When Visual Communication Backfires: Reactance to Three Aspects of Imagery

Fabienne Bünzli, James Price Dillard, Yuwei Li, Martin J. Eppler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Although many persuasive messages include imagery, relatively little is known about the potential for the visual components to induce reactance. This research examined the effects of three message variations—camera angle (low vs. eye-level), antithesis (vs. thesis) (i.e., the juxtaposition of contrasting images), and facial expression of emotion (anger vs. happiness)—on reactance and subsequent persuasion. Two experiments (N = 240 and N = 259) using pro-environmental appeals found that variation in each of the visual features was associated with increased perception of threat to freedom, reactance and decreased persuasion. Political conservatives felt more threatened by any message than liberals, but were not differentially sensitive to image variations. This research opens the door for a programmatic analysis of imagery and reactance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)683-713
Number of pages31
JournalCommunication Research
Volume52
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2025

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Communication
  • Language and Linguistics
  • Linguistics and Language

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'When Visual Communication Backfires: Reactance to Three Aspects of Imagery'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this