ABSTRACT

Research on resistance to persuasion has examined a number of relevant variables such as one’s bolstering of one’s own argument and, for example, generating counterarguments in order to resist a persuasive message. Is resistance to persuasion a function of a widespread practice of bolstering and/or counterarguing? Or, is resistance to persuasion more meaningfully examined from an individual differences approach based on relative levels of trait argumentativeness within samples? Three hypotheses were offered and tested. Results suggested that empirical investigations of the relationship of bolstering arguments and generating counterarguments to resistance to persuasion should report argumentativeness levels of research participants. Trait argumentativeness may have a very substantial role in the effect sizes reported in resistance to persuasion research. High argumentatives significantly preferred counterarguing over bolstering in resistance to persuasion whereas low argumentatives significantly preferred bolstering over counterarguing, suggesting a root difference between high and low argumentatives requiring further investigation for verification.

摘要

关于抗说服力的研究已经研究了许多相关的变量，例如一个人对自己的论点的支持，以及例如产生抗辩以抵抗说服力的信息。对说服的抵抗是否是支持和/或反驳的广泛实践的功能？还是基于样本中性格争论的相对水平，从个体差异方法中更有意义地检验了对说服力的抵抗力？提供了三个假设并进行了检验。结果表明，关于支持论点和产生抗辩抗性的反驳关系的实证研究应报告研究参与者的论据水平。特质的论证性可能在抗说服性研究报告的效应大小中起着非常重要的作用。高议论者在支持说服力方面明显优于反对论，而低议论者在支持说服力方面明显优于支持论据，这表明高论点和低论据之间的根本差异需要进一步研究以进行验证。