Theses and Dissertations from UMD
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/2
New submissions to the thesis/dissertation collections are added automatically as they are received from the Graduate School. Currently, the Graduate School deposits all theses and dissertations from a given semester after the official graduation date. This means that there may be up to a 4 month delay in the appearance of a give thesis/dissertation in DRUM
More information is available at Theses and Dissertations at University of Maryland Libraries.
Browse
3 results
Search Results
Item Testing a Dual Path Framework of the Boomerang Effect: Proattitudinal versus Counterattitudinal Messages(2017) Zhao, Xinyan; Fink, Edward L.; Communication; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)This dissertation aims to differentiate two types of boomerang effects on belief and attitude change: a boomerang effect under a proattitudinal message and a boomerang effect under a counterattitudinal message. By employing a 2 (Message valence: anti-policy vs. pro-policy) × 2 (Issues: legal age for drinking vs. legal age of marriage) × 2 (Threat to freedom: low threat vs. high threat) × 2 (Argument quality: low quality vs. high quality) plus 2 (Control groups: no-message control for the two issues) cross-sectional factorial design (N = 458), antecedents and mediators that bring about the two types of boomerang effect were examined. Under a counterattitudinal message, both argument quality and prior belief strength predicted a boomerang effect: Those receiving a low-quality argument or those with a strong prior belief, as compared with the control group, exhibited a boomerang on belief and attitude. The dominant mechanism that explained the relationship between argument quality and belief position boomerang was counterarguing (vs. anger). Under a proattitudinal message, there was an indirect effect of trait reactance on belief boomerang through anger (vs. negative cognitions). But the perceived threat to attitudinal freedom did not predict a boomerang effect. These results contribute to attitude change research by empirically separating cognitive and affective mechanisms for boomerang effects. Furthermore, this study refines the construct of negative cognitions and integrates reactance theory and the cognitive response perspective on boomerang effects. Both structural equation models and confirmatory factor analysis suggested that counterarguments and nonrefutational thoughts were two distinct types of negative cognitions. The two constructs were caused by different sets of antecedents and had different outcomes: Poor argument quality caused counterarguments, whereas perceived threat and trait reactance caused nonrefutational thoughts. Only counterarguments mediated the effects of argument quality on the boomerang effects for belief (e.g., the extent to which the legal drinking age should be decreased on a magnitude scale) and belief position (e.g., the legal age for drinking), which subsequently predicted the boomerang effect on attitude (e.g., the extent to which the legal drinking age is liked). This dissertation expands the theoretical scope of belief and attitude change research. Future research should explore the persuasive appeals for mitigating the cognitive or affective process resulting in a boomerang effect. Among those who are more prone to boomerang on certain issues, a boomerang appeal can be employed to persuade.Item The Following Message Might Make You Mad: Forewarning and Inoculation Against Reactance(2011) Magid, Yoav; Turner, Monique M; Communication; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)If a persuasive attempt, be it a commercial advertisement, a Public Service Announcement, or a major public health campaign, threatens individuals' perceived freedom to make their own choices, psychological reactance can cause the attempt to be ineffective or even to backfire. Extant research points to two major ways of reducing reactance, the first being weakening the language of the persuasive message, and the second offering a freedom-restoring postscript. In the present research, a method to nip reactance in its bud by forewarning and inoculating individuals against their impending reactant state is proposed and experimentally tested. The data suggested that forewarning individuals against reactance made them more reactant, but inoculating them had no effect. In terms of boomerang effect, forewarning and inoculating seemed to work (marginally) for women, but backfire for men. Implications are discussed.Item THE DYNAMICS OF REACTANCE AND COGNITIVE STRUCTURE: REACTANCE, RESTORATION, AND TIME.(2010) Bessarabova, Elena; Fink, Edward L.; Turner, Monique M.; Communication; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)This dissertation examined the effects of freedom-limiting communication on attitude structures at three points in time. A 2 (Threat to freedom: low threat vs. high threat) x 2 (Restoration postscript: present vs. filler postscript) x 3 (Time: immediate-time measurement vs. one-minute delay vs. two-minute delay) plus 3 (control groups for each time point: immediate-time measurement vs. one-minute delay vs. two-minute delay) between-participants design was employed. The results replicated the findings of existing research on reactance by showing that when threat to freedom was high, a boomerang effect emerged, leading to change in attitude and behavioral intention in the direction opposite to the one advocated in the message. This study also advanced the theory of reactance by documenting how threat to freedom affects both the focal attitude concept targeted by the message (here, recycling) as well as a concept related to the target concept (here, energy conservation). In addition, the effects of pairing different levels of threat to freedom with a restoration postscript were examined: The findings indicated that adding a restoration postscript (defined as the suggestion that an individual still has freedom to make a decision) to low threat to freedom messages might be detrimental to persuasion as compared to adding a restoration component when threat to freedom is high. Finally, the effects of threat to freedom and restoration over time were considered: The results of the experiment suggest that reactance effects may not be persistent over time.