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.
BaronJ. (1993). Why teach thinking? An essay. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 42, 191–214.
2.
CacioppoJ. T.PettyR. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116–131.
3.
CialdiniR. B. (1993). Influence: The psychology of persuasion (Rev. ed.). Morrow.
4.
CialdiniR. B.GoldsteinN. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621.
5.
CialdiniR. B.VincentJ. E.LewisS. K.CatalanJ.WheelerD.DarbyB. L. (1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(2), 206–215.
6.
CohenG. L.AronsonJ.SteeleC. M. (2000). When beliefs yield to evidence: Reducing biased evaluation by affirming the self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(9), 1151–1164.
7.
CorrellJ.SpencerS. J.ZannaM. P. (2004). An affirmed self and an open mind: Self-affirmation and sensitivity to argument strength. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(3), 350–356.
8.
CrowleyA. E.HoyerW. D. (1994). An integrative framework for understanding two-sided persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 561–574.
9.
ElliotA. J.DevineP. G. (1994). On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: Dissonance as psychological discomfort. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 382–394.
10.
FeinbergM.WillerR. (2015). From gulf to bridge: When do moral arguments facilitate political influence?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(12), 1665–1681.
11.
HareW. (2003a). The ideal of open-mindedness and its place in education. Journal of Thought, 38(2), 3–10.
12.
HayesA. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford.
13.
HodsonG.MaioG. R.EssesV. M. (2001). The role of attitudinal ambivalence in susceptibility to consensus information. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23(3), 197–205.
14.
HovlandC. I.JanisI. L.KelleyH. H. (1953). Communication and Persuasion. Yale University Press.
15.
HovlandC. I.LumsdaineA. A.SheffieldF. D. (1949). Experiments on mass communication. (Studies in social psychology in World War II), Vol. 3. Princeton University Press.
16.
KaoD. T. (2011). Message sidedness in advertising: The moderating roles of need for cognition and time pressure in persuasion. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 52(4), 329–340.
17.
LearyM. R.DiebelsK. J.DavissonE. K.Jongman-SerenoK. P.IsherwoodJ. C.RaimiK. T.DefflerS. A.HoyleR. H. (2017). Cognitive and interpersonal features of intellectual humility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(6), 793–813.
18.
LinnJ. A.KnowlesE. S. (2002). Acknowledging target resistance in persuasive messages [Conference session]. Annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.
19.
LuttrellA.PettyR. E.BriñolP.WagnerB. C. (2016). Making it moral: Merely labeling an attitude as moral increases its strength. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 65, 82–93.
20.
LuttrellA.Philipp-MullerA.PettyR. E. (2019). Challenging moral attitudes with moral messages. Psychological Science, 30, 1136–1150.
21.
McGuireW. (1964). Inducing resistance to persuasion. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. I, pp. 192–229). Academic Press.
22.
MinsonJ. A.ChenF. S.TinsleyC. H. (2019). Why won’t you listen to me? Measuring receptiveness to opposing views. Management Science, 66, 3069–3094.
23.
NorcrossJ. C.KrebsP. M.ProchaskaJ. O. (2011). Stages of change. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67(2), 143–154.
24.
PettyR. E.KrosnickJ. A. (Eds.) (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25.
Pew Research Center. (2014, June12). Political polarization in the American public.
26.
Philipp-MullerA. Z.WallaceL. E.WegenerD. T. (2020). Where does moral conviction fit? A factor analytic approach examining antecedents to attitude strength. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 86, Article 103900.
27.
PriceE.OttatiV.WilsonC.KimS. (2015). Open-minded cognition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(11), 1488–1504.
28.
PriesterJ. R.PettyR. E. (1996). The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: Relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 431–449.
29.
PutnamL. L.JonesT. S. (1982). Reciprocity in negotiations: An analysis of bargaining interaction. Communication Monographs, 49(3), 171–191.
RokeachM. (1960). The open and closed mind: Investigations into the nature of belief systems and personality systems. Basic Books.
32.
RosnowR. L.RosenthalR. (1989). Definition and interpretation of interaction effects. Psychological Bulletin, 105(1), 143–146.
33.
SkitkaL. J. (2010). The psychology of moral conviction. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(4), 267–281.
34.
SkitkaL. J.MorganG. S. (2014). The social and political implications of moral conviction. Political Psychology, 35(S1), 95–110.
35.
SkitkaL. J.WashburnA. N.CarselT. S. (2015). The psychological foundations and consequences of moral conviction. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 41–44.
TurnerM. M.TamboriniR.LimonM. S.Zuckerman-HymanC. (2007). The moderators and mediators of door-in-the-face requests: Is it a negotiation or a helping experience?Communication Monographs, 74(3), 333–356.
WrightJ. C.CullumJ.SchwabN. (2008). The cognitive and affective dimensions of moral conviction: Implications for attitudinal and behavioral measures of interpersonal tolerance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(11), 1461–1476.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
