Reducing psychological reactance to bystander intervention messages: comparing preemptive and postscript mitigation strategies

IF 1.9 Q2 COMMUNICATION Communication Research Reports Pub Date : 2022-10-10 DOI:10.1080/08824096.2022.2130227
Tobias Reynolds-Tylus, Kathleen E. Smith, Megan E. Moore
{"title":"Reducing psychological reactance to bystander intervention messages: comparing preemptive and postscript mitigation strategies","authors":"Tobias Reynolds-Tylus, Kathleen E. Smith, Megan E. Moore","doi":"10.1080/08824096.2022.2130227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study compared the effectiveness of two approaches for diminishing psychological reactance in the context of bystander intervention: preemptive and postscript mitigation. Undergraduates (N = 598) completed an online survey experiment. Participants viewed a message promoting bystander intervention and were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: preemptive script, restoration postscript, or a message-only control (no pre/postscript). Consistent with past work, no differences were observed in the effectiveness of the preemptive and postscript mitigation techniques vis-à-vis reactance and behavioral intention. The use of a reactance mitigation strategy (preemptive or postscript) resulted in greater behavioral intention relative to a control message. However, post hoc analyses revealed this effect occurred among women, but not men. Counter to expectations, the use of preemptive and postscript strategies did not reduce reactance relative to a control message.","PeriodicalId":47084,"journal":{"name":"Communication Research Reports","volume":"39 1","pages":"259 - 265"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Research Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2022.2130227","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study compared the effectiveness of two approaches for diminishing psychological reactance in the context of bystander intervention: preemptive and postscript mitigation. Undergraduates (N = 598) completed an online survey experiment. Participants viewed a message promoting bystander intervention and were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: preemptive script, restoration postscript, or a message-only control (no pre/postscript). Consistent with past work, no differences were observed in the effectiveness of the preemptive and postscript mitigation techniques vis-à-vis reactance and behavioral intention. The use of a reactance mitigation strategy (preemptive or postscript) resulted in greater behavioral intention relative to a control message. However, post hoc analyses revealed this effect occurred among women, but not men. Counter to expectations, the use of preemptive and postscript strategies did not reduce reactance relative to a control message.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
减少对旁观者干预信息的心理抗拒:比较先发制人和后记缓解策略
摘要本研究比较了在旁观者干预背景下减少心理抗拒的两种方法的有效性:先发制人和事后缓解。598名大学生完成了一项在线调查实验。参与者观看了促进旁观者干预的信息,并被随机分配到三种条件之一:先发制人的脚本,恢复后记,或仅消息控制(没有前/后记)。与过去的工作一致,对于-à-vis抗拒和行为意向,在先发制人和后记缓解技术的有效性方面没有观察到差异。电抗缓解策略(先发制人或后记)的使用导致了相对于控制消息更大的行为意图。然而,事后分析显示,这种影响发生在女性身上,而不是男性。与预期相反,使用先发制人和后记策略并没有减少相对于控制消息的电抗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
Extending the communication during sexual activity model: what role does sexual communication self-efficacy play? Conflict styles within individualistic, low power distance, and low context nations: a four nation comparison Science terms elicit ideological differences in message processing Development and validation of the commitment to social activism scale using the Thurstone scaling procedure Patient perceptions of healthcare provider (un)helpful approaches to explaining health information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1