The influence of culture and close others on the effectiveness of (self)-persuasion.

IF 1.9 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Journal of General Psychology Pub Date : 2022-04-01 Epub Date: 2020-08-07 DOI:10.1080/00221309.2020.1803193
Shuang Li, Rick B van Baaren, Barbara C N Müller
{"title":"The influence of culture and close others on the effectiveness of (self)-persuasion.","authors":"Shuang Li,&nbsp;Rick B van Baaren,&nbsp;Barbara C N Müller","doi":"10.1080/00221309.2020.1803193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although self-persuasion was shown to be more effective than direct persuasion in changing attitudes and intentions, its effectiveness in different cultures remains unclear. Furthermore, research suggests that Eastern individuals tend to incorporate close others in the self to a larger extent than Western individuals. Combining both lines of research, the current studies examined whether thinking of a close other would influence the effectiveness of (self)-persuasion across cultures. Two parallel studies were conducted. U.S. participants (<i>n</i><sub>study 1</sub> = 195; <i>n</i><sub>study 2</sub> = 292) and Chinese participants (<i>n</i><sub>study 1</sub> = 187; <i>n</i><sub>study 2</sub> = 313) reported their initial attitudes and intentions toward five target behaviors prior to either think of a specific close other or not. Subsequently, they were randomly assigned to receive either a self-persuasion or a direct persuasion task. Specifically, the self-persuasion task led participants to generate own arguments or arguments that they think the close other would give; the direct persuasion task led participants to read given arguments or imagine that the arguments were from the close other. In the end, all participants reported their attitudes and intentions again after doing the persuasion tasks. The moderation effect of culture was only found in Study 1, such that direct persuasion worked more effectively in Chinese participants than self-persuasion, whereas the effectiveness of the two persuasive techniques did not differ in U.S. participants. In both studies, thinking of a close other was not found to influence the effectiveness of (self-)persuasion across cultures. Possible explanations and future research directions were discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":47581,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Psychology","volume":"149 2","pages":"139-168"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00221309.2020.1803193","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2020.1803193","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/8/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Although self-persuasion was shown to be more effective than direct persuasion in changing attitudes and intentions, its effectiveness in different cultures remains unclear. Furthermore, research suggests that Eastern individuals tend to incorporate close others in the self to a larger extent than Western individuals. Combining both lines of research, the current studies examined whether thinking of a close other would influence the effectiveness of (self)-persuasion across cultures. Two parallel studies were conducted. U.S. participants (nstudy 1 = 195; nstudy 2 = 292) and Chinese participants (nstudy 1 = 187; nstudy 2 = 313) reported their initial attitudes and intentions toward five target behaviors prior to either think of a specific close other or not. Subsequently, they were randomly assigned to receive either a self-persuasion or a direct persuasion task. Specifically, the self-persuasion task led participants to generate own arguments or arguments that they think the close other would give; the direct persuasion task led participants to read given arguments or imagine that the arguments were from the close other. In the end, all participants reported their attitudes and intentions again after doing the persuasion tasks. The moderation effect of culture was only found in Study 1, such that direct persuasion worked more effectively in Chinese participants than self-persuasion, whereas the effectiveness of the two persuasive techniques did not differ in U.S. participants. In both studies, thinking of a close other was not found to influence the effectiveness of (self-)persuasion across cultures. Possible explanations and future research directions were discussed.

文化和亲密他人对(自我)说服效果的影响。
虽然自我说服在改变态度和意图方面比直接说服更有效,但其在不同文化中的有效性尚不清楚。此外,研究表明,东方人比西方人更倾向于将亲近的人融入自我。结合这两方面的研究,目前的研究考察了在不同文化背景下,考虑亲近的人是否会影响(自我)说服的有效性。进行了两项平行研究。美国参与者(nstudy 1 = 195;nstudy 2 = 292)和中国参与者(nstudy 1 = 187;(研究2 = 313)报告了他们对五种目标行为的最初态度和意图,然后再考虑一个特定的亲近的人或不考虑。随后,他们被随机分配接受自我说服或直接说服的任务。具体来说,自我说服任务让参与者提出自己的论点,或者他们认为亲近的人会给出的论点;直接说服任务让参与者阅读给定的论点,或者想象这些论点来自亲密的另一个人。最后,所有参与者在完成说服任务后再次报告他们的态度和意图。文化的调节作用仅在研究1中被发现,因此直接说服在中国参与者中比自我说服更有效,而两种说服技巧在美国参与者中的有效性没有差异。在这两项研究中,没有发现考虑亲密的他人会影响跨文化(自我)说服的有效性。讨论了可能的解释和未来的研究方向。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of General Psychology
Journal of General Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
4.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The Journal of General Psychology publishes human and animal research reflecting various methodological approaches in all areas of experimental psychology. It covers traditional topics such as physiological and comparative psychology, sensation, perception, learning, and motivation, as well as more diverse topics such as cognition, memory, language, aging, and substance abuse, or mathematical, statistical, methodological, and other theoretical investigations. The journal especially features studies that establish functional relationships, involve a series of integrated experiments, or contribute to the development of new theoretical insights or practical applications.
×
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