We explore the effect of recommendation modality on recommendation adherence. Results from five experiments run on various online platforms (N = 6,103 adults from TurkPrime and Prolific) show that people are more likely to adhere to recommendations that they hear (auditory) than recommendations that they read (visual). This effect persists regardless of whether the auditory recommendation is spoken by a human voice or an automated voice and holds for hypothetical and consequential choices. We show that the effect is in part driven by the relative need for closure—manifested in a sense of urgency—that is evoked by the ephemerality of auditory messages. This work suggests that differences in the physical properties of auditory and visual modalities can lead to meaningful psychological and behavioral consequences.
AuerP. (2009). On-line syntax: Thoughts on the temporality of spoken language. Language Sciences, 31(1), 1–13.
2.
BarneaU.MeyerR.NaveG. (2019). You only get one shot: How content ephemerality affects information processing and viewing behavior. In BagchiR.BlockL.LeeL. (Eds.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 47, pp. 448–449). Association for Consumer Research.
3.
BayerJ. B.EllisonN. B.SchoenebeckS. Y.FalkE. B. (2016). Sharing the small moments: Ephemeral social interaction on Snapchat. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 956–977.
4.
BergerJ.IyengarR. (2013). Communication channels and word of mouth: How the medium shapes the message. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 567–579.
ChaikenS.EaglyA. H. (1983). Communication modality as a determinant of persuasion: The role of communicator salience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 241–256.
7.
Flecha-OrtízJ.Santos-CorradaM.Dones-GonzálezV.López-GonzálezE.VegaA. (2019). Millennials & Snapchat: Self-expression through its use and its influence on purchase motivation. Journal of Business Research, 125, 798–805.
8.
KristoffersonK.McFerranB.MoralesA. C.DahlD. W. (2017). The dark side of scarcity promotions: How exposure to limited-quantity promotions can induce aggression. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(5), 683–706.
9.
KruglanskiA. W.WebsterD. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing.”Psychological Review, 103(2), 263–283.
10.
KruglanskiA. W.WebsterD. M.KlemA. (1993). Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(5), 861–876.
11.
KuH. H.KuoC. C.KuoT.-W. (2012). The effect of scarcity on the purchase intentions of prevention and promotion motivated consumers. Psychology & Marketing, 29(8), 541–548. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20541
12.
LeahyW.SwellerJ. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 943–951.
13.
LynnM. (1991). Scarcity effects on value: A quantitative review of the commodity theory literature. Psychology & Marketing, 8(1), 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.4220080105
14.
MayselessO.KruglanskiA. W. (1987). What makes you so sure? Effects of epistemic motivations on judgmental confidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39(2), 162–183.
15.
MehrabianA.WienerM. (1967). Decoding of inconsistent communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6(1), 109–114.
MorlokT. N.ConstantiouI.HessT. (2018). Gone for better or for worse? Exploring the dual nature of ephemerality on social media platforms. Research Papers, 15. https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2018_rp/15
18.
MunzK. P.MorwitzV. G. (2020). Not-so easy listening: Roots and repercussions of auditory choice difficulty in voice commerce. In ArgoJ.LowreyT. M.Jensen SchauH. (Eds.), Advances in consumer research (Vol. 48, pp. 1011–1016). Association for Consumer Research.
19.
OberskiD. (2014). lavaan.survey: An R package for complex survey analysis of structural equation models. Journal of Statistical Software, 57(1). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v057.i01
20.
RoetsA.Van HielA. (2007). Separating ability from need: Clarifying the dimensional structure of the Need for Closure Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(2), 266–280.
21.
RoetsA.Van HielA. (2011). Item selection and validation of a brief, 15-item version of the Need for Closure Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(1), 90–94.
22.
SchroederJ.EpleyN. (2015). The sound of intellect: Speech reveals a thoughtful mind, increasing a job candidate’s appeal. Psychological Science, 26(6), 877–891.
23.
SchroederJ.EpleyN. (2016). Mistaking minds and machines: How speech affects dehumanization and anthropomorphism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(11), 1427–1437.
24.
SchroederJ.KardasM.EpleyN. (2017). The humanizing voice: Speech reveals, and text conceals, a more thoughtful mind in the midst of disagreement. Psychological Science, 28(12), 1745–1762.
25.
SharmaE.AlterA. L. (2012). Financial deprivation prompts consumers to seek scarce goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(3), 545–560.
26.
SimmonsJ. P.NelsonL. D.SimonsohnU. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366.
27.
SinghA. M.MarcusN.AyresP. (2012). The transient information effect: Investigating the impact of segmentation on spoken and written text. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(6), 848–853.
28.
SwainS. D.HannaR.AbendrothL. J. (2006). How time restrictions work: The roles of urgency, anticipated regret, and deal evaluations. In PechmannC.PriceL. (Eds.), ACR North American Advances (Vol. 33, pp. 523–525). Association for Consumer Research.
29.
Van ZantA. B.BergerJ. (2020). How the voice persuades. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(4), 661–682.
30.
YzerbytV.MullerD.BataillerC.JuddC. M. (2018). New recommendations for testing indirect effects in mediational models: The need to report and test component paths. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(6), 929–943.
31.
ZhuM.YangY.HseeC. K. (2018). The mere urgency effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(3), 673–690.
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.
