefan J. Hock, Stephen M. Garcia

Erschienen in: Marketing Letters | Ausgabe 1/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Across four studies, we show that experts’ efforts to strengthen the persuasiveness of health and civic duty-related appeals actually weakened them. When designing “Top 10” reasons lists to get people to quit smoking, encourage young people to vote, and persuade individuals to engage in fitness, governmental (studies 1–2) and non-profit (study 3) agencies chose to include mildly strong reasons alongside strong ones in their effort to be as persuasive as possible. However, from the target audience’s perspective, those mildly favorable reasons actually decreased the persuasiveness of the message compared to a condition in which fewer but only highly persuasive reasons were used. Building upon the Presenter’s Paradox by Weaver, Garcia & Schwarz (Journal of Consumer Research 39 (3):445–460, 2012), these results demonstrate that averaging in impression formation occurs not only in targets commonly thought of as unified entities such as consumer products and people but also occurs in persuasion contexts where the individual arguments comprising a message are independent of each other.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
After reading the experimental materials and responding to the key dependent variables, participants rated the seriousness of each of the 10 reasons to quit smoking on seven-point Likert scales (1 = not at all serious, 7 = very serious) one at a time in a random order. As predicted, participants rated the two arguments from our “strong” arguments two reasons condition to be more serious (M Strong_Reasons = 6.61, SD = 1.12) than the eight arguments we had deemed to be less strong (M Weak_Reasons = 5.79, SD = 1.37), t (139) = 9.48, p < .001.
 
2
An outside group of observers judged the 10 reasons used in the original top 10 campaign one at a time in a random order on the basis of how important each was in determining whether a person should vote. A paired sample t test confirmed that participants rated the three strong reasons we used in three reasons condition to be more important (M Strong_Reasons = 5.43, SD = 1.91) than the seven reasons we had deemed to be less strong (M Weak_Reasons = 3.20, SD = .98), t (17) = 11.18, p < .001.
 
3
An outside group of observers was presented with the 10 reasons from the original top 10 reasons campaign one at a time in a random order and indicated the importance of each reason in determining whether a person should exercise (1 = not at all important, 7 = very important). Results from a paired sample t test again confirmed that the arguments from our three reasons condition were judged to be more important (M Strong_Reasons = 6.15, SD = 0.96) than the arguments that we had categorized to be weaker (M Weak_Reasons = 5.70, SD = 0.82), t (19) = 2.47, p < .03.
 
4
An outside group of observers was presented with the 10 reasons one at a time in a random order and indicated the importance of each reason in determining whether a person should attend the University of Michigan (1 = not at all important, 7 = very important). Results from a repeated measures ANOVA confirmed that the argument from our top 1 reason condition was judged to be more important (M Strong_Reasons = 5.94, SD = 1.26) than the arguments that we had categorized to be weaker (M Weak_Reasons = 3.65, SD = 1.21), F (1, 30) = 57.14, p < .001.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Anderson, N. H. (1965). Averaging versus adding as a stimulus-combination rule in impression formation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(4), 394–400.CrossRef Anderson, N. H. (1965). Averaging versus adding as a stimulus-combination rule in impression formation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(4), 394–400.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Anderson, N. H. (1968). Application of a linear serial model to a personality-impression task using serial presentation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10(4), 354–362.CrossRef Anderson, N. H. (1968). Application of a linear serial model to a personality-impression task using serial presentation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10(4), 354–362.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. E. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306–307.CrossRef Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. E. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306–307.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dillard, J. P., Weber, K. M., & Vail, R. G. (2007). The relationship between the perceived and actual effectiveness of persuasive messages: a meta-analysis with implications for formative campaign research. Journal of Communication, 57, 613–631.CrossRef Dillard, J. P., Weber, K. M., & Vail, R. G. (2007). The relationship between the perceived and actual effectiveness of persuasive messages: a meta-analysis with implications for formative campaign research. Journal of Communication, 57, 613–631.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Forth Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Forth Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Zurück zum Zitat Fishbein, M., Jamieson, K. H., Zimmer, E., von Haeften, I., & Nabi, R. (2002). Avoiding the boomerang: testing the relative effectiveness of antidrug public service announcements before a national campaign. American Journal of Public Health, 92, 238–245.CrossRef Fishbein, M., Jamieson, K. H., Zimmer, E., von Haeften, I., & Nabi, R. (2002). Avoiding the boomerang: testing the relative effectiveness of antidrug public service announcements before a national campaign. American Journal of Public Health, 92, 238–245.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Friedrich, J., Fetherstonhaugh, D., Casey, S., & Gallagher, D. (1996). Argument integration and attitude change: suppression effects in the integration of one-sided arguments that vary in persuasiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 179–191.CrossRef Friedrich, J., Fetherstonhaugh, D., Casey, S., & Gallagher, D. (1996). Argument integration and attitude change: suppression effects in the integration of one-sided arguments that vary in persuasiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 179–191.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gaeth, G. J., Levin, I. P., Chakraborty, G., & Levin, A. M. (1990). Consumer evaluation of multi-product bundles: an information integration analysis. Marketing Letters, 2, 47–58.CrossRef Gaeth, G. J., Levin, I. P., Chakraborty, G., & Levin, A. M. (1990). Consumer evaluation of multi-product bundles: an information integration analysis. Marketing Letters, 2, 47–58.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Meyvis, T., & Janiszewski, C. (2002). Consumers’ beliefs about product benefits: the effect of obviously irrelevant information. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 618–636.CrossRef Meyvis, T., & Janiszewski, C. (2002). Consumers’ beliefs about product benefits: the effect of obviously irrelevant information. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 618–636.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Nisbett, R. E., Zukier, H., & Lemley, R. E. (1981). The dilution effect: nondiagnostic information weakens the implications of diagnostic information. Cognitive Psychology, 13(2), 248–277. Nisbett, R. E., Zukier, H., & Lemley, R. E. (1981). The dilution effect: nondiagnostic information weakens the implications of diagnostic information. Cognitive Psychology, 13(2), 248–277.
Zurück zum Zitat Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69–81.CrossRef Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69–81.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Strasser, A. A., Cappella, J. N., Jepson, C., Fishbein, M., Tang, K. Z., Han, E., et al. (2009). Experimental evaluation of anti-tobacco PSAs: effects of message content and format on physiological and behavioral outcomes. Nicotine and Tobacco Research, 11, 293–302.CrossRef Strasser, A. A., Cappella, J. N., Jepson, C., Fishbein, M., Tang, K. Z., Han, E., et al. (2009). Experimental evaluation of anti-tobacco PSAs: effects of message content and format on physiological and behavioral outcomes. Nicotine and Tobacco Research, 11, 293–302.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tetlock, P. E., Lerner, J. S., & Boettger, R. (1996). The dilution effect: judgmental bias, conversational convention, or a bit of both? European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 915–934.CrossRef Tetlock, P. E., Lerner, J. S., & Boettger, R. (1996). The dilution effect: judgmental bias, conversational convention, or a bit of both? European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 915–934.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Thornton, W., Kirchner, G., & Jacobs, J. (1991). Influence of a photograph on a charitable appeal: a picture may be worth a thousand words when it has to speak for itself. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 433–445.CrossRef Thornton, W., Kirchner, G., & Jacobs, J. (1991). Influence of a photograph on a charitable appeal: a picture may be worth a thousand words when it has to speak for itself. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 433–445.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Troutman, C. M., & Shanteau, J. (1977). Inferences based on nondiagnostic information. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Performance, 19, 43–55.CrossRef Troutman, C. M., & Shanteau, J. (1977). Inferences based on nondiagnostic information. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Performance, 19, 43–55.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Weaver, K., Garcia, S. M., & Schwarz, N. (2012). The presenter’s paradox. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(3), 445–460.CrossRef Weaver, K., Garcia, S. M., & Schwarz, N. (2012). The presenter’s paradox. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(3), 445–460.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Yadav, M. S. (1994). How buyers evaluate product bundles: a model of anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 342–353.CrossRef Yadav, M. S. (1994). How buyers evaluate product bundles: a model of anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 342–353.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
“Top 10” reasons: When adding persuasive arguments reduces persuasion
verfasst von
Kimberlee Weaver
Stefan J. Hock
Stephen M. Garcia
Publikationsdatum
01.03.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Marketing Letters / Ausgabe 1/2016
Print ISSN: 0923-0645
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-059X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-014-9286-1

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2016

Marketing Letters 1/2016 Zur Ausgabe