In a pretest-posttest design, subscribers to women’s magazines were mailed a high- versus low-power message arguing a radical feminist view. Uninvolved women changed their opinions more after the high-power-style message, and involved women more after the low-power-style message.
Abelson, R. P. (1988). Conviction. American Psychologist, 43, 267-275.
2.
Boninger, D. S., Krosnick, J. A., & Berent, M. K. (1995). The origins of attitude importance: Self-interest, social identification, and value-relevance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 61-80.
3.
Bradac, J. J., Mulac, A., & Thompson, S. A. (1995). Men’s and women’s use of intensifiers and hedges in problem-solving interaction: Molar and molecular analyses. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28, 93-116.
4.
Carli, L. L. (1990). Gender, language and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 941-951.
5.
Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (Rev. ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
Hamilton, M. A., Hunter, J. E., & Burgoon, M. (1990). An empirical test of an axiomatic model of the relationship between language intensity and persuasion. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 9, 235-255.
7.
Hass, R. G., & Linder, D. E. (1972). Counterargument availability and the effects of message structure on persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 219-233.
8.
Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). The effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 290-314.
9.
Kraus, D. M., & Chiu, C. (1998). Language and social behavior. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 41-88). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
10.
Krosnick, J. A. (1988). The role of attitude importance in social evaluation: A study of policy preferences, presidential candidate evaluations, and voting behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 196-210.
11.
Levin, K. D., Nichols, D. R., & Johnson, B. T. (2000). Involvement and persuasion: Attitude functions for the motivated processor. In G. R. Maio & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Why we evaluate: Functions of attitudes (pp. 163-194). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 233-346). New York: Random House.
13.
Mulac, A., Bradac, J. J., & Gibbons, P. (2001). Empirical support for the gender-as-culture hypothesis: An intercultural analysis of male/female language differences. Human Communication Research, 27, 121-152.
14.
Ng, S. H., & Bradac, J. J. (1993). Power in language. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1990). Involvement and persuasion: Tradition versus integration. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 367-374.
16.
Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Attitude change: multiple roles for persuasion variables. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 323-390). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
17.
Pomerantz, E. M., Chaiken, S. T., & Tordesillas, R. S. (1995). Attitude strength and resistance processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 408-419.
18.
Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. (1961). Social judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
19.
Sherif, C. W., Sherif, M., & Nebergall, R. E. (1965). Attitude and attitude change: The social judgment-involvement approach. Philadelphia: Saunders.
20.
Van Yperen, N. W., & Buunk, B. P. (1991). Sex-role attitudes, social comparison, and satisfaction with relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54, 169-180.
21.
Wood, W. (1982). The retrieval of attitude-relevant information from memory: Effects of susceptibility to persuasion and on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 798-810.
22.
Wood, W., Kallgren, C. A., III, & Preisler, R. M. (1985). Access to attitude-relevant information in memory as a determinant of persuasion: The role of message attributes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 73-85.
