Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Registered Report

Helping on Social Media

Self-Persuasion and Question–Behavior Effects

Published Online:June 01, 2022https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000346

Abstract

Abstract: Direct persuasion (i.e., providing people with arguments in favor of a certain behavior) can activate resistance in the receiver and, thus, result in a hampered influence attempt. More promising techniques to influence people’s behavior are self-persuasion (SP; i.e., asking people to generate arguments themselves) and the question–behavior effect (QBE; i.e., asking people to predict their future behavior), which can be easily implemented in social media settings. As both rely differently on message elaboration and focus on different outcomes, we investigated whether SP or QBE is more effective in a social media setting to increase helping behavior. In a between-subjects design, participants viewed an online Facebook group related to United World Schools and either (a) read arguments regarding helping others (direct persuasion), (b) provided arguments regarding helping others (SP), or (c) stated whether they intended to help others (QBE), while their message elaboration was assessed. We hypothesized that both SP and QBE would positively impact attitudes and levels of helping behavior compared to the direct persuasion condition. Additionally, we hypothesized that QBE and SP are equally effective in changing behavior, but that SP is more effective than QBE in changing attitudes toward helping, especially when participants strongly elaborate on their own arguments regarding the positive aspects of helping. Results showed no evidence of SP and QBE influencing attitudes toward helping and helping behavior. For behavioral intentions, some, albeit limited, evidence was found that SP and QBE can have an effect.

References

  • Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections. Psychology and Health, 26(9), 1113–1127. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2011.613995 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Aronson, E. (1999). The power of self-persuasion. American Psychologist, 54(11), 875–884. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088188 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bernritter, S. F., van Ooijen, I. & Müller, B. C. N. (2017). Self-persuasion as marketing technique: The role of consumers’ involvement. European Journal of Marketing, 51(5/6), 1075–1090. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-04-2015-0213 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.20027 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Briñol, P., McCaslin, M. J. & Petty, R. E. (2012). Self-generated persuasion: Effects of the target and direction of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5), 925–940. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027231 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Burn, S. M. & Oskamp, S. (1986). Increasing community recycling with persuasive communication and public commitment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16(1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Chapman, K. (2001). Measuring intent: There’s nothing “mere” about mere measurement effects. Psychology & Marketing, 18(8), 811–841. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.1031 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: Science and practice (3rd ed.). Harper Collins. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Cioffi, D. & Garner, R. (1998). The effect of response options on decisions and subsequent behavior: Sometimes inaction is better. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(5), 463–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167298245002 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Clarkson, J. J., Tormala, Z. L. & Leone, C. (2011). A self-validation perspective on the mere thought effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(2), 449–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.12.003 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Crano, W. D. & Prislin, R. (2006). Attitudes and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology, 57(1), 345–374. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190034 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Crawford, M. T., McConnell, A. R., Lewis, A. C. & Sherman, S. J. (2002). Reactance, compliance, and anticipated regret. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(1), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1481 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Damen, T. G. E., Müller, B. C. N., van Baaren, R. B. & Dijksterhuis, A. (2015). Re-examining the agentic shift: The sense of agency influences the effectiveness of (self)persuasion. PLoS One, 10(6), Article e0128635. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128635 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • de Boer, M. R., Waterlander, W. E., Kuijper, L. D. J., Steenhuis, I. H. M. & Twisk, J. W. R. (2015). Testing for baseline differences in randomized controlled trials: An unhealthy research behavior that is hard to eradicate. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 12(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0162-z First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Dillard, J. P. & Shen, L. (2005). On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Communication Monographs, 72(2), 144–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750500111815 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Duffecy, J., Sanford, S., Wagner, L., Begale, M., Nawacki, E. & Mohr, D. C. (2013). Project onward: An innovative e-health intervention for cancer survivors. Psycho-Oncology, 22(4), 947–951. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.3075 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A. & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Glock, S., Müller, B. C. & Ritter, S. M. (2013). Warning labels formulated as questions positively influence smoking-related risk perception. Journal of Health Psychology, 18(2), 252–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105312439734 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Greenwald, A. G. & Albert, R. D. (1968). Acceptance and recall of improvised arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8(1, Pt. 1), 31–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0021237 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hayes, A. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis, Guilford Press. https://doi.org/978-1-60918-230-4 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • JASP Team. (2018). JASP (Version 0.8.6) [Computer software]. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Kass, R. & Raftery, A. (1995). Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90(430), 773–795. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kim, S. Y., Levine, T. R. & Allen, M. (2017). The intertwined model of reactance for resistance and persuasive boomerang. Communication Research, 44(7), 931–951. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650214548575 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Levav, J. & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2006). When questions change behavior: The role of ease of representation. Psychological Science, 17(3), 207–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01687.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Levorashka, A., Utz, S. & Ambros, R. (2016). What’s in a like? Motivations for pressing the like button. Proceedings of the Tenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM 2016) (pp. 623–626). http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM16/paper/view/13022/12812 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Li, S., Ritter, S. M., Bi, C., van Baaren, R. & Müller, B. C. N. (2019). Does smokers’ self-construal moderate the effect of (self-)persuasion on smoking? Health Psychology Bulletin, 3(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.5334/hpb.17 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Li, S., van Baaren, R. B. & Müller, B. C. N. (2020). The influence of culture and close others on the effectiveness of (self)-persuasion. Journal of General Psychology, 149(2), 139–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2020.1803193 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Li, S., van Halen, C., van Baaren, R. B. & Müller, B. C. N. (2020). Self-persuasion increases healthy eating intention depending on cultural background. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103405 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Loman, J. G. B., Müller, B. C. N., Oude Groote Beverborg, A., van Baaren, R. B. & Buijzen, M. (2018). Self-persuasion in media messages: Reducing alcohol consumption among students with open-ended questions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24(1), 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000162 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Maio, G. R. & Thomas, G. (2007). The epistemic-teleologic model of deliberate self-persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868306294589 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Matz, S. C., Kosinski, M., Nave, G. & Stillwell, D. J. (2017). Psychological targeting as an effective approach to digital mass persuasion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 201710966. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1710966114 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • McCambridge, J. (2015). From question-behaviour effects in trials to the social psychology of research participation. Psychology & Health, 30(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2014.953527 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McCambridge, J. & Kypri, K. (2011). Can simply answering research questions change behaviour? Systematic review and meta analyses of brief alcohol intervention trials. PLoS One, 6(10), Article e23748. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023748 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Müller, B. C. N., Ritter, S. M., Glock, S., Dijksterhuis, A. P., Engels, R. C. M. E. & Van Baaren, R. B. (2016). Smoking-related warning messages formulated as questions positively influence short-term smoking behaviour. Journal of Health Psychology, 21(1), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105314522083 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Müller, B. C. N., van Baaren, R. B., Ritter, S. M., Woud, M. L., Bergmann, H., Harakeh, Z., … Dijksterhuis, A. (2009). Tell me why… The influence of self-involvement on short term smoking behaviour. Addictive Behaviors, 34(5), 427–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.12.016 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Müller, B. C. N., van Baaren, R. B., van Someren, D. & Dijksterhuis, A. (2014). A present for Pinocchio: On when non-biological agents become real. Social Cognition, 32(4), 381–396. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Müller, B. C. N., van Someren, D. H., Gloudemans, R. T. M., Van Leeuwen, M. L. & Greifeneder, R. (2017). Helping made easy: Ease of argument generation enhances intentions to help. Social Psychology, 48(2), 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000293 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Müller, B. C. N., van Steen, T., Li, S., Loman, J. G. B. & Buijzen, M. (2022). Materials for “Helping on social media: Self-persuasion and question-behavior effects”. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7N69Z First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Murray, G., Leitan, N. D., Berk, M., Thomas, N., Michalak, E., Berk, L., … Kyrios, M. (2015). Online mindfulness-based intervention for late-stage bipolar disorder: Pilot evidence for feasibility and effectiveness. Journal of Affective Disorders, 178, 46–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2015.02.024 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Mussweiler, T. & Neumann, R. (2000). Sources of mental contamination: Comparing the effects of self-generated versus externally provided primes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(2), 194–206. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1999.1415 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Obermiller, C. & Spangenberg, E. R. (2000). Improving telephone fundraising by use of self-prophecy. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 5(4), 365–372. https://doi.org/10.1002/nvsm.126 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Reynolds, R. A. (1997). A validation test of a message elaboration measure. Communication Research Reports, 14(3), 269–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824099709388670 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Schmider, E., Ziegler, M., Danay, E., Beyer, L. & Bühner, M. (2010). Is it really robust? Reinvestigating the robustness of ANOVA against violations of the normal distribution assumption. Methodology, 6(4), 147–151. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000016 First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Sherman, S. J. (1980). On the self-erasing nature of errors of prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(2), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.39.2.211 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Spangenberg, E. R., Sprott, D. E., Grohmann, B. & Smith, R. J. (2003). Mass-communicated prediction requests: Practical applicaton and a cognitive dissonance explanation for self-prophecy. Journal of Marketing, 67(3), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.67.3.47.18659 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Spangenberg, E. R., Sprott, D. E., Knuff, D. C., Smith, R. J., Obermiller, C. & Greenwald, A. G. (2012). Process evidence for the question-behavior effect: Influencing socially normative behaviors. Social Influence, 7(3), 211–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2012.694024 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Sprott, D. E., Spangenberg, E. R., Block, L., Fitzsimons, G. J., Morwitz, V. & Williams, P. (2006). The question–behavior effect: What we know and where we go from here. Social Influence, 1(2), 128–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510600685409 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Sprott, D. E., Spangenberg, E. R., Knuff, D. C. & Devezer, B. (2006). Self-prediction and patient health: Influencing health-related behaviors through self-prophecy. Medical Science Monitor, 12(5), 85–92. http://ukpmc.ac.uk/abstract/MED/16641888 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Treiblmaier, H. & Chong, S. (2011). Trust and perceived risk of personal information as antecedents of online information disclosure: Results from three countries. Journal of Global Information Management, 19(4), 76–94. https://doi.org/10.4018/jgim.2011100104 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Van Kerckhove, A., Geuens, M. & Vermeir, I. (2009). The effect of sequential self-predictions on behavior change. Working Paper. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Van Steen, T. & Joinson, A. N. (2018). Self-affirmation and goal difficulty as moderators of the question-behaviour effect. Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 2(3), 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts5.21 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2007). A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(5), 779–804. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194105 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wagenmakers, E.-J., Lee, M., Lodewyckx, T. & Iverson, G. J. (2008). Bayesian versus frequentist inference. In H. HoijtinkI. KlugkistP. A. BoelenEds., Bayesian evaluation of informative hypotheses (pp. 187–207). https://doi.org/10.1007/978–0-387–09612-4_9 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Wagenmakers, E. J., Wetzels, R., Borsboom, D. & van der Maas, H. L. J. (2011). Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: The case of psi: Comment on Bem (2011). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3), 426–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022790 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Webb, D. J., Green, C. L. & Brashear, T. G. (2000). Development and validation of scales to measure attitudes influencing monetary donations to charitable organizations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070300282010 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wilson, T. D. & Brekke, N. (1994). Mental contamination and mental correction: Unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations. Psychological Bulletin, 116(1), 117–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.116.1.117 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wood, C., Conner, M., Miles, E., Sandberg, T., Taylor, N., Godin, G. & Sheeran, P. (2016). The impact of asking intention or self-prediction questions on subsequent behavior: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20(3), 245–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868315592334 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar