Believe it or not? Examining how one’s own normative beliefs impact the perceived credibility of descriptive norms-based messages

IF 1.9 Q2 COMMUNICATION Communication Research Reports Pub Date : 2022-06-04 DOI:10.1080/08824096.2022.2083597
Buduo Wang, Natalie Brown-Devlin
{"title":"Believe it or not? Examining how one’s own normative beliefs impact the perceived credibility of descriptive norms-based messages","authors":"Buduo Wang, Natalie Brown-Devlin","doi":"10.1080/08824096.2022.2083597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A large body of norms-based research has demonstrated that descriptive norm appeals in health messages can shape message viewers’ normative beliefs, which then impact persuasive outcomes. This study, however, suggests that, at least for some health topics (here, a mask-wearing campaign), descriptive norm appeals do not change message recipients’ normative beliefs. Instead, one’s own normative beliefs may function as a moderator for the effect of norm appeals on message credibility and subsequent persuasive outcomes. Specifically, a positive (negative) indirect effect was observed (descriptive norm appeals – message credibility – perceived message effectiveness – behavior intentions) when viewers’ own normative beliefs were more consistent (inconsistent) with what the descriptive norm appeal indicated. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":47084,"journal":{"name":"Communication Research Reports","volume":"39 1","pages":"181 - 191"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Research Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2022.2083597","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: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT A large body of norms-based research has demonstrated that descriptive norm appeals in health messages can shape message viewers’ normative beliefs, which then impact persuasive outcomes. This study, however, suggests that, at least for some health topics (here, a mask-wearing campaign), descriptive norm appeals do not change message recipients’ normative beliefs. Instead, one’s own normative beliefs may function as a moderator for the effect of norm appeals on message credibility and subsequent persuasive outcomes. Specifically, a positive (negative) indirect effect was observed (descriptive norm appeals – message credibility – perceived message effectiveness – behavior intentions) when viewers’ own normative beliefs were more consistent (inconsistent) with what the descriptive norm appeal indicated. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
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
信不信由你?检查自己的规范性信念如何影响描述性基于规范的信息的感知可信度
摘要大量基于规范的研究表明,健康信息中的描述性规范诉求可以塑造信息受众的规范信念,进而影响说服结果。然而,这项研究表明,至少对于一些健康话题(这里是戴口罩运动),描述性规范呼吁不会改变信息接收者的规范信念。相反,一个人自己的规范信念可能会对规范诉求对信息可信度和随后的说服结果的影响起到调节作用。具体而言,当观众自己的规范信念与描述性规范吸引力所表明的更一致(不一致)时,观察到了积极(消极)的间接效应(描述性规范吸引力-信息可信度-感知信息有效性-行为意图)。讨论了理论意义和实践意义。
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