Psychological Reactance and Persuasive Health Communication: A Test and Extension of the Intertwined Model

Stephen A. Rains, Monique Mitchell Turner

Human Communication Research · 2007 · 320 citations · 49 references

Concepts

TL;DR

The study aims to test and extend Dillard and Shen’s 2005 model of psychological reactance by examining the best‑fitting model of reactance processes and evaluating the effects of argument quality, consequence severity, and request magnitude. Two experiments were conducted, each assessing the best‑fitting model of reactance processes and manipulating argument quality, consequence severity, and request magnitude to observe their impact on reactance. The intertwined cognitive–affective model emerged as the best‑fitting model of reactance processes, and only request magnitude significantly influenced reactance, underscoring implications for persuasive health campaigns.

Abstract

This manuscript reports 2 experiments that were conducted to test and extend the work of J. P. Dillard and L. Shen (2005) examining the cognitive and affective processes involved in psychological reactance. In particular, the studies reported here (a) examined the best-fitting model of reactance processes and (b) tested 3 factors that may affect reactance including argument quality, severity of the consequences associated with the message topic, and magnitude of the request made in the message. The results showed that the intertwined cognitive–affective model was the best-fitting model of reactance processes. Magnitude of the request was the only variable that affected reactance. The implications of these findings for research on reactance and persuasive health campaigns are discussed.

References

49