Order Matters When Using Two-Sided Messages to Influence Morally Based Attitudes.

Contrary to common beliefs, sometimes downplaying or even undermining one's case can enhance impact, especially for people with strong attitudes. Across four studies (N = 1,548), we demonstrate that the placement of the undermining information within a two-sided message matters. By manipulating message order within a two-sided message, Study 1 showed that the relative effectiveness of two- over one-sided messages for people with a moral attitude primarily occurred when the two-sided message acknowledged the recipient's side at the end rather than at the beginning of the message. Studies 2A/B showed that this effect was associated with positive source perceptions, such that placing the acknowledgment at the end results in people with a higher moral basis perceiving the source as more thoughtful and sincere. Furthermore, this inference process was more likely to occur when motivation to think was relatively high. Study 3, a preregistered experiment, replicated these findings using a different topic.

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19.

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations ('claims') detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms 'physical distancing' and 'social distancing'. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.

Pitch as a Recipient, Channel, and Context Factor Affecting Thought Reliance and Persuasion.

Three experiments tested how low versus high pitch generated from sources beyond a message communicator can affect reliance on thoughts and influence recipients' attitudes. First, participants wrote positive or negative thoughts about an exam proposal (Experiments 1, 2) or their academic abilities (Experiment 3). Then, pitch from the message recipient (Experiment 1), channel (Experiment 2), or context (Experiment 3) was manipulated to be high or low. Experiment 1 showed that when participants vocally expressed their thoughts using low (vs. high) pitch, thoughts had a greater effect on attitudes toward exams. Experiment 2 revealed low (vs. high) pitch sounds from the keyboard participants used to write their thoughts produced the same effect on thought usage. Experiment 3 demonstrated that thoughts influenced attitudes more when listed while background music was low (vs. high) Pitch can influence attitudes through a meta-cognitive thought reliance process whether emerging from the recipient, channel, or context.

How research on persuasion can inform dual-process models of judgment.

De Neys makes some useful points regarding dual-process models, but his critique ignores highly relevant theories of judgment from the persuasion literature. These persuasion models predate and often circumvent many of the criticisms he makes of the dual-process approaches he covers. Furthermore, the persuasion models anticipated some of the correctives to dual-process models that he proposes.

Understanding the Magnitude of Hypocrisy in Moral Contradictions: The Role of Surprise at Violating Strong Attitudes.

Although two people could both enact similar forms of hypocrisy, one person might be judged as more hypocritical than the other. The present research advances a novel, theoretical explanation for a paradigmatic instance of this: the increased hypocrisy ascribed to contradicting a morally (vs. nonmorally) based attitude. In contrast to prior explanations, the present research shows that people infer targets holding morally (vs. nonmorally) based attitudes are more difficult to change. Consequently, when people are hypocritical on these stances, it elicits greater surprise, which amplifies the perceived hypocrisy. Through both statistical mediation and experimental moderation, we provide evidence for this process and show how our explanation generalizes to understanding heightened hypocrisy in other contexts, too (i.e., violating nonmoral attitudes held with certainty vs. uncertainty). Altogether, we provide an integrative, theoretical lens for predicting when moral and nonmoral acts of hypocrisy will be perceived as particularly hypocritical.

Self-Validation Theory: Confidence can Increase but also Decrease Performance in Applied Settings.

This article presents self-validation theory (SVT) as a framework predicting when mental contents guide performance. First, we illustrate how confidence can validate people's thoughts (goals, beliefs, identity) increasing and decreasing performance, depending on what thoughts are validated. This first section reviews examples of validation processes in guiding intellectual performance in academic settings, sport performance in athletes, as well as performance on diverse social tasks. SVT specifies moderating conditions for validation processes to operate. Therefore, in the second section of this review, we identify unique and testable moderators for metacognitive processes demonstrating when and for whom validation processes are more likely to occur. A third section calls for future research identifying new validating variables (e.g., preparation, courage) capable of increasing usage of unexplored thoughts relevant to performance (e.g., expectations). This final section examines new domains for validation (e.g., group performance, cheating in performance), discusses to what extent people can use self-validation strategies deliberatively to improve their performance and addresses when performance can be impaired by invalidation (e.g., due to identity threat).

Attitude Strength: What's New?

Attitude strength (what makes attitudes durable and impactful) has become an important topic in the domain of social influence. We review three areas in which the traditional view of attitude strength has been modified or updated since the publication of Petty and Krosnick's 1995 edited book on the topic. First, although it was widely assumed that there were different categories of strength variables (i.e., operative versus meta-cognitive), it may now be better to recognize that each strength property can be measured both structurally and subjectively and that each measure is useful. Second, although scholars assumed that virtually all persuasion techniques would work better on weaker than stronger attitudes, recent research suggests that some techniques might actually work better on stronger than weaker attitudes. Third, although stronger attitudes often guide behavior better than weaker ones, when strength is challenged or weak attitudes are threatening, people can be motivated to act to demonstrate or restore certainty. This can result in weaker attitudes leading to more extreme behavior.

Attitude Strength: What’s New?

Attitude strength (what makes attitudes durable and impactful) has become an important topic in the domain of social influence. We review three areas in which the traditional view of attitude strength has been modified or updated since the publication of Petty and Krosnick’s 1995 edited book on the topic. First, although it was widely assumed that there were different categories of strength variables (i.e., operative versus meta-cognitive), it may now be better to recognize that each strength property can be measured both structurally and subjectively and that each measure is useful. Second, although scholars assumed that virtually all persuasion techniques would work better on weaker than stronger attitudes, recent research suggests that some techniques might actually work better on stronger than weaker attitudes. Third, although stronger attitudes often guide behavior better than weaker ones, when strength is challenged or weak attitudes are threatening, people can be motivated to act to demonstrate or restore certainty. This can result in weaker attitudes leading to more extreme behavior. (AU)

Self-Validation Theory: Confidence can Increase but also Decrease Performance in Applied Settings

This article presents self-validation theory (SVT) as a framework predicting when mental contents guide performance. First, we illustrate how confidence can validate people’s thoughts (goals, beliefs, identity) increasing and decreasing performance, depending on what thoughts are validated. This first section reviews examples of validation processes in guiding intellectual performance in academic settings, sport performance in athletes, as well as performance on diverse social tasks. SVT specifies moderating conditions for validation processes to operate. Therefore, in the second section of this review, we identify unique and testable moderators for metacognitive processes demonstrating when and for whom validation processes are more likely to occur. A third section calls for future research identifying new validating variables (e.g., preparation, courage) capable of increasing usage of unexplored thoughts relevant to performance (e.g., expectations). This final section examines new domains for validation (e.g., group performance, cheating in performance), discusses to what extent people can use self-validation strategies deliberatively to improve their performance and addresses when performance can be impaired by invalidation (e.g., due to identity threat). (AU)

Strengthening the Link between Vaccine Predispositions and Vaccine Advocacy through Certainty.

BACKGROUND: Instruments designed to assess individual differences in predispositions towards vaccination are useful in predicting vaccination-related outcomes. Despite their importance, there is relatively little evidence regarding the conditions under which these instruments are more predictive. The current research was designed to improve the ability of these kinds of instruments to predict vaccination advocacy by considering the certainty associated with the responses to vaccination scales. METHOD: Across two studies, participants completed the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire BMQ scale (Study 1) or the Vaccination Attitudes Examination (VAX) scale (Study 2). The certainty participants had in their responses to each scale was either measured (Study 1) or manipulated (Study 2). Intentions to advocate in favor of vaccination served as the criterion measure in both studies. RESULTS: As expected, the scales significantly predicted vaccination advocacy, contributing to enhancing the predictive validity of the instruments used in the studies. Most relevant, certainty moderated the extent to which these scales predicted vaccination advocacy, with greater consistency between the initial scores and the subsequent advocacy willingness obtained for those with higher certainty. CONCLUSIONS: Certainty can be useful to predict when the relationship between vaccination-related cognitions (i.e., beliefs or attitudes) and advocacy willingness is likely to be stronger.

Two-Sided Messages Promote Openness for a Variety of Deeply Entrenched Attitudes.

Prior research showed that people holding attitudes on relatively moral topics became more open to two- rather than one-sided messages as the moral basis of their attitudes increased. Across three studies (N = 963), we extend this finding to relatively non-moral topics by demonstrating that two-sided messages can encourage people with strong attitudes indexed by various non-moral attitude strength measures to be more open to contrary positions. Study 1 demonstrated this for four indicators of attitude strength (e.g., certainty). As the strength of one's attitude increased, two-sided messages increased in relative effectiveness over one-sided communication. This was mediated by perceived appreciation for the speaker acknowledging one's view. Study 2 replicated this finding in a preregistered experiment. Study 3 conceptually replicated and extended it to people holding attitudes based on their political identity. Finally, evidence was obtained supporting perceived appreciation (rather than source evaluation) as the key driver of this interactive effect.

Why are people antiscience, and what can we do about it?

From vaccination refusal to climate change denial, antiscience views are threatening humanity. When different individuals are provided with the same piece of scientific evidence, why do some accept whereas others dismiss it? Building on various emerging data and models that have explored the psychology of being antiscience, we specify four core bases of key principles driving antiscience attitudes. These principles are grounded in decades of research on attitudes, persuasion, social influence, social identity, and information processing. They apply across diverse domains of antiscience phenomena. Specifically, antiscience attitudes are more likely to emerge when a scientific message comes from sources perceived as lacking credibility; when the recipients embrace the social membership or identity of groups with antiscience attitudes; when the scientific message itself contradicts what recipients consider true, favorable, valuable, or moral; or when there is a mismatch between the delivery of the scientific message and the epistemic style of the recipient. Politics triggers or amplifies many principles across all four bases, making it a particularly potent force in antiscience attitudes. Guided by the key principles, we describe evidence-based counteractive strategies for increasing public acceptance of science.

Polarization of Attitudes as a Function of Mortality Salience: A Meta-Cognitive Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The present study analyzes how attitudes can polarize after reminders of death in the context of persuasion, and proposes that a meta-cognitive process (i.e., self-validation) can serve as a compensatory coping mechanism to deal with mortality salience. METHOD: Participants were first asked to read either a strong or a weak resume of a job applicant. Next, they listed their initial thoughts about that applicant. Then, they were asked to think about of their own death (i.e., mortality salience condition) versus being asked to think about of being cold (i.e., control condition). Finally, participants reported the confidence in their thoughts, as well as their attitudes towards the applicant. RESULTS: Participants who were assigned to the mortality salience (vs. control) condition showed greater impact of their previously generated thoughts on their subsequent attitudes. Additionally, as hypothesized, this effect of attitude polarization was mediated by changes in thought confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Attitudes unrelated to mortality can be polarized by reminders of death and this effect can operate through a meta-cognitive process of thought validation. Implications for persuasion, self-validation, and beyond are discussed.

Self-validation theory: An integrative framework for understanding when thoughts become consequential.

Self-validation theory (SVT) is introduced and presented as a series of six postulates. The core notion of SVT is that thoughts become more consequential for judgment and action as the perceived validity of the thoughts is increased. Instead of focusing on the objective accuracy of thoughts, self-validation research focuses on a subjective sense that one's thoughts are valid or appropriate to use. People come to rely on any thought more when they perceive that thought is likely to be true (cognitive validation) or because they feel good about the thought (affective validation). Perceptions of thought validity are influenced by thought-relevant as well as incidental factors (e.g., one's moods, sense of ease), and the impact of these factors can vary with their meaning. Individual and situational factors moderate when people rely on their assessments of validity and what thoughts are salient to validate. In short, SVT is a comprehensive and integrative framework from which to examine the use of thoughts across many seemingly diverse variables, outcomes, and domains in psychology. The theory is also relevant to understanding judgments in numerous applied contexts. By identifying moderators and mediators of thought validation processes and outcomes, SVT is capable of specifying when and why many different variables have an impact on judgments and actions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The role of dialecticism in objective and subjective attitudinal ambivalence.

Although attitudes are often considered positive or negative evaluations, people often have both positive and negative associations with a target object or issue, and when people are ambivalent, they are typically presumed to find the experience aversive because they are motivated to hold clear, univalent attitudes. Cross-cultural research, however, has shown cultural variation in the propensity for dialectical thinking, which is characterized by a tolerance for contradiction. Two studies examined the role of dialectical thinking tendencies in the occurrence of attitudinal ambivalence and how much people subjectively experience their state of ambivalence. Study 1 measured individual differences in dialectical thinking within a culture, and Study 2 compared participants across two cultures (United States and Taiwan) that differ in dialecticism. Across studies, greater dialectical thinking was associated with holding both positive and negative evaluations of the same topic (objective ambivalence) and weaker correlations between objective ambivalence and subjective reports of being conflicted (subjective ambivalence).

Two-Sided Messages Promote Openness for Morally Based Attitudes.

This research demonstrates that two- versus one-sided counterattitudinal messages can encourage people with a strong moral basis for their attitudes to be more open to contrary positions. Studies 1A/B demonstrated that the interaction between moral basis and message sidedness was present not just for a controversial issue with balanced views in society but also for a topic with a majority opinion. In Study 2, the relative effectiveness of two- over one-sided messages for people with a moral attitude basis was shown to occur only when the two-sided message respectfully acknowledged the recipient's side. In Study 3, the effect was replicated in a preregistered experiment. Furthermore, moral bases provided unique predictive power beyond alternative attitude strength indicators. Across all studies, perceived appreciation of the speaker acknowledging the recipient's view mediated the impact of the independent variables on openness.

Polarization of Attitudes as a Function of Mortality Salience: A Meta-Cognitive Analysis / Polarización de las Actitudes Como Resultado de Hacer Saliente la Mortalidad: un Análisis Meta-Cognitivo

Background: The present study analyzes how attitudes can polarize afterreminders of death in the context of persuasion, and proposes that a meta-cognitive process (i.e., self-validation) can serve as a compensatory copingmechanism to deal with mortality salience. Method: Participants were firstasked to read either a strong or a weak resume of a job applicant. Next,they listed their initial thoughts about that applicant. Then, they were askedto think about of their own death (i.e., mortality salience condition) versusbeing asked to think about of being cold (i.e., control condition). Finally,participants reported the confidence in their thoughts, as well as theirattitudes towards the applicant. Results: Participants who were assigned tothe mortality salience (vs. control) condition showed greater impact of theirpreviously generated thoughts on their subsequent attitudes. Additionally,as hypothesized, this effect of attitude polarization was mediated by changesin thought confidence. Conclusions: Attitudes unrelated to mortality canbe polarized by reminders of death and this effect can operate through ameta-cognitive process of thought validation. Implications for persuasion,self-validation, and beyond are discussed.

Antecedentes: la presenteinvestigación analiza cómo las actitudes se polarizan como resultado dehacer saliente la mortalidad en el contexto de la persuasión y propone queun proceso meta-cognitivo (i.e., la auto-validación) puede servir comoun mecanismo compensatorio de afrontamiento ante la idea de la muerte.Método: los participantes fueron asignados aleatoriamente a leer uncurrículum que incluía información muy convincente o información pococonvincente sobre un candidato a un puesto de trabajo. A continuación, escribieron los pensamientos que tuvieron sobre el candidato. Después, realizaron una tarea que implicó pensar en la idea de su propia muerte (i.e.,condición de mortalidad) o pensar en la idea de tener frío (i.e., condiciónde control). Finalmente, los participantes informaron de la confianza que tuvieron en sus pensamientos, así como de las actitudes que se formaron hacia el candidato. Resultados: los participantes de la condición demortalidad (vs. control) mostraron un mayor impacto de sus pensamientosiniciales sobre sus actitudes. Además, este efecto de polarización fuemediado por la confianza en los pensamientos. Conclusiones: las actitudesno relacionadas con la mortalidad pueden polarizarse al hacer salientela mortalidad y este efecto puede ocurrir a través de un proceso meta-cognitivo de validación del pensamiento.

Paralinguistic Features Communicated through Voice can Affect Appraisals of Confidence and Evaluative Judgments.

This article unpacks the basic mechanisms by which paralinguistic features communicated through the voice can affect evaluative judgments and persuasion. Special emphasis is placed on exploring the rapidly emerging literature on vocal features linked to appraisals of confidence (e.g., vocal pitch, intonation, speech rate, loudness, etc.), and their subsequent impact on information processing and meta-cognitive processes of attitude change. The main goal of this review is to advance understanding of the different psychological processes by which paralinguistic markers of confidence can affect attitude change, specifying the conditions under which they are more likely to operate. In sum, we highlight the importance of considering basic mechanisms of attitude change to predict when and why appraisals of paralinguistic markers of confidence can lead to more or less persuasion.

Individual differences in three aspects of evaluation: The motives to have, learn, and express attitudes.

We report seven studies that introduce and validate two unique aspects of evaluation that supplement the original Need to Evaluate (NE) scale (Jarvis & Petty, 1996). Whereas the original scale focused on the tendency to have attitudes, the two new scales focus on the tendencies to learn and express attitudes. Although the new scales are correlated with the original scale and each other, each new scale is shown to be related in a unique way to other relevant scales, and most importantly, to predict different outcomes. Study 1 develops the new learning and expressing aspects of evaluation. Study 2 establishes the factor structure of these new dimensions and distinguishes them from the having aspect identified in the original NE scale. Study 3 demonstrates the convergent and discriminant validity of the two new NE scales in relation to relevant existing individual differences. Study 4 shows that the new NE-learning and expressing scales can predict people's preference for different roles in an impending group discussion. Study 5 shows that the NE-expressing scale predicts attitudes in a paradigm where people generate persuasive arguments and Study 6 shows that the NE-learning scale predicts attitudes in response to an external message using evaluative language. Finally, Study 7 shows that the original NE scale predicts above and beyond the two new scales in accounting for people's tendencies to have and possess attitudes toward various social and political issues. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Dampening affect via expectations: The case of ambivalence.

People often form attitudes based on a mixture of positive and negative information. This can result in mixed evaluative reactions that are associated with feeling conflicted and undecided (i.e., felt ambivalence). In the present research, we examined whether expectations of receiving mixed information could dampen felt ambivalence compared to situations where the mixed information was instead unexpected. In six experiments, expectancies of receiving mixed information-either explicitly provided or implied via patterns of behavior-led people to feel less ambivalent about a target person who had engaged in mixed social behaviors. Expectations of mixed information reduced felt ambivalence to receipt of such information in comparison to having no explicit expectancies (Studies 1-3, 5-6), negative expectancies (Study 2), positive expectancies (Study 3), and compared with expectancies formed merely on the basis of behavioral patterns (Study 4). The extent to which people felt that their expectancies of mixed information regarding the target were confirmed (vs. disconfirmed) significantly accounted for the reductions in felt ambivalence. Finally, lower felt ambivalence via manipulated expectations accounted for reduced decision time in a workplace simulation about recommending promotion or termination of an employee (Study 6). Overall, these findings bridge the extensive literatures in attitudes, social judgment, and expectations, showing that expecting mixed information can lead to reductions in felt ambivalence that have consequences for behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).