你应该阅读这篇论文的十五个理由:提供许多论点如何增加专业知识和说服力意图的感知。

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Abigail Bergman, Mohamed A Hussein, Rhia Catapano, Zakary L Tormala
{"title":"你应该阅读这篇论文的十五个理由:提供许多论点如何增加专业知识和说服力意图的感知。","authors":"Abigail Bergman, Mohamed A Hussein, Rhia Catapano, Zakary L Tormala","doi":"10.1177/01461672251366068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>People generally believe that more is better in persuasion, for good reason. Past research has shown that providing more arguments can enhance a message's persuasiveness. In contrast, we demonstrate that increasing the number of arguments in a message can have conflicting effects on perceptions of the message source. Compared to using few arguments, using many arguments makes the source seem more like an expert, increasing persuasion, but it can also make the source appear to have greater persuasive intent, decreasing persuasion. These perceptions suppress each other, resulting in minimal or no overall benefit to persuasion. We document these effects across multiple experiments. We further demonstrate that providing many arguments can have a clear positive or negative effect, depending on whether high expertise or low persuasive intent is more valued. These findings expand our understanding of argument quantity effects in persuasion and contribute to a growing literature on conflicting source perceptions.</p>","PeriodicalId":19834,"journal":{"name":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","volume":" ","pages":"1461672251366068"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fifteen Reasons You Should Read This Paper: How Providing Many Arguments Increases Perceptions of Both Expertise and Persuasive Intent.\",\"authors\":\"Abigail Bergman, Mohamed A Hussein, Rhia Catapano, Zakary L Tormala\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01461672251366068\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>People generally believe that more is better in persuasion, for good reason. Past research has shown that providing more arguments can enhance a message's persuasiveness. In contrast, we demonstrate that increasing the number of arguments in a message can have conflicting effects on perceptions of the message source. Compared to using few arguments, using many arguments makes the source seem more like an expert, increasing persuasion, but it can also make the source appear to have greater persuasive intent, decreasing persuasion. These perceptions suppress each other, resulting in minimal or no overall benefit to persuasion. We document these effects across multiple experiments. We further demonstrate that providing many arguments can have a clear positive or negative effect, depending on whether high expertise or low persuasive intent is more valued. These findings expand our understanding of argument quantity effects in persuasion and contribute to a growing literature on conflicting source perceptions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19834,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1461672251366068\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672251366068\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672251366068","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们普遍相信说服越多越好,这是有充分理由的。过去的研究表明,提供更多的论据可以增强信息的说服力。相反,我们证明了增加消息中参数的数量会对消息源的感知产生冲突的影响。与使用较少的论据相比,使用较多的论据使来源看起来更像一个专家,增加说服力,但它也可以使来源看起来更有说服力的意图,减少说服力。这些感知相互抑制,导致说服的总体效益微乎其微或根本没有。我们在多个实验中记录了这些影响。我们进一步证明,提供许多论点可以有明显的积极或消极的影响,这取决于高专业知识或低说服力意图更有价值。这些发现扩大了我们对说服中的论据数量效应的理解,并有助于越来越多的文献关于冲突来源的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fifteen Reasons You Should Read This Paper: How Providing Many Arguments Increases Perceptions of Both Expertise and Persuasive Intent.

People generally believe that more is better in persuasion, for good reason. Past research has shown that providing more arguments can enhance a message's persuasiveness. In contrast, we demonstrate that increasing the number of arguments in a message can have conflicting effects on perceptions of the message source. Compared to using few arguments, using many arguments makes the source seem more like an expert, increasing persuasion, but it can also make the source appear to have greater persuasive intent, decreasing persuasion. These perceptions suppress each other, resulting in minimal or no overall benefit to persuasion. We document these effects across multiple experiments. We further demonstrate that providing many arguments can have a clear positive or negative effect, depending on whether high expertise or low persuasive intent is more valued. These findings expand our understanding of argument quantity effects in persuasion and contribute to a growing literature on conflicting source perceptions.

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
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
5.00%
发文量
116
期刊介绍: The Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin is the official journal for the Society of Personality and Social Psychology. The journal is an international outlet for original empirical papers in all areas of personality and social psychology.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信