Novelty As a Parameter for Using Arguments in Persuasive Communication
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Novelty as a Parameter for Using Arguments in Persuasive Communication EMPIRICAL PAPER GERJO KOK *Author affiliations can be found in the back matter of this article ABSTRACT CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Background: In this paper, a series of studies investigating one of the parameters for Gerjo Kok effectiveness in relation to using arguments in persuasive communication messages Maastricht University, NL is described: the novelty of arguments. [email protected] Method: The first study involves the elicitation of arguments, the second study entails the identification of novel arguments, and the third study focuses on the influence of novel versus familiar arguments. The main hypothesis for this series of studies was: KEYWORDS: persuasive communication; Messages with novel, valid and relevant arguments will lead to more attitude change arguments; parameters; than messages with familiar, valid and relevant arguments. attitude change Results: This hypothesis is supported by the data: messages with new, valid and relevant arguments led to more attitude change than messages with familiar, valid TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: and relevant arguments. Kok, G. (2021). Novelty as a Parameter for Using Discussion: To ensure the central processing of arguments, messages need to be new Arguments in Persuasive to the receiver. Communication. Health Psychology Bulletin, 5(1), There is a need for more experimental studies identifying parameters for effectiveness pp. 12–19. DOI: https://doi. in relation to various behavior change methods. org/10.5334/hpb.13 Kok Health Psychology Bulletin DOI: 10.5334/hpb.13 13 INTRODUCTION more meaningful premises and a conclusion (Burnstein & Vinokur, 1977; Vinokur & Burnstein, 1978). The Many meta-analyses addressing the effectiveness Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty & Wegener, 1998; of behavior change methods have failed to take into Petty et al., 2019) predicts that high-quality arguments account one or more of the four conditions that must be will be effective only when the receivers process the met for a method to effectively influence behavior (1) a message through the central route, not when they use the method can only influence behavior if it targets beliefs peripheral route. A higher number of arguments does not that underlie a determinant that the method can change; ensure quality and, in fact, may negatively affect attitude (2) these beliefs (and the overarching determinant) must change; they may be convincing for people who process in fact be relevant predictors of the behavior; (3) the the information through the peripheral route, but they method must be translated into a practical application will be less convincing for people who process through that fits with the target population, its culture, and the the central route. Health promotors try to develop high relevant context; and (4) the parameters for effectiveness quality messages and ensure that those receiving these (the conditions under which the methods are shown to messages process them through the central route, in be effective) must be satisfied in the final application of order to create maintenance of change. the method (Peters et al., 2015; De Bruin et al., 2015). It has been suggested (Vinokur & Burnstein 1978; This last condition in particular is often not taken into Burnstein & Vinokur, 1977) that the following four account. For the coding of behavior change methods, as characteristics determine the quality of arguments, that well as the translation of these methods into practical is, their effectiveness after careful processing: applications, it is not enough to simply provide a con- sensus-based definition. It is also essential to identify Direction, the extent to which the argument and satisfy parameters for effectiveness in relation to supports a specific opinion X or supports the each chosen method (Bartholomew Eldredge et al., opposite opinion Y; 2016; Kok et al., 2016; Peters & Kok, 2016). All behavior Relevance, the extent to which the argument is change methods have such parameters for effectiveness relevant to the topic of the message; (Crutzen & Peters, 2017). Validity, the extent to which the argument is true, Social psychologists contribute to our knowledge valid and plausible; about these parameters by studying behavior change Novelty, the extent to which the message contains in laboratory settings and conducting experiments new arguments, unlikely to have already been that systematically manipulate the relevant concepts considered by the receiver. being studied. In this paper, a study investigating the parameters for effectiveness in relation to using These characteristics can be seen as parameters arguments in persuasive communication messages for effectiveness for the behavior change method is described. This study was part of the author’s PhD ‘Arguments’. Arguments are often used in persuasive dissertation (written in Dutch), and laid the groundwork communication with the aim of changing attitudes. for a larger study comparing the influence of arguments The series of studies presented here focus on the versus social comparison (Kok, 1983). This larger essential – but often ignored – role of novelty: “For study has been published (Kok et al., 1986, in Dutch). central processing of arguments they need to be new The study described here has never been published to the message receiver” (Bartholomew Eldredge et before (unfortunately, the original data are lost and al., 2016, p. 385 and Kok et al., 2016, suppl. p. 10). As some information is not reported here because it was a consequence, health promotors try to develop high not reported in the dissertation or in the chapter). quality messages containing arguments that are new, Nevertheless, in hindsight, the study demonstrates as well as relevant and valid, and which promote change perfectly the relevance of parameters for effectiveness. in the right direction. This combination is essential; it is The data are from 1983, but the process outlined here is easy to come up with new arguments, but is extremely just as relevant today. difficult to provide new arguments for the target Health promotors often use messages designed population that are also relevant, valid and in the right to change attitudes as a first step towards changing direction. intentions and behaviors. One of the most widely The question that springs to mind, then, is: How does used behavior change methods for bringing about the health promotor identify and select arguments that attitude change is persuasive communication (McGuire, are new as well as relevant, valid, and also promote 2012). Persuasive communication can be defined as change in the right direction? It is not difficult to come communication that guides individuals and environmental up with new arguments; the challenge is to find new agents toward the adoption of an idea, attitude, or action arguments that also meet the other three criteria. In by using arguments or other means (Petty et al., 2009). the following section, we will describe three studies that, Arguments can be defined as the use of a set of one or together, nicely demonstrate this process. The first study Kok Health Psychology Bulletin DOI: 10.5334/hpb.13 14 involves the elicitation of arguments, the second study STUDY 2: SELECTING NEW VERSUS entails the identification of new arguments, and the FAMILIAR ARGUMENTS third study focuses on the influence of new and familiar arguments. The main hypothesis for this series of studies A second study was conducted in order to assess the was: Messages with new, valid and relevant arguments arguments generated in study 1 in terms of validity, will lead to more attitude change than messages with relevance, novelty, and direction (in favor of or against). familiar, valid and relevant arguments. At the time these studies were carried out, ethical METHOD approval was not customary; however, all procedures would The 30 arguments were evaluated by 76 high school have been approved by currently accepted standards. students (grades 4 and 5). Students read the arguments and judged them on four characteristics using 5-point scales, ranging from “Highly” to “Not at all”: STUDY 1: ELICITATION OF ARGUMENTS New versus familiar: “We would like to know, in To determine the influence of new and familiar arguments, relation to the arguments listed below, whether we first needed to manipulate the level of novelty versus you are already familiar with these arguments or familiarity of arguments in both directions of the scale. not. An argument is highly new for you if you don’t An initial study was therefore conducted in order to select know it, have never heard about it and have never these arguments. thought about it. An argument is highly familiar to you if you do know it, have heard about it often, METHOD and have thought about it often”. The attitude topic chosen for use in this study is not from Direction (in favor or against): “We would like to the area of health promotion. There is, however, no reason know if you think the arguments listed below are to assume that the process would be any different for in favor of or against the statement provided. topics or issues which are related to health promotion. In An argument can be seen as highly in favor of line with our wish to use a relevant but rarely discussed the statement if it expresses an opinion in line topic, we decided on “Punishments and rewards in with (in the same directions as) the statement. education”. The participants in our studies were all high An argument can be seen as highly against the school students or first year university students, meaning statement if it expresses an opinion in opposition that this topic was highly relevant to them. At the same to (in the opposite direction of) the statement. time, we did not consider this to be a widely discussed Note that this is not about your own opinion but topic within educational settings. The topic was therefore only about the direction of the argument”. deemed suitable in terms of identifying new arguments.