Abstract

Drawing together research on persuasion and text comprehension, two experiments test the effects of hedge placement (Experiment 1) and hedge type (Experiment 2) on attitudes, source evaluations, and perceptions of argument strength. Participants read an editorial in support of implementing comprehensive exams at their university. Experiment 1 shows that hedges placed on data statements (and not interpretation statements) lead to negative perceptions of the policy, source, and argument. This is especially pronounced on source evaluations among individuals with more scientific training. Experiment 2 reveals that colloquial, but not professional, hedges placed on interpretation statements lead to more negative evaluations relative to no hedges. Data related to perceptions of the source are moderated by individual differences in scientific reasoning. This research suggests that hedges describing data statements and/or that use colloquial language can, but do not always, undermine persuasive attempts.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.