Inducing Resistance to Conspiracy Theory Propaganda: Testing Inoculation and Metainoculation Strategies

This investigation examined the boundaries of inoculation theory by examining how inoculation can be applied to conspiracy theory propaganda as well as inoculation itself (called metainoculation). A 3‐phase experiment with 312 participants compared 3 main groups: no‐treatment control, inoculation, and metainoculation. Research questions explored how inoculation and metainoculation effects differ based on the argument structure of inoculation messages (fact‐ vs. logic‐based). The attack message was a 40‐minute chapter from the 9/11 Truth conspiracy theory film, Loose Change: Final Cut. The results indicated that both the inoculation treatments induced more resistance than the control message, with the fact‐based treatment being the most effective. The results also revealed that metainoculation treatments reduced the efficacy of the inoculation treatments.     

Candidate Effects on Election Outcomes: Political Skill,Campaign Efficacy,and Intentions in a British General Election

Integrating Social/Political Influence Theory with the Theory of Planned Behavior, we argue that personal resources (i.e., political skill, self-efficacy) enable political candidates to form more ambitious campaign intentions, and thus perform better in elections. We tested this model with a sample of political candidates (N = 225) campaigning in a British general election. Three months before polling day, candidates provided self-ratings of political skill, domain-specific self-efficacy (i.e., campaign efficacy), and personal campaign intentions during the campaign period. Our results demonstrated that political skill was positively related to campaign efficacy, and intentions, via campaign efficacy. We also found a significant indirect effect for political skill on electoral performance (i.e., percentage of the vote), through campaign efficacy and intentions. Implications of our results for understanding candidate effects in campaigns and future research are discussed.     

Frequency of Exposure and Evaluation of Candidates and Campaign Speeches1

Three slides, each showing the photograph of a college-age male, were shown either 5, 10, or 25 times to a total of 95 students (S s). After the presentation, the slides, plus a fourth not previously shown, were presented as photographs of candidates in a campus election, each being paired with a campaign speech. Three speeches consisted of bland platitudes, whereas the fourth argued in favor of a large tuition increase. Ratings of the speeches and the candidates indicated that subjects were accurate in ranking the relative frequency of exposure of the four slides and that the controversial speech elicited less agreement and less favorable ratings than the three other messages. There were U-shaped curvilinear effects of exposure on S s' agreement with the messages, and with ratings of the persuasiveness of the message. Neither exposure nor speech effects were found in ratings of the candidates themselves. Implications of these findings for the frequency of exposure hypothesis (Zajonc, 1968) and for political campaigns are discussed.     

THE MEDIATION OF RESISTANCE TO PERSUASION STRATEGIES BY LANGUAGE VARIABLES AND ACTIVE-PASSIVE PARTICIPATION

This investigation attempted to confer resistance to persuasion by inoculating people with either supportive, refutational, or combination pretreatment messages. Following inoculation, subjects either passively received a high or low intense attack message or actively encoded a message of high or low intensity. As predicted, there was a significant interaction between type of attack and level of language intensity. Discussion centered on the effects of language intensity as a mediator of attitude change in yet another persuasive paradigm.     

Failing to Recall: Examining the Effects of Trace Decay and Interference on Memory for Campaign Information

Voters are continuously bombarded with information during political campaigns, yet a consistent conclusion from research on voter learning is that individuals remember far less information about political candidates than one might expect. What remains unclear is why memory for campaign information is so poor. The present study examines two explanations for memory failure. Using an experimental design, the present study explores whether campaign information fades from memory (trace decay) or whether extraneous information impedes an individual's subsequent ability to recall campaign information (interference). The results suggest that examining the ways in which the larger information environment influences recall of campaign information has important implications for the importance we attribute to campaign information in models of voter decision making.     

Boosting the Potency of Resistance: Combining the Motivational Forces of Inoculation and Psychological Reactance

The efficacy of inoculation theory has been confirmed by decades of empirical research, yet optimizing its effectiveness remains a vibrant line of investigation. The present research turns to psychological reactance theory for a means of enhancing the core mechanisms of inoculation—threat and refutational preemption. Findings from a multisite study indicate reactance enhances key resistance outcomes, including: threat, anger at attack message source, negative cognitions, negative affect, anticipated threat to freedom, anticipated attack message source derogation, perceived threat to freedom, perceived attack message source derogation, and counterarguing. Most importantly, reactance‐enhanced inoculations result in lesser attitude change—the ultimate measure of resistance.     

Rethinking the Inoculation Analogy: Effects on Subjects With Differing Preexisting Attitudes

Inoculation messages employed in past studies have been consistently preventative. Yet, if inoculation strategies are to be used in mass media campaigns, researchers need to know what the effects will be on all audience members—not just those known to support a message sponsor’s position. A 3‐phase experiment was conducted involving 558 participants. Linear regression analyses identified that initially supportive, neutral, and opposed subjects exposed to the inoculation message reported significantly more positive attitudes toward the study topic of agricultural biotechnology following an attack message than did their respective controls. The inoculation message contributed to significantly increased threat levels among initially neutral and opposed subjects and marginally increased counterarguing output among initially supportive and neutral subjects. Additionally, counterarguing partially mediated final attitudes for inoculated supportive subjects.     

The subjective group dynamics in negative campaigns

I relied on the subjective group dynamics framework to analyse the derogation of inparty candidates involved in negative campaigns. In an experimental study (dynamic simulation of an electoral campaign, N = 118), I found that participants downgraded the inparty candidate (both in terms of evaluation and vote choice) more when he ran a person‐based negative campaign than when he ran an issue‐based negative campaign. This effect was significant for participants with high levels of political identification only. Overall, the findings revealed that political candidates, as members of significant social groups, are not exempt from the forms of extremity in evaluations typically observed in other social groups.     

Playing the game: when group success is more important than downgrading deviants

Partisan respondents evaluated a potential party leader (Study 1) or an ingroup political candidate (Study 2) who expressed normative or deviant opinions against a backdrop of public opinion that was either supportive of, or hostile toward, the ingroup's traditional beliefs (Study 1) or the normative ingroup position on a specific issue (Study 2). Across both studies, high identifiers gave stronger support to a normative candidate over a deviant candidate when public opinion was with the group, but not when public opinion was against the group. Under the latter conditions, high identifiers instead upgraded the deviant candidate. Additional analyses revealed this pattern of differential support for normative and deviant candidates among high identifiers appeared to be related to strategic considerations—specifically, the candidate's perceived chances of gaining public support and being elected. Among low identifiers, support for normative and deviant candidates was less affected by the broader context of public opinion, and was not related to such strategic considerations. These results demonstrate that responses to deviance depend on the broader context in which deviance occurs. Deviance can, at times, be a way through which groups achieve important goals. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Character Attacks and Their Effects on Perceptions of Male and Female Political Candidates

The study examined the perceptions of political candidates (male and female) who make negative statements about the personality and integrity of their political opponents. Male and female participants (Sex of Participant factor) indicated their impressions of a male or female political candidate (Sex of Candidate factor) who either attacked or did not attack the character of his/her opponent (Attack factor) in a political leadership debate. Participants who read a speech given by a candidate of their own gender tended to rate the candidate as having greater integrity when the candidate attacked his/her opponent than when he/she did not. When judging a candidate of the opposite gender, participants tended to rate the candidate who attacked his/her opponent as having less integrity than a candidate who did not attack his/her opponent. Results are discussed with regard to the impact that aggressive campaign tactics can have on voter perceptions, and how similarity between voters and candidates may affect perceptions of such tactics.     

CAMPAIGN COMMUNICATION AND ATTITUDE CHANGE: A MULTIDIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS1

The processes by which political attitude changes occur have been examined extensively from a variety of methodological and theoretical perspectives. In this study, the authors attempt to extend the traditional balance formulation to a continuously-scaled least-squares paradigm in which change occurs as a function of accumulated information. A longitudinal tracking of the changes in attitude toward parties, candidates, and issues is used to make predictions about subsequent attitudes and consequent voting behavior. Possible communicative influences from a political campaign are explored with regard to their impact on changes in concept relations. Analysis of political changes hypotheses and a critical examination of the methodology are used as the basis for suggesting improvements in campaign communication research.     

Group Distinctiveness,Political Identification,and the Third-Person Effect: Perceptions of a Political Campaign in the 2004 Greek National Election

The present study examined the effects of political identification and group distinctiveness on perceptions of media influence during an election campaign. Participants estimated the effect of political communication on self and on voters of two large, nondistinctive political parties and two small, distinctive political parties. Nondistinctive party members showed an ingroup bias (i.e., greater perceived media influence on the outgroup) irrespective of strength of identification compared to the nondistinctive outgroups, whereas they did not show any bias (high identifiers) or even reverse bias (low identifiers) toward the distinctive outgroups. Distinctive party members showed an ingroup bias (irrespective of strength of identification) against the nondistinctive outgroups and an ingroup bias (high identifiers) or no bias (low identifiers) toward the distinctive outgroups. Ingroup assimilation (i.e., lack of difference in perceived influence between self and ingroup) was evident for distinctive party members, but not for nondistinctive party members. Results highlight the importance of group distinctiveness and identification in third-person perceptions.     

Cueing Patriotism,Prejudice, and Partisanship in the Age of Obama: Experimental Tests of U.S. Flag Imagery Effects in Presidential Elections

The American flag is a powerful symbol that campaigns seek to harness for electoral gain. But the flag's benefits may be more elusive than they appear. We begin by presenting content analysis of the flag's prevalence in 2012 U.S. presidential campaign ads, which suggests both candidates saw flags as advantageous. Then, in two experiments set during the 2012 campaign and a later study with prospective 2016 candidates, we find flag exposure provides modest but consistent benefits for Republican candidates among voters high in symbolic patriotism, racial prejudice, and Republican identification. These effects arise regardless of which candidate appears with the flag. Taken together, our results speak to both the power and limitations of the American flag in electioneering. Beyond practical implications for campaigns, these studies emphasize the heterogeneity of citizens’ reactions to visual political symbols and highlight potent links between symbolic attitudes and a nation's flag.     

Playing the Woman Card: Ambivalent Sexism in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Race

Late in the 2016 U.S. Presidential primary, Donald Trump attacked Hillary Clinton for playing the “woman’s card.” Theories of system justification suggest that attitudes about gender, particularly endorsement of hostile and benevolent sexism, likely shaped reactions to this campaign attack. Using a set of two studies, we find that hostile sexists exposed to the attack showed increased support for Trump and decreased support for Clinton. Benevolent sexists, however, reacted to Trump’s statements with increased support for Clinton, consistent with benevolent sexism’s focus on protecting women (Study 1). We further found that the woman card attack produced distinct emotional reactions among those with low and high levels of hostile and benevolent sexism. The attack also increased political participation among hostile sexists (Study 2). Our results offer new insights into the role of sexism in the 2016 presidential contest and further the discipline’s understanding of the gendered dimension of negative campaigning.     

AN EMPIRICAL TEST OF A MODEL OF RESISTANCE TO PERSUASION

This investigation synthesized research from several related areas to produce a model of resistance to persuasion based upon variables not considered by earlier congruity and inoculation models. Support was found for the prediction that the kind of critical response set induced and the target of the criticism are mediators of resistance to persuasion. The more critical acts are focused on arguments presented in a persuasive message, the more likely that the critical act will not be distracting and therefore promote counterarguing which will lead people to be resistant to subsequent persuasive messages arguing on the same side of given attitudinal issue. When criticism is less central to message variables and focuses on speaker and/or delivery characteristics, distraction occurs which decreases the probability of counterarguing and induces people to be vulnerable to forthcoming persuasive messages. This is especially true when negative criticism of speaker characteristics reduces threat to present attitudes and reduces motivation to counterargue to protect privately held beliefs. A completely counterbalanced design employing several manipulation checks was created to rule out competing explanations for differential resistance to persuasion.     

What Voters Do: Information Search During Election Campaigns

Learning about political candidates before voting can be a cognitively taxing task, given that the information environment of a campaign may be chaotic and complicated. In response, voters may adopt decision strategies that guide their processing of campaign information. This paper reports results from a series of process-tracing experiments designed to learn how voters in a presidential primary election adopt and use such strategies. Different voters adopt different strategies, with the choice of strategy dependent on the campaign environment and individual voter characteristics. The adoption of particular strategies can have implications for how voters evaluate candidates.     

It's My Campaign I'll Cry if I Want to: How and When Campaigns Use Emotional Appeals

Recent research in the area of campaign advertising suggests that emotional appeals can influence political attitudes, electoral choices and decision‐making processes. Yet is there any evidence that candidates use emotional appeals strategically during campaigns? Is there a pattern to their use? For instance, are fear appeals used primarily late in the campaign by trailing candidates in order to get voters to rethink their choices? And are enthusiasm appeals used more commonly early on in order to shore up a candidate's base? We use affective intelligence theory—and supplement it with the idea of a voter backlash—to generate expectations about when candidates use certain emotional appeals (namely, anger, fear, enthusiasm, and pride) and which types of candidates are most likely to do so. We then test these ideas using campaign advertising data from several U.S. Senate races from 2004. Our research thus provides a link between research on campaign decision making—here the decision to “go emotional”—and research focusing on the effects of emotional appeals on voters.     

Rights and Morals, Issues, and Candidate Integrity: Insights into the Role of the News Media

In recent American political discourse, elections and debates tend to be presented by the news media as collisions of basic principles, with opposing parties advancing beliefs about what is right and what is wrong. When news coverage of an election campaign focuses on issues that emphasize rights and morals, voting behavior may be affected in two ways: Citizens become likely to form and make use of evaluations of the integrity of the candidates, and citizens become motivated to seek an issue-position "match" with candidates on those issues for which discourse is ethically charged (particularly when they hold a similar interpretation of the issue). These ideas were tested in an experiment in which labor union members and undergraduate students were presented with news stories about the contrasting positions of fictional candidates for elective office. Across three political environments, all information was held constant except for systematic alteration of a different issue in each environment. These three issues (abortion, gun control, and health care) vary in the types of value conflicts emphasized in news coverage. The results shed light on how individuals process, interpret, and use issue coverage in choosing among candidates.