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.
BardenJ.PettyR. E. (2008). The mere perception of elaboration creates attitude certainty: Exploring the thoughtfulness heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(3), 489–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012559
2.
BassiliJ. N. (1996). Meta-judgmental versus operative indexes of psychological attributes: The case of measures of attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(4), 637–653. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.4.637
3.
BoningerD. S.KrosnickJ. A.BerentM. K. (1995a). Origins of attitude importance: Self-interest, social identification, and value relevance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(1), 61–80.
4.
CameronJ. E. (2004). A three-factor model of social identity. Self and Identity, 3(3), 239–262.
5.
ChenF. S.MinsonJ. A.TormalaZ. L. (2010). Tell me more: The effects of expressed interest on receptiveness during dialog. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(5), 850–853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.04.012
6.
ChildD. (2006). The essentials of factor analysis. A&C Black.
7.
CialdiniR. B. (1993). The psychology of persuasion. Collins.
CialdiniR. B.GreenB. L.RuschA. J. (1992). When tactical pronouncements of change become real change: The case of reciprocal persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 30–40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.1.30
10.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge Academic.
11.
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.
12.
DeltonA. W.DeScioliP.RyanT. J. (2020). Moral obstinacy in political negotiations. Political Psychology, 41(1), 3–20.
13.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160.
14.
FazioR. H. (1995). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In PettyR. E.KrosnickJ. A. (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 247–282). Psychology Press.
FeinbergM.WillerR. (2015). From gulf to bridge: When do moral arguments facilitate political influence?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(12), 1665–1681. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167215607842
17.
GoldenL. L.AlpertM. I. (1987). Comparative analysis of the relative effectiveness of one-and two-sided communication for contrasting products. Journal of Advertising, 16(1), 18–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.1987.10673056
18.
HayesA. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford.
19.
AbramsD.HoggM. A. (1988). Comments on the motivational status of self-esteem in social identity and intergroup discrimination. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(4), 317–334.
20.
HoggM. A.AbramsD.BrewerM. B. (2017). Social identity: The role of self in group processes and intergroup relations. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(5), 570–581.
21.
HovlandC. I.JanisI. L.KelleyH. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. Yale University Press.
22.
HovlandC. I.LumsdaineA. A.SheffieldF. D. (1949). Experiments on mass communication (Studies in social psychology in World War II, Vol. 3). Princeton University Press.
23.
HuddyL. (2013). From group identity to political cohesion and commitment. In HuddyL.SearsD. O.LevyJ. S. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 737–773). Oxford University Press.
24.
HusseinM. A.TormalaZ. L. (2021). Undermining your case to enhance your impact: A framework for understanding the effects of acts of receptiveness in persuasion, 25(3), 229–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683211001269
25.
JonesE. E.DavisK. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions the attribution process in person perception. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 219–266.
26.
KaminsM. A. (1989). Celebrity and noncelebrity advertising in a two-sided context. Journal of Advertising Research, 29(3), 34–42.
27.
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2011.00882.x
28.
KimC. H.HanD.DuhachekA.TormalaZ. L. (2018). Political identity, preference, and persuasion. Social Influence, 13(4), 177–191.
29.
KrosnickJ. A. (1989). Attitude importance and attitude accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15(3), 297–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167289153002
30.
KrosnickJ. A.BoningerD. S.ChuangY. C.BerentM. K.CarnotC. G. (1993). Attitude strength: One construct or many related constructs?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(6), 1132–1151.
31.
KrosnickJ. A.PettyR. E. (1995). Attitude strength: An overview. In PettyR. E.KrosnickJ. A. (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 1–24). Lawrence Erlbaum.
32.
LuttrellA.PettyR. E.BriñolP. (2016). Ambivalence and certainty can interact to predict attitude stability over time. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 63, 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.11.008
33.
LuttrellA.Philipp-MullerA.PettyR. E. (2019). Challenging moral attitudes with moral messages. Psychological Science, 30, 1136–1150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619854706
34.
LuttrellA.SawickiV. (2020). Attitude strength: Distinguishing predictors versus defining features. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 14(8), e12555. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12555
35.
MaioG. P.HaddockG.VerplankenB. (2019). The psychology of attitudes and attitude change (3rd ed.). SAGE.
36.
MinsonJ. A.ChenF. S.TinsleyC. H. (2019). Why won’t you listen to me? Measuring receptiveness to opposing views. Management Science, 66(7), 3069–3094. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3295946
37.
NorcrossJ. C.KrebsP. M.ProchaskaJ. O. (2010). Stages of change. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67(2), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20758
38.
PetrocelliJ. V.TormalaZ. L.RuckerD. D. (2007). Unpacking attitude certainty: Attitude clarity and attitude correctness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 30–41.
39.
PettyR. E.KrosnickJ. A. (Eds.). (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Lawrence Erlbaum.
RosnowR. L.RosenthalR. (1989). Definition and interpretation of interaction effects. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 143–146.
42.
RuckerD. D.TormalaZ. L.PettyR. E.BriñolP. (2014). Consumer conviction and commitment: An appraisal-based framework for attitude certainty. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(1), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2013.07.001
43.
SawickiV.WegenerD. T. (2018). Metacognitive reflection as a moderator of attitude strength versus attitude bolstering: Implications for attitude similarity and attraction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(5), 638–652. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217744196
SteeleC. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 261–302.
47.
TeenyJ. D.SievJ. J.BriñolP.PettyR. E. (2021). A review and conceptual framework for understanding personalized matching effects in persuasion. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 31(2), 382–414. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1198
48.
TormalaZ. L.PettyR. E. (2004a). Resistance to persuasion and attitude certainty: The moderating role of elaboration. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(11), 1446–1457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204264251
49.
Van BavelJ. J.PereiraA. (2018). The partisan brain: An identity-based model of political belief. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(3), 213–224.
50.
VisserP. S.KrosnickJ. A.SimmonsJ. P. (2003). Distinguishing the cognitive and behavioral consequences of attitude importance and certainty: A new approach to testing the common-factor hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(2), 118–141.
WestfallJ.Van BovenL.ChambersJ. R.JuddC. M. (2015). Perceiving political polarization in the United States: Party identity strength and attitude extremity exacerbate the perceived partisan divide. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615569849
53.
WhittinghamM. J.StephensP. A.BradburyR. B.FreckletonR. P. (2006). Why do we still use stepwise modelling in ecology and behaviour?Journal of Animal Ecology, 75(5), 1182–1189.
54.
XuM.PettyR. E. (2022). Two-sided messages promote openness for morally based attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(8), 1151–1166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220988371
55.
ZunickP. V.TeenyJ. D.FazioR. H. (2017). Are some attitudes more self-defining than others? Assessing self-related attitude functions and their consequences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(8), 1136–1149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217705121
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.
