Warning and persuasion.

Communication and Persuasion

“…For example, McGuire (1964) has argued that inoculation treatments enhance resistance to persuasion mostly by increasing people's motivation to defend their beliefs. Papageorgis (1968) noted that two conceptually distinct kinds of warnings have been studied by persuasion researchers. Papageorgis (1968) noted that two conceptually distinct kinds of warnings have been studied by persuasion researchers.…”

“I am not guilty” vs “I am innocent”: Successful negation may depend on the schema used for its encoding

“…These might be central for understanding what happens in situations that induce receivers to use negation. For example, negations might be generated as one counter-argues against an untrustworthy source of communication while listening to it or reading it (Eagly, Wood, & Chaiken, 1978;Papageorgis, 1968;Petty & Cacioppo, 1977;Zuwerink & Devine, 2000). More generally, receivers are often informed that some knowledge they have is ill-founded, so that after having learned ''X'' in the past, they should now process ''not-X'' (Fiedler, Walther, Armbruster, Fay, & Naumann, 1996;Hornby, 1974;Johnson, 1988;Johnson, Hashtroudi, & Lindsay, 1993;Johnson & Raye, 1981;Koehler, 1991;Loftus, 1979;Loftus & Palmer, 1974;Ross, Lepper, & Hubbard, 1975;Schul, 1993;Schul & Burnstein, 1985;Schul & Manzury, 1990;Schul & Mayo, 1999;Sellars, 1954;Strack & Bless, 1994).…”

Demand Artifacts in Laboratory Experiments in Consumer Research

“…In attitude change research which a priori seems to carry the greatest justification for deception, Papageorgis (1968) found that whether subjects were deceived or forewarned about the purpose of a persuasion experiment was often not a crucial determinant of subsequent attitude change. He concluded that, in some instances, deception may cause more problems (including demand artifacts) ~h~n it solves.…”