A Measure of Perceived Argument Strength: Reliability and Validity

Studies of the content of persuasive messages in which the central arguments of the message are scrutinized have traditionally relied on the technique of thought-listing to assess argument strength. Although the validity of the thought-listing procedure is well documented, its utility can be limited in situations involving nonadult populations and sensitive topics. In this paper, we present a self-reported scale that can be used to assess perceived argument strength in contexts where thought-listing may be less appropriate. This scale taps into perceived argument strength from multiple points of view, including but also extending beyond the potential of the argument to elicit positive and negative thoughts. Reliability and validity of this scale were assessed in health communication contexts involving anti-drug public service announcements (PSAs) directed at adolescents and anti-smoking PSAs targeting adults. Evidence of convergence between this scale and the thought-listing technique was also obtained using the classical comprehensive exam arguments.

[1]  K. Williams,et al.  The Effects of Group Diffusion of Cognitive Effort on Attitudes: An Information-Processing View. , 1980 .

[2]  C. F. Kao,et al.  The efficient assessment of need for cognition. , 1984, Journal of personality assessment.

[3]  C. Areni.  The Proposition-Probability Model of Argument Structure and Message Acceptance , 2002 .

[4]  Shelly Chaiken,et al.  The pursuit of self-interest: self-interest bias in attitude judgment and persuasion. , 2005, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[5]  J. Cappella,et al.  The effect of smoking cues in antismoking advertisements on smoking urge and psychophysiological reactions. , 2009, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[6]  R. Hoyle,et al.  Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking , 2002 .

[7]  Timothy C. Brock,et al.  Communication discrepancy and intent to persuade as determinants of counterargument production , 1967 .

[8]  Blair T. Johnson,et al.  Effects of involvement on persuasion: a meta-analysis , 1989 .

[9]  Howard G. Lavine,et al.  Cognitive Processing and the Functional Matching Effect in Persuasion: The Mediating Role of Subjective Perceptions of Message Quality , 1996, Journal of experimental social psychology.

[10]  Paul A. Mongeau,et al.  Majority/minority size and the evaluations of persuasive arguments , 1992 .

[11]  Terence A. Shimp,et al.  Effects of involvement, argument strength, and source characteristics on central and peripheral processing of advertising , 1990 .

[12]  Karl G. Jöreskog,et al.  Lisrel 8: Structural Equation Modeling With the Simplis Command Language , 1993 .

[13]  Blair T. Johnson,et al.  Communication and Attitude Change: Causes, Processes, and Effects , 2005 .

[14]  Wendy Wood,et al.  Forewarned and forearmed? Two meta-analytic syntheses of forewarnings of influence appeals. , 2003, Psychological bulletin.

[15]  M. Fishbein,et al.  The role of theory in developing effective antidrug public service announcements , 2002 .

[16]  Herbert Bless,et al.  Inferring the importance of arguments: Order effects and conversational rules , 2003 .

[17]  Chen-Chao Tao,et al.  Conceptualizing Media Stimuli in Experimental Research: Psychological Versus Attribute‐Based Definitions , 2007 .

[18]  Robin L. Nabi,et al.  Avoiding the boomerang: testing the relative effectiveness of antidrug public service announcements before a national campaign. , 2002, American journal of public health.

[19]  R. V. E. Dijk,et al.  The Concept of Argument Quality in the Elaboration Likelihood Model , 2003 .

[20]  M. Stephenson.  Examining Adolescents' Responses to Antimarijuana PSAs , 2003 .

[21]  M. Fishbein,et al.  The Attentional Mechanism of Message Sensation Value: Interaction between Message Sensation Value and Argument Quality on Message Effectiveness , 2006 .

[22]  Elizabeth Pugzles Lorch,et al.  Sensation Seeking, Message Sensation Value, and Drug Use as Mediators of PSA Effectiveness , 1991 .

[23]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[24]  B. Byrne.  Structural equation modeling with EQS : basic concepts, applications, and programming , 2000 .

[25]  R. V. E. Dijk,et al.  A normative and empirical approach to Petty and Cacioppo's 'strong' and 'weak' arguments , 2003 .

[26]  F. Boster,et al.  The impact of varying argument quality and minority size on influencing the majority and perceptions of the minority , 2001 .

[27]  W. Hippel,et al.  Mapping cognitive structures and processes through verbal content: the thought-listing technique. , 1997, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[28]  Terence A. Shimp.  Attitude toward the AD as a Mediator of Consumer Brand Choice , 1981 .

[29]  James Price Dillard,et al.  The Relationship Between the Perceived and Actual Effectiveness of Persuasive Messages: A Meta-Analysis With Implications for Formative Campaign Research , 2007 .

[30]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. , 1979 .

[31]  B. Byrne.  Factor Analytic Models: Viewing the Structure of an Assessment Instrument From Three Perspectives , 2005, Journal of personality assessment.

[32]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[33]  M. Diehl,et al.  The effect of multiple source information on message scrutiny: The case of source expertise and likability1 , 2001 .

[34]  P. Palmgreen,et al.  Sensation seeking, perceived message sensation value, personal involvement, and processing of anti-marijuana PSAs , 2001 .

[35]  Caryn Lerman,et al.  Experimental evaluation of antitobacco PSAs: effects of message content and format on physiological and behavioral outcomes. , 2009, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[36]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. , 1998 .

[37]  John R. Baseheart,et al.  Perceived Message Sensation Value (PMSV) and the Dimensions and Validation of a PMSV Scale , 2002, Health communication.

[38]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[39]  Richard J. Lutz,et al.  The Role of Argument Quality in the Elaboration Likelihood Model , 1988 .

[40]  Franziska Marquart,et al.  Communication and persuasion : central and peripheral routes to attitude change , 1988 .

[41]  Kenneth G. DeBono,et al.  Trait Anxiety and Persuasion: Individual Differences in Information Processing Strategies , 1994 .

[42]  R. Lance Holbert,et al.  Commentary on the uses and misuses of structural equation modeling in communication research. , 2008 .

[43]  Blair T. Johnson,et al.  Truth or Consequences: Overcoming Resistance to Persuasion with Positive Thinking , 2004 .

[44]  Daniel J. O'Keefe,et al.  Message Properties, Mediating States, and Manipulation Checks: Claims, Evidence, and Data Analysis in Experimental Persuasive Message Effects Research , 2003 .

[45]  D. D. Morley,et al.  Subjective Message Constructs: A Theory of Persuasion. , 1987 .

[46]  James M. Munch,et al.  Rhetorical Question, Summarization Frequency, and Argument Strength Effects on Recall , 1988 .

[47]  M. Sherif,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1946, Psychological review.