Joshua J. Guyer

Background:: In this study, we examined whether a persuasive message in favor of a pro-environmental proposal could influence attitude change through a self-validation process when individuals were told that the source of the proposal belonged to their ingroup (vs. their outgroup). Method:: Participants read a message that advocated for the use of solar power. Immediately following the message, participants were asked to list their thoughts regarding the persuasive proposal. A thought favorability index was created for each participant. Following the thought-listing task, participants received the experimental manipulation (i.e., ingroup vs. outgroup source) based on the minimal group paradigm, after which they reported their attitudes towards the proposal. Results:: A regression analysis showed the predicted interaction between thought favorability and type of source (i.e., ingroup vs. outgroup) on attitudes towards the solar power proposal. According to our expectations, thought favorability was a better predictor of attitudes for participants in the ingroup (vs. outgroup) source condition. Conclusions:: Attitudes can be polarized as a function of ingroup versus outgroup differentiation through a self-validation process.

Three experiments tested how low versus high pitch generated from sources beyond a message communicator can affect reliance on thoughts and influence recipients’ attitudes. First, participants wrote positive or negative thoughts about an exam proposal (Experiments 1, 2) or their academic abilities (Experiment 3). Then, pitch from the message recipient (Experiment 1), channel (Experiment 2), or context (Experiment 3) was manipulated to be high or low. Experiment 1 showed that when participants vocally expressed their thoughts using low (vs. high) pitch, thoughts had a greater effect on attitudes toward exams. Experiment 2 revealed low (vs. high) pitch sounds from the keyboard participants used to write their thoughts produced the same effect on thought usage. Experiment 3 demonstrated that thoughts influenced attitudes more when listed while background music was low (vs. high) Pitch can influence attitudes through a meta-cognitive thought reliance process whether emerging from the recipient, channel, or context.

This article unpacks the basic mechanisms by which paralinguistic features communicated through the voice can affect evaluative judgments and persuasion. Special emphasis is placed on exploring the rapidly emerging literature on vocal features linked to appraisals of confidence (e.g., vocal pitch, intonation, speech rate, loudness, etc.), and their subsequent impact on information processing and meta-cognitive processes of attitude change. The main goal of this review is to advance understanding of the different psychological processes by which paralinguistic markers of confidence can affect attitude change, specifying the conditions under which they are more likely to operate. In sum, we highlight the importance of considering basic mechanisms of attitude change to predict when and why appraisals of paralinguistic markers of confidence can lead to more or less persuasion.

To better understand doping-related attitude change, it is important to consider not only the amount of thinking (i.e., elaboration) done by message recipients, but also the favourability of their thoughts in response to the proposal, as well as the perceived validity in their thoughts. The main goal of the present study was to analyse the effects of a meta-cognitive process (i.e., thought validation) on attitudes related to doping. Thus, we randomly assigned participants to read a message either against or in favour of legalising several doping behaviours. Participants listed their thoughts regarding the proposal and indicated the perceived validity in their thoughts, then reported their attitudes. As hypothesised, the message against legalisation elicited more unfavourable thoughts and attitudes than the message in favour of legalisation. Most relevantly, the effects of the message direction on attitudes were greater for participants with higher (vs. lower) levels of thought validity. Furthermore, consistent with the thought validation process, results revealed that thought favourability was a better predictor of attitudes for participants with higher (vs. lower) perceived thought validity, indicating that perceiving one’s thoughts as valid plays an important role in persuasion. These findings provide novel insights for research and interventions regarding doping in sports.

Research has shown that athletes’ attitudes towards the use of banned performance-enhancing substances are reliable predictors of their intentions to use these substances, which in turn can be relevant predictors of their actual doping behaviours. Despite the important role played by attitudes and intentions in doping, research analysing how to change those attitudes and intentions is relatively scarce. The present study examined how individual differences in Need for Cognition (NC, Cacioppo & Petty, 1982) influenced doping-related attitude change and subsequent behavioural intentions. Participants were randomly assigned to read a persuasive message either against or in favour of legalising the use of several banned substances, including anabolic androgenic steroids (AAS) and Erythropoietin (EPO). In addition, participants completed the NC scale, and finally reported their attitudes and behavioural intentions regarding the legalisation proposal. As hypothesised, results showed that participants who received an anti-legalisation message had significantly more unfavourable attitudes towards the proposal than participants who received a pro-legalisation message, regardless of NC. However, as predicted, NC moderated the relationship between individuals’ attitudes and their intentions. That is, high-NC participants showed greater attitude-intention correspondence than low-NC participants.