Shaping Interpersonal Communication About Persuasive Media Campaigns by Inducing Critical Versus Collective Orientations

Individuals process persuasive campaign messages intra- and interpersonally with the goal of either accurately evaluating the advocacy or defending against it. In an experiment, messages that argued for reducing consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages were presented to regular drinkers (N = 275). They were then forbidden to interact, allowed to interact, or directed to interact by discussion prompts with either a critical or a collective focus. The no-talk condition data showed persuasion whereas unguided talk yielded counter-persuasion (i.e., a boomerang), which was mitigated to an equal degree by the two prompts. Exploration of potential mediating mechanisms revealed that the prompt effects could be attributed to variations in the quantity of on-topic talk, sentence length, cognitive process words, and negations. As all of these findings were strongest among heavy drinkers, the study demonstrated the promise of prompts for promoting campaign-consistent talk and salutary effects among at-risk individuals.