Sleeper effect from below: Long-term effects of source credibility and user comments on the persuasiveness of news articles

Abstract

User comments on news websites are a controversial element of online communication. Various studies have reported the negative effects of comments criticizing the related news articles on readers’ attitudes toward the issues described in these articles. However, these findings are mostly based on measurements directly after the reception of comments. No research has investigated the long-term effects of comments on readers’ article-related attitudes and compared them with the effects of cues emanating from the articles themselves. Therefore, this study transferred the sleeper effect in persuasion to news sites with comment sections. In a 2 × 2-experiment, the persuasiveness of an article was measured immediately after reception and after a delay of 2 weeks. Low/high source credibility and negative/positive user comments served as discounting/acceptance cues. Results suggest that user comments caused a relative sleeper effect of the article-induced persuasion; they affected the article’s persuasiveness in the short term, but not in the long term.

Keywords

Interactivity media effects news websites persuasion sleeper effect source credibility user comments

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

Brossard

Scheufele

et al . (2014) The “nasty effect”: online incivility and risk perceptions of emerging technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 19: 373–387.

Bless

Wänke

Bohner

et al . (1994) Need for Cognition: Eine Skala zur Erfassung von Engagement und Freude bei Denkaufgaben [Need for cognition: a scale measuring engagement and happiness in cognitive tasks]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie 25: 147–154.

Coe

Kenski

Rains

(2014) Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in newspaper website comments. Journal of Communication 64: 658–679.

Cook

(1971) The discounting cue hypothesis and the sleeper effect. Unpublished Manuscript, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.

Foos

(2015) Reawakening the sleeper effect in consumer research: the role of implicit self-anchoring and explicit self-referencing on the persuasive impact of countervailing information over time. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester, Manchester. Available at: https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=uk-ac-man-scw:263610&datastreamId=FULL-TEXT.PDF

Foos

Keeling

(2016) Redressing the sleeper effect: evidence for the favorable persuasive impact of discounting information over time in a contemporary advertising context. Journal of Advertising 45(1): 19–25.

Gillig

Greenwald

(1974) Is it time to lay the sleeper effect to rest? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 29(1): 132–139.

Greenwald

Pratkanis

Leippe

et al . (1986) Under what conditions does theory obstruct research progress? Psychological Review 93(2): 216–229.

Gruder

Cook

Hennigan

et al . (1978) Empirical tests of the absolute sleeper effect predicted from the discounting cue hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36(10): 1061–1074.

10.

Hovland

Weiss

(1951) The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly 15(4): 635–650.

11.

Hovland

Janis

Kelley

(1953) Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies If Opinion Change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

12.

Hovland

Lumsdaine

Sheffield

(1949) Experiments on Mass Communication. Studies in Social Psychology in World War II, Vol. 3. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

13.

Hsueh

Yogeeswaran

Malinen

(2015) “Leave your comment below”: can biased online comments influence our own prejudicial attitudes and behaviors? Human Communication Research 41: 557–576.

14.

Kohring

Matthes

(2007) Trust in news media: Development and validation of a multidimensional Scale. Communication Research 34(2): 231–252.

15.

Kruglanski

Thompson

(1999) Persuasion by a single route: a view from the unimodel. Psychological Inquiry 10(2): 83–109.

16.

Kumkale

Albarracín

(2004) The sleeper effect in persuasion: a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin 130(1): 143–172.

17.

Lee

E-J

Jang

(2010) What do others’ reactions to news on internet portal sites tell us? Effects of presentation format and readers’ need for cognition on reality perception. Communication Research 37(6): 825–846.

18.

Lippmann

(1922) Public Opinion. New York: Free Press.

19.

McCroskey

Teven

(1999) Goodwill: a reexamination of the construct and its measurement. Communication Monographs 66: 90–103.

20.

Miller

Campbell

(1959) Recency and primacy in persuasion as a function of the timing of speeches and measurements. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 59(1): 1–9.

21.

Newman

Fletcher

Levy

DAL

et al . (2016) Reuters institute digital news report 2016. Available at: https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk

22.

Petty

Cacioppo

(1986) Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change (Springer Series in Social Psychology). Berlin: Springer.

23.

Pratkanis

Greenwald

Baumgardner

(1988) In search of reliable persuasion effects: III: the sleeper effect is dead: long live the sleeper effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54(2): 203–218.

24.

Priester

Wegener

Petty

et al . (1999) Examining the psychological process underlying the sleeper effect: the elaboration likelihood model explanation. Media Psychology 1(1): 27–48.

25.

Prochazka

Schweiger

(2016) Media criticism online. Allegations and criticism towards news media in user comments. Studies in Communication and Media 5(4): 454–469.

26.

Prochazka

Weber

Schweiger

(2018) Effects of civility and reasoning in user comments on perceived journalistic quality. Journalism Studies 19: 62–78.

27.

Ruiz

Domingo

Micó

et al . (2011) Public sphere 2.0? The democratic qualities of citizen debates in online newspapers. The International Journal of Press/Politics 16: 463–487.

28.

Stroud

Scacco

Muddiman

et al . (2015) Changing deliberative norms on news organizations’ Facebook sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 20(2): 188–203.

29.

Stroud

Van Duyn

Peacock

(2016) News commenters and news comment readers. Available at: https://mediaengagement.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ENP-News-Commenters-and-Comment-Readers1.pdf

30.

Winter

(2013) Lost in Information? Sozialpsychologische Aspekte der Selektion und Rezeption von journalistischen Online-Angeboten [Lost in Information? Social-Psychological Aspects of the Selection and Reception of Journalistic Online Services]. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer Verlag.

31.

Winter

Krämer

(2016) Who’s right: the author or the audience? Effects of user comments and ratings on the perception of online science articles. Communications 41(3): 597.

32.

Zaichkowsky

(1985) Measuring the involvement construct. Journal of Consumer Research 12: 341–352.

33.

Ziegele

Quiring

(2013) Conceptualizing online discussion value: a multidimensional framework for analyzing user comments on mass-media websites. Annals of the International Communication Association 37: 125–153.

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

0.07 MB