The underlying mechanisms of the persuasiveness of different types of satirical news messages.

IF 2.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Discourse Processes Pub Date : 2024-08-20 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1080/0163853X.2024.2381407
Ellen Droog, Christian Burgers
{"title":"The underlying mechanisms of the persuasiveness of different types of satirical news messages.","authors":"Ellen Droog, Christian Burgers","doi":"10.1080/0163853X.2024.2381407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research into the persuasiveness of satirical news has found mixed results. Two possible explanations lie in the lack of clarity about mechanisms underlying the influence of consuming different types of satirical content. In six experiments (<i>N<sub>total</sub></i>  = 3,139), we investigated how (different types of) humorous versus nonhumorous (satirical) messages influenced recipients' cognitive, emotional, and excitative responses and how these responses in turn influenced their attitudes. Results show that attitudes were influenced through recipients' cognitive and emotional reactions to the stimuli but in opposite directions. This suppressed an overall effect on attitudes: Consuming humorous satirical messages led to more message-agreement because the messages were more humorous, and recipients felt less angry, while this consumption led to less message-agreement because the messages were discounted more, and recipients felt less worried. Our results highlight the importance of distinguishing between different types of satirical news content (humorous vs. nonhumorous) when studying satire's persuasiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":11316,"journal":{"name":"Discourse Processes","volume":"61 10","pages":"479-497"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11614037/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse Processes","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2024.2381407","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research into the persuasiveness of satirical news has found mixed results. Two possible explanations lie in the lack of clarity about mechanisms underlying the influence of consuming different types of satirical content. In six experiments (Ntotal  = 3,139), we investigated how (different types of) humorous versus nonhumorous (satirical) messages influenced recipients' cognitive, emotional, and excitative responses and how these responses in turn influenced their attitudes. Results show that attitudes were influenced through recipients' cognitive and emotional reactions to the stimuli but in opposite directions. This suppressed an overall effect on attitudes: Consuming humorous satirical messages led to more message-agreement because the messages were more humorous, and recipients felt less angry, while this consumption led to less message-agreement because the messages were discounted more, and recipients felt less worried. Our results highlight the importance of distinguishing between different types of satirical news content (humorous vs. nonhumorous) when studying satire's persuasiveness.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.50%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: Discourse Processes is a multidisciplinary journal providing a forum for cross-fertilization of ideas from diverse disciplines sharing a common interest in discourse--prose comprehension and recall, dialogue analysis, text grammar construction, computer simulation of natural language, cross-cultural comparisons of communicative competence, or related topics. The problems posed by multisentence contexts and the methods required to investigate them, although not always unique to discourse, are sufficiently distinct so as to require an organized mode of scientific interaction made possible through the journal.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信