Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Psychological reactance is a key construct in persuasion, but experimental inductions often confound imperative language with epistemically certain language (i.e., language that belies grounds for doubt). Two online experiments examine the effects of each language type on indicators of psychological reactance across two scientific contexts. In Study 1 (N = 274), imperative language increased felt anger and perceived threat to freedom, while epistemically certain language did not. In Study 2 (N = 402), epistemically uncertain language attenuated felt anger and perceived threat to freedom. Findings offer theoretical and practical insight into the effects of each language type on resistance to persuasion.

Keywords

psychological reactance imperative language epistemic certainty and uncertainty persuasion

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bensley

L. S.

(1991). The role of psychological reactance in drinking following alcohol prevention messages. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(13), 1111–1124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00461.x

Berkowitz

(1973). Reactance and the unwillingness to help others. Psychological Bulletin, 79(5), 310–317. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034443

Brehm

J. W.

(1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Academic Press.

Brehm

S. S.

Brehm

J. W.

(1981). Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control. Academic Press.

Brosig

Bavorova

(2019). Association of attitudes towards genetically modified food among young adults and their referent persons. PLoS ONE, 14(2), Article e0211879. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211879

Brotherton

French

C. C.

Pickering

A. D.

(2013). Measuring belief in conspiracy theories: The generic conspiracist beliefs scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 279. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00279

Burger

J. M.

Cooper

H. M.

(1979). The desirability of control. Motivation and Emotion, 3, 381–393.

Burgoon

Miller

(1985). An expectancy interpretation of language and persuasion. In Giles

St. Clair

(Eds.) Recent advances in language communication and social psychology (pp. 199–229). Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429436178

Burgoon

Alvaro

Grandpre

Voulodakis

(2002). Revisiting the theory of psychological reactance: Communicating threats to attitudinal freedom. In Dillard

J. P.

Pfau

(Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 213–232). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976046

10.

Carleton

R. N.

Norton

M. A. P. J.

Asmundson

G. J. G.

(2007). Fearing the unknown: A short version of the intolerance of uncertainty scale. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 21(1), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.03.014

11.

Chaiken

Liberman

Eagly

(1989). Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In Uleman

Bargh

(Eds.) Unintended Thought (pp. 212–252). Guilford.

12.

Chinn

Hart

P. S.

(2021). Climate change consensus messages cause reactance. Environmental Communication, 17(1), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2021.1910530

13.

Clayton

R. B.

Leshner

Sanders-Jackson

Hendrickse

(2020). When counterarguing becomes the primary task: Examination of dogmatic anti-vaping messages on psychological reactance, available cognitive resources, and memory. Journal of Communication, 70(4), 522–547. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqaa010

14.

Dillard

J. P.

(1991). The current status of research on sequential-request compliance techniques. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(3), 283–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167291173008

15.

Dillard

J. P.

Hunter

J. E.

Burgoon

(1984). Sequential-request persuasive strategies: Meta-analysis of foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face. Human Communication Research, 10(4), 461–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1984.tb00028.x

16.

Dillard

J. P.

Kinney

T. A.

Cruz

M. G.

(1996). Influence, appraisals, and emotions in close relationships. Communication Monographs, 63(2), 105–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759609376382

17.

Dillard

J. P.

Peck

(2000). Affect and persuasion: Emotional responses to public service announcements. Communication Research, 27(4), 461–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365000027004003

18.

Dillard

J. P.

Shen

(2005). On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Communication Monographs, 72(2), 144–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750500111815

19.

Dunlap

R. E.

Van Liere

K. D.

Mertig

A. G.

Jones

R. E.

(2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00176

20.

Edwards

S. M.

Lee

J. H.

(2002). Forced exposure and psychological reactance: Antecedents and consequences of the perceived intrusiveness of pop-up ads. Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2002.10673678

21.

Finkelstein

S. R.

Boland

W. A.

Vallen

Connell

P. M.

Sherman

G. D.

Feemster

K. A.

(2020). Psychological reactance impacts ratings of pediatrician vaccine-related communication quality, perceived vaccine safety, and vaccination priority among U.S. parents. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, 16(5), 1024–1029. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2019.1694815

22.

Franco

Malhotra

Simonovits

(2014). Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science, 345(6203), 1502–1505. DOI: 10.1126/science.1255484

23.

Friedman

Dunwoody

Rogers

(1999). Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science. Lawrence Erlbaum.

24.

Gardner

Leshner

(2016). The role of narrative and other-referencing in attenuating psychological reactance to diabetes self-care messages. Health Communication, 31(6), 738–751. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2014.993498

25.

Gustafson

Rice

(2019). The effects of uncertainty frames in three science communication topics. Science Communication, 41(6), 679–706. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019870811

26.

Hart

P. S.

(2011). One or many? The influence of episodic and thematic climate change frames on policy preferences and individual behavior change. Science Communication, 33(1), 28–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547010366400

27.

Hayes

A. F.

(2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based perspective (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.

28.

Heaps Henley

T. B

. (1999). Language matters: Wording considerations in hazard perception and warning comprehension. The Journal of Psychology, 133(3), 341–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223989909599747

29.

Jackson

Jacobs

(1983). Generalizing about messages: Suggestions for design and analysis of experiments. Human Communication Research, 9(2), 169–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1983.tb00691.x

30.

Jensen

J. D.

(2008). Scientific uncertainty in news coverage of cancer research: Effects of hedging on scientists’ and journalists’ credibility. Human Communication Research, 34(3), 347–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2008.00324.x

31.

Kampourakis

McCain

(2019). Uncertainty: How it makes science advance. Oxford Academic.

32.

Karmarkar

U. R.

Tormala

Z. L.

(2009). 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

33.

Katz

S. J.

Byrne

Mathios

A. D.

Avery

R. J.

Dorf

M. C.

Safi

A. G.

Niederdeppe

(2020). Testing the effects of certain versus hypothetical language in health risk messages. Communication Monographs, 87(1), 47–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2019.1640889

34.

Kim

S. Y.

Levine

Allen

(2013). Comparing separate process and intertwined models for reactance. Communication Studies, 64(3), 273–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2012.755639

35.

LaVoie

N. R.

Quick

B. L.

Riles

J. M.

Lambert

N. J.

(2017). Are graphic cigarette warning labels an effective message strategy? A test of psychological reactance theory and source appraisal. Communication Research, 44(3), 416–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215609669

36.

Lee

Cameron

G. T.

(2017). Utilizing audiovisual and gain-framed messages to attenuate psychological reactance toward weight management health messages. Health Communication, 32(1), 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2015.1099506

37.

Leiserowitz

Maibach

Rosenthal

Kotcher

Carman

Verner

Lee

Ballew

Uppalapati

Campbell

Myers

Goldberg

Marlon

(2023). Climate change in the American mind: Beliefs & attitudes, December 2022. Yale University and George Mason University, Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

38.

McComas

K. A.

Besley

J. C.

(2017). Messages promoting genetic modification of crops in the context of climate change: Evidence for psychological reactance. Appetite, 108, 104–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.09.026

39.

Dixon

Hmielowski

J. D.

(2019). Psychological reactance from reading basic facts on climate change: The role of prior views and political identification. Environmental Communication, 13(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2018.1548369

40.

Miller

C. H.

Lane

L. T.

Deatrick

L. M.

Young

A. M.

Potts

K. A.

(2007). Psychological reactance and promotional health messages: The effects of controlling language, lexical concreteness, and the restoration of freedom. Human Communication Research, 33(2), 219–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00297.x

41.

Moyer-Gusé

(2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication Theory, 18(3), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00328.x

42.

Moyer-Gusé

Nabi

R. L.

(2010). Explaining the effects of narrative in an entertainment television program: Overcoming resistance to persuasion. Human Communication Research, 36(1), 26–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01367

43.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Genetically engineered crops: Experiences and prospects. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/23395/genetically-engineered-crops-experiences-and-prospects

44.

Nosek

B. A.

Ebersole

C. R.

DeHaven

A. C.

Mellor

D. T.

(2018). The preregistration revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 115(11), 2600–2606. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708274114

45.

O’Keefe

D. J.

(2002). Persuasion: Theory & research (2nd ed.). Sage.

46.

O’Keefe

D. J.

(2007). Brief report: Post hoc power, observed power, a priori power, retrospective power, prospective power, achieved power: Sorting out appropriate uses of statistical power analyses. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(4), 291–299. https://doi.org/10.1080.19312450701641375

47.

Petty

Cacioppo

(1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Springer.

48.

Pew Research Center. (2016). The new food fights: U.S. public divides over food science. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/12/01/the-new-food-fights/

49.

Quick

B. L.

Bates

B. R.

(2010). The use of gain- or loss-frame messages and efficacy appeals to dissuade excessive alcohol consumption among college students: A test of psychological reactance theory. Journal of Health Communication, 15(6), 603–628. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2010.499593

50.

Quick

B. L.

Considine

J. R.

(2008). Examining the use of forceful language when designing exercise persuasive messages for adults: A test of conceptualizing reactance arousal as a two-step process. Health Communication, 23(5), 483–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410230802342150

51.

Quick

B. L.

Shen

Dillard

J. P.

(2013). Reactance theory and persuasion. In Dillard

J. P.

Shen

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 167–183). Sage.

52.

Quick

B. L.

Stephenson

M. T.

(2007). Further evidence that psychological reactance can be modeled as a combination of anger and negative cognitions. Communication Research, 34(3), 255–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650207300

53.

Rains

S. A.

(2013). The nature of psychological reactance revisited: A meta-analytic review. Human Communication Research, 39(1), 47–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2012.01443.x

54.

Rains

S. A.

Turner

M. M.

(2007). Psychological reactance and persuasive health communication: A test and extension of the intertwined model. Human Communication Research, 33(2), 241–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00298.x

55.

Ratcliff

C. L.

(2021). Characterizing reactance in communication research: A review of conceptual and operational approaches. Communication Research, 48(7), 1033–1058. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219872126

56.

Ratcliff

C. L.

Fleerackers

Wicke

Harvill

King

A. J.

Jensen

J. D.

(2023). Framing covid-19 preprint research as uncertain: A mixed-method study of public reactions. Health Communication, 39, 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2023.2164954

57.

Reeves

Yeykelis

Cummings

J. J.

(2016). The use of media in media psychology. Media Psychology, 19(1), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1030083

58.

Reinhart

A. M.

Marshall

H. M.

Feeley

T. H.

Tutzauer

(2007). The persuasive effects of message framing in organ donation: The mediating role of psychological reactance. Communication Monographs, 74(2), 229–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750701397098

59.

Reynolds-Tylus

(2019). An examination of message elaboration as a moderator of psychological reactance. Communication Research Reports, 36(2), 158–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2019.1580567

60.

Rhode

J. B.

Dent

A. L.

Ditto

P. H.

(2022). Climate change consensus messages may cause reactance in conservatives, but there is no meta-analytic evidence that they backfire. Environmental Communication, 17(1), 60–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2022.2101501

61.

Rosenberg

B. D.

Siegel

J. T.

(2018). A 50-year review of psychological reactance theory: Do not read this article. Motivation Science, 4(4), 281–300. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000091

62.

Rosenberg

B. D.

Siegel

J. T.

(2021). Threatening uncertainty and psychological reactance: Are freedom threats always noxious? Current Psychology, 42(5), 3968–3977. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01640-8

63.

Shen

Suyeun

Kristin

K. A.

Demetria

(2018). The psychological mechanisms of persuasive impact from narrative communication. Studies in Communication Sciences, 17(2), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.24434/j.scoms.2017.02.003

64.

Silvia

P. J.

(2006). Reactance and the dynamics of disagreement: Multiple paths from threatened freedom to resistance to persuasion. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(5), 673–685. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.309

65.

Slater

D. M.

Peter

Valkenburg

P. M.

(2015). Message variability and heterogeneity: A core challenge for communication research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 39(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2015.1167917

66.

Song

McComas

K. A.

Schuler

K. L.

(2018). Source effects on psychological reactance to regulatory policies: The role of trust and similarity. Science Communication, 40(5), 591–620. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547018791293

67.

Steindl

Jonas

Sittenthaler

Traut-Mattausch

Greenberg

(2015). Understanding psychological reactance: New developments and findings. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 223(4), 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000222

68.

Tormala

Z. L.

(2016). The role of certainty (and uncertainty) in attitudes and persuasion. Current Opinion in Psychology, 10, 6–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.10.017

69.

United Nations. (n.d.). What is climate change? https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/what-is-climate-change

70.

van der Linden

Maibach

Leiserowitz

. (2019). Exposure to scientific consensus does not cause psychological reactance. Environmental Communication, 17(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2019.1617763

71.

Yuan

Besley

J. C.

(2019). Be mean or be nice? Understanding the effects of aggressive and polite communication styles in child vaccination debate. Health Communication, 34(10), 1212–1221. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2018.1471337

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.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

Tipping the Scales of Psychological Reactance: A Closer Look at Imperative Language and the Role of Epistemic Certainty

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material