接种理论机制的两个检验

William L. Benoit
{"title":"接种理论机制的两个检验","authors":"William L. Benoit","doi":"10.1080/10417949109372832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two studies were conducted on two controversial topics to test the hypothesized mechanism of resistance. No support was found for the assumption that resistance occurs by increasing the audiences’ production of counterarguments to persuasive attacks. Furthermore, unlike McGuire's findings on cultural truism topics, refutation‐same defenses were not substantially better at creating resistance to immediate persuasive attack than supportive defenses. Finally, neither level of audience involvement in the topic nor the audience's prior attitude toward the topic were found to influence the effectiveness of type of defense.","PeriodicalId":212800,"journal":{"name":"Southern Journal of Communication","volume":"54 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1991-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two tests of the mechanism of inoculation theory\",\"authors\":\"William L. Benoit\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10417949109372832\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Two studies were conducted on two controversial topics to test the hypothesized mechanism of resistance. No support was found for the assumption that resistance occurs by increasing the audiences’ production of counterarguments to persuasive attacks. Furthermore, unlike McGuire's findings on cultural truism topics, refutation‐same defenses were not substantially better at creating resistance to immediate persuasive attack than supportive defenses. Finally, neither level of audience involvement in the topic nor the audience's prior attitude toward the topic were found to influence the effectiveness of type of defense.\",\"PeriodicalId\":212800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Southern Journal of Communication\",\"volume\":\"54 3\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1991-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Southern Journal of Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10417949109372832\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southern Journal of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10417949109372832","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

针对两个有争议的话题进行了两项研究,以检验假设的耐药机制。没有证据支持这样的假设,即通过增加受众对说服性攻击的反驳来产生抵抗。此外,与McGuire在文化真理主题上的发现不同,反驳-相同的防御在抵抗即时说服性攻击方面并不比支持性防御好得多。最后,观众对话题的投入程度和观众对话题的先前态度都没有影响辩护类型的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Two tests of the mechanism of inoculation theory
Two studies were conducted on two controversial topics to test the hypothesized mechanism of resistance. No support was found for the assumption that resistance occurs by increasing the audiences’ production of counterarguments to persuasive attacks. Furthermore, unlike McGuire's findings on cultural truism topics, refutation‐same defenses were not substantially better at creating resistance to immediate persuasive attack than supportive defenses. Finally, neither level of audience involvement in the topic nor the audience's prior attitude toward the topic were found to influence the effectiveness of type of defense.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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