Deliberation and Valence as Dissociable Components of Counterarguing among Smokers: Evidence from Neuroimaging and Quantitative Linguistic Analysis

Abstract

ABSTRACT Counterarguing is a key obstacle to successful persuasion. However, the difficulty of directly measuring counterarguing during message exposure limits knowledge of the underlying mechanisms. The current study combines neuroimaging and linguistic measures to unpack neurocognitive and psychological mechanisms associated with counterarguing among a sample of established smokers in response to anti-smoking messaging. We capture participants’ neural activity in brain regions associated with effortful deliberation and negative argumentation during message exposure, and link it with their subsequent language patterns to further understanding of counterarguing in the brain. Greater brain activity within key regions of interest associated with deliberation and negative argumentation is associated with greater cognitive depth and less positivity in the post-scan message descriptions, respectively, among those who have lower intention to change their smoking behavior. We connect these neural representations of counterarguing with psychological theories and discuss implications that may increase the impact of persuasive communications.