ABSTRACT

Through two experiments (N₁ = 131, N₂ = 520), this study looks at whether the negative effects of acronyms and abbreviations in headlines are based on their presence or their difficulty. In all, it finds support for a difficulty effect; people had lower content and source perceptions when they were shown a headline with unfamiliar acronym(s) compared with ones they knew, and they were more frustrated with those articles. These differences were moderated by need for cognition. In terms of a presence effect, people did perceive some differences in articles with acronyms in their headlines compared to those without, particularly if they were paying close attention, but those differences were much less pronounced. In other words, readers don’t seem to be inherently bothered by the presence of acronyms in headlines; they seem to be bothered by the ones they don’t understand. These findings suggest that journalists should strive to explain acronyms and abbreviations in headlines, rather than worry about avoiding them altogether. Implications for journalistic practice, reader engagement, and dual-processing theories of persuasion are discussed.

摘要

通过两个实验（N ₁  = 131，N ₂  = 520），本研究着眼于标题中首字母缩略词的负面影响是基于它们的存在还是它们的难度。总之，它找到了难度效应的支持。与他们知道的标题相比，当人们看到带有不熟悉的首字母缩略词的标题时，他们对内容和来源的看法较低，他们对这些文章更加沮丧。这些差异被认知需要所缓和. 就存在效应而言，人们确实感觉到标题中带有首字母缩略词的文章与没有首字母缩略词的文章存在一些差异，尤其是在他们密切关注的情况下，但这些差异并不那么明显。换句话说，读者似乎并不会被标题中出现的首字母缩略词所困扰。他们似乎被他们不理解的人所困扰。这些发现表明，记者应该努力解释标题中的首字母缩略词和缩略语，而不是担心完全避免使用它们。讨论了对新闻实践、读者参与和说服的双重处理理论的影响。