Language patterns of complexity and confidence often indicate positive persuasion outcomes across settings. For example, such word types correlate with funding support from grant agencies and online crowds. This paper tested the preregistered hypothesis that language patterns of complexity and confidence also relate to a conference submission’s acceptance. Replicating and extending prior work, submissions from the International Communication Association (N = 9,559) with more complex content and more causality tend to be accepted. Implications of these data are discussed.
BoydR. L.SchwartzH. A. (2020). Natural language analysis and the psychology of verbal behavior: The past, present, and future states of the field. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 40(1), 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20967028
2.
DienlinT.JohannesN.BowmanN. D.MasurP. K.EngesserS.KümpelA. S.LukitoJ.BierL. M.ZhangR.JohnsonB. K.HuskeyR.SchneiderF. M.BreuerJ.ParryD. A.VermeulenI.FisherJ. T.BanksJ.WeberR.EllisD. A.. . . de VreeseC. (2021). An agenda for open science in communication. Journal of Communication, 71, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/JOC/JQZ052
3.
EichstaedtJ. C.SmithR. J.MerchantR. M.UngarL. H.CrutchleyP.Preoţiuc-PietroD.AschD. A.SchwartzH. A. (2018). Facebook language predicts depression in medical records. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(44), 11203–11208. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1802331115
4.
FlanaginA. J. (2007). Commercial markets as communication markets: Uncertainty reduction through mediated information exchange in online auctions. New Media & Society, 9(3), 401–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807076966
5.
HovlandC. I.JanisI. L.KellyH. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. Yale University Press.
6.
JordanK. N.SterlingJ.PennebakerJ. W.BoydR. L. (2019). Examining long-term trends in politics and culture through language of political leaders and cultural institutions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(9), 3476–3481. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1811987116
7.
KacewiczE.PennebakerJ. W.DavisM.JeonM.GraesserA. C. (2014). Pronoun use reflects standings in social hierarchies. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33(2), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x13502654
8.
KarmarkarU. R.TormalaZ. L. (2010). Believe me, I have no idea what I’m talking about: The effects of source certainty on consumer involvement and persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(6), 1033–1049. https://doi.org/10.1086/648381
9.
KeatingD. M.TotzkayD. (2019). We do publish (conceptual) replications (sometimes): Publication trends in communication science, 2007–2016. Annals of the International Communication Association, 43(3), 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2019.1632218
10.
LarrimoreL.JiangL.LarrimoreJ.MarkowitzD. M.GorskiS. (2011). Peer to peer lending: The relationship between language features, trustworthiness, and persuasion success. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 39(1), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2010.536844
11.
LetchfordA.MoatH. S.PreisT. (2015). The advantage of short paper titles. Royal Society Open Science, 2(8), 150266. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150266
12.
MarkowitzD. M. (2018). Academy Awards speeches reflect social status, cinematic roles, and winning expectations. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 37(3), 376–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x17751012
13.
MarkowitzD. M. (2019). What words are worth: National Science Foundation grant abstracts indicate award funding. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 38(3), 264–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X18824859
14.
MarkowitzD. M.HancockJ. T. (2016). Linguistic obfuscation in fraudulent science. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 35(4), 435–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X15614605
15.
MarkowitzD. M.KouchakiM.HancockJ. T.GinoF. (2021). The deception spiral: Corporate obfuscation leads to perceptions of immorality and cheating behavior. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 40, 277–296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20949594
16.
PennebakerJ. W. (2011). The secret life of pronouns: What our words say about us. Bloomsbury Press.
17.
PennebakerJ. W.BoothR. J.BoydR. L.FrancisM. E. (2015). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC2015. Pennebaker Conglomerates.
18.
PennebakerJ. W.ChungC. K.FrazeeJ.LavergneG. M.BeaverD. I. (2014). When small words foretell academic success: The case of college admissions essays. PLoS ONE, 9(12), e115844. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115844
19.
PriceP. C.StoneE. R. (2004). Intuitive evaluation of likelihood judgment producers: Evidence for a confidence heuristic. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17(1), 39–57. https://doi.org/doi:10.1002/bdm.460
20.
SalganikM. (2017). Bit by bit: Social research in the digital age. Princeton University Press.
21.
TausczikY. R.PennebakerJ. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(1), 24–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676
WalterN.CodyM. J.Ball-RokeachS. J. (2018). The ebb and flow of communication research: Seven decades of publication trends and research priorities. Journal of Communication, 68(2), 424–440. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx015
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.
