TY - JOUR
T1 - Profiling persuasion
T2 - The role of beliefs, knowledge, and interest in the processing of persuasive texts that vary by argument structure
AU - Buehl, Michelle M.
AU - Alexander, Patricia A.
AU - Murphy, P. Karen
AU - Sperl, Christopher T.
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2001/6
Y1 - 2001/6
N2 - Undergrauate participants read both a one-sided text on educational reform and a two-sided nonrefutational text on the V-Chip. Students completed topic-specific beliefs, knowledge, and interest measures and reacted to specific text characteristics. The results indicated that although both forms of text affected readers, the effects varied by the type of argument structure. Specifically, after adjusting for topic, the one-sided text was more effective in changing readers' beliefs than the two-sided nonrefutational text, whereas the two-sided nonrefutational article was more effective in changing participants' knowledge. The knowledge and interest profiles of more or less persuaded readers differed significantly for the two-sided nonrefutational text but not for the one-sided text. Readers' reactions to the articles also differed by argument structure. Overall, this study contributes to the understanding of readers' processing of one-sided and two-sided nonrefutational texts.
AB - Undergrauate participants read both a one-sided text on educational reform and a two-sided nonrefutational text on the V-Chip. Students completed topic-specific beliefs, knowledge, and interest measures and reacted to specific text characteristics. The results indicated that although both forms of text affected readers, the effects varied by the type of argument structure. Specifically, after adjusting for topic, the one-sided text was more effective in changing readers' beliefs than the two-sided nonrefutational text, whereas the two-sided nonrefutational article was more effective in changing participants' knowledge. The knowledge and interest profiles of more or less persuaded readers differed significantly for the two-sided nonrefutational text but not for the one-sided text. Readers' reactions to the articles also differed by argument structure. Overall, this study contributes to the understanding of readers' processing of one-sided and two-sided nonrefutational texts.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0010916717&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0010916717&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10862960109548112
DO - 10.1080/10862960109548112
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0010916717
SN - 1086-296X
VL - 33
SP - 269
EP - 301
JO - Journal of Literacy Research
JF - Journal of Literacy Research
IS - 2
ER -