Stop the Denial! The Effect of Assertive Language in Pro-Environmental Messages on Reactance, Attitude, and Behavior Intention Master’s Thesis University of Amsterdam - Graduate School of Communication Master Track Persuasive Communication Antonina Siermann Student ID: 12265039 Supervisor: Ivana Bušljeta Banks 25.06.2019 STOP THE DENIAL! 2 Abstract Encouraging individuals to act environmentally friendly is challenging. Past research reveals that one of the reasons public messages aimed at changing behavior fail to achieve the desired effect is the use of assertive language. Since this controlling and forceful phrasing of messages tends to elicit reactance, an aversive arousal in response to threats to freedom and autonomy, receivers are less likely to comply with the advocated stance. This study aims to examine this relationship of assertive language on reactance, attitude, and behavior intention in the context of promoting pro-environmental behavior. Additionally, a frequently used moderator in communication research is included which might mitigate the arousal of reactance towards assertive language: source credibility. Since highly credible sources are considered to be knowledgeable and competent, the assertive language used may be seen as justified, and not as threatening or impolite. The conceptual model used in this study is analyzed in the context of plastic pollution and the use of reusable water bottles as an advised solution. In line with prior research to assertive language and reactance theory, results indicate that reactance mediates the effect of assertive language on attitude towards reusable bottles and behavior intention to use a reusable bottle in the future: Participants exposed to a highly assertive message experienced significantly more reactance than participants in the low-assertive condition, which negatively affected their attitudes and behavior intentions. However, source credibility showed no significant effect in this relationship so that a moderated mediation effect was excluded. Keywords: assertive language, reactance, source credibility, attitude, behavior intention STOP THE DENIAL! 3 Introduction ‘Drop Dirty Palm Oil Now’, ‘Take Action!’, and ‘Stop Bankrupting Our Oceans’ are common slogans used by policy-makers and environmental stakeholders in an attempt to change individuals’ behavior (Greenpeace International, 2019; WWF – World Wildlife Fund, 2019). However, prior research in the field of health-communication, psycholinguistics, and advertising has shown that such highly assertive phrases, including commands and orders, result in low receiver compliance (Kronrod, Grinstein, & Wathieu, 2012; Dillard & Shen, 2005; Quick & Considine, 2008; Zemack-Rugar, Moore, & Fitzsimons, 2017). The psychological mechanism behind this effect is called reactance, an aversive arousal that elicits when individuals feel that their autonomy or self-determination is being threatened (Brehm, 1966; Miller et al., 2007). The Theory of Psychological Reactance further states that individuals experiencing reactance are motivated to reestablish threatened freedoms through resistance techniques, such as message rejection, source derogation, or behaving exactly opposite of how they are asked to (Brehm & Brehm, 1981; Ungar, Sieverding, Schweizer, Stadnitski, 2015). However, research of psychological reactance in the field of social issues are limited, although assertive language is extensively used in pro-environmental messages. Furthermore, studies indicate that assertive language does not always lead to the experience of reactance: Messages that contain explicit statements and direct commands can also be perceived as clear and important, which positively affects receivers’ assessment of the source (Miller et al., 2007). Similarly, assertive expressions used by highly credible sources can be viewed as justifiable, and therefore may not elicit reactance in receivers. In comparison, assertive language used by low-credibility sources can be perceived as unjustified, leading to defensive reactions (Jenkins & Dragojevic, 2013). However, according to Sternthal, Phillips, and Dholokia (1978), source credibility only matters when the claims made in the message are highly discrepant from receivers’ initial opinion. If the arguments STOP THE DENIAL! 4 made are in line with receivers’ opinion, both high and low-credibility sources are likely to reach the same persuasion effects. Taking the prior findings collectively, the purpose of this research is to extend current reactance literature by investigating the relationship of assertive language on receivers’ reactance, attitude, and behavior intention in a pro-environmental context. The study further examines if this relationship is dependent on receivers’ assessment of the source as source credibility has proven to have a considerable impact on the effects of assertive language. Since the conceptual model is analyzed in the context of plastic pollution and the use of reusable water bottles as an advised solution, the study focuses on receivers’ attitude towards reusable bottles (ARB) and their behavior intention to use a reusable bottle in the near future (BI). The research question of this study is as follows: To what extent do pro-environmental messages written in high-assertive language have an influence on receiver’s reactance, attitude, and behavior intention compared to pro- environmental messages written in low-assertive language? What role does source credibility play in this relationship? Investigating this relationship addresses several gaps in literature. First, the majority of academic research on reactance theory is largely limited to the field of health communication (Rains & Turner, 2007; Dillard & Shen, 2005; Grandpre et al., 2003) and commercial advertising (Fitzsimons & Lehmann, 2004; Meirick & Nisbett, 2011). Studies that examine psychological reactance with regard to social issues such as pro-environmental campaigns have been minimal. Second, research on the effect of assertive language on receivers’ reactions yields inconsistent findings (Kim, Baek, Yoon, Oh, & Choi, 2017; Katz, Kronrod, Grinstein & Nisan, 2018). Extending knowledge on assertive phrasing in pro-environmental messages and its impact on public opinion can, therefore, further illuminate the linguistic research. From a STOP THE DENIAL! 5 practical point of view, the findings of the study reveal how and when assertive language can increase compliance, which is especially important when persuading individuals to act in an environmentally friendly manner. Thus, the study provides a direction for policy-makers and organizations to effectively design environmental messages in the future and reach maximum persuasion effects. Third, while source credibility is extensively investigated in the field of communication, a review of the literature provides no findings of this concept being studied in a pro-environmental context combined with assertive language. The thesis starts with a theoretical grounding of the central concepts used in the study, while the proposed hypotheses are consecutively presented. The theoretical framework is followed by the description of the chosen research design and the procedure thereof. In the results section, analyses of the collected data and the findings of the study are presented. The thesis concludes with a discussion of the findings, including theoretical and managerial implications, the limitations of the study, and suggestions for future research. Theoretical Background Pro-Environmental Messages Since human behavior is the main factor causing environmental problems such as climate change or plastic pollution, there is an increasing need for governments, organizations, and green political parties to effectively craft messages that promote behavior change towards a more sustainable and environmentally friendly lifestyle (Vlek & Steg, 2007; Bhatnagar & McKay-Nesbitt, 2016). However, persuading individuals to act in an environmentally responsible manner proves a challenging task since the beneficiary thereof is not always directly the individual him/herself but society or the environment at large (Lucas, Brooks, Darnton, & Jones, 2008; Kronrod, Grinstein, & Wathieu, 2012). Additionally, a large range of studies reveals that public messages are often written in assertive language, including STOP THE DENIAL! 6 commands, explicit statements, and orders, which leads to reluctant reactions of receivers’ (Wilson & Kunkel, 2000; Zhang & Sapp, 2013; Grandpre et al. 2003). Since these assertive expressions force receivers to comply with the advocated stance, the message can be perceived as threatening and impolite, which can in turn increase negative outcomes, such as message rejection or source derogation (Dillard & Shen, 2005; Jenkins & Dragojevic, 2013). Other findings on pro-environmental campaigns reveal more promising strategies to effectively craft persuasive messages. For example, the results of a study by Gifford and Comeau (2011) show that message framing has a considerable impact on perceived climate change competence, engagement, and behavioral intentions. The authors concluded that motivational-oriented frames (i.e. messages that involve solutions, values, and portray positive changes in lifestyle) tend to be more effective in encouraging climate-change-related behaviors than sacrifice-oriented frames (i.e. messages that focus on sacrifices by citizens). Moreover, Cialdini (2003) recommends public service communicators to use both descriptive (i.e. portray what people