ABSTRACT

Despite more than six decades of research, foundational arguments about mechanisms proposed in inoculation theory to bring about persuasion resistance have gone untested. We conducted an experiment to examine a classic idea about the optimal strength of counterarguments and refutations in inoculation messages as well as a contemporary notion regarding forewarning. The results were inconsistent with the idea that weak counterarguments and strong refutations are optimal for fostering resistance. The contrast models examining the interaction between counterargument and refutation strength were not consistent with the expected patterns for traditional threat, motivational threat, counterarguing, or attitudinal resistance. The results did, however, offer some evidence for the importance of forewarning in inoculation messages. Including forewarning with a refutational preemption led to greater motivational threat relative to a refutational preemption without forewarning or a control message.

摘要

尽管进行了 6 年多的研究，但关于接种理论中提出的导致说服抵抗的机制的基本论点尚未得到验证。我们进行了一项实验，以检验关于接种信息中反驳和反驳的最佳强度的经典思想以及关于预警的当代观念。结果与弱反驳和强反驳最适合培养抵抗的观点不一致。检查反驳和反驳强度之间相互作用的对比模型与传统威胁、动机威胁、反驳或态度抵抗的预期模式不一致。然而，结果确实为接种信息中预警的重要性提供了一些证据。