How to Handle Opposing Arguments in Persuasive Messages¶
O’Keefe. (1999). How to Handle Opposing Arguments in Persuasive Messages: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Effects of One-Sided and Two-Sided Messages. Annals of the International Communication Association.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Message Sidedness
- Refutation depth matters: a two-sided message that names but does not actually rebut the opposing position (non-refutational two-sided) is often weaker than either a full one-sided or a refutational two-sided message
This sourceThe meta-analytic finding that, outside advertising, refutational two-sided messages outpersuade one-sided ones while nonrefutational two-sided messages persuade less than one-sided ones.
SupportedVerified against the source
- Refutation depth matters: a two-sided message that names but does not actually rebut the opposing position (non-refutational two-sided) is often weaker than either a full one-sided or a refutational two-sided message
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This work's DOI is recorded above but has not been resolved against an external catalogue, so nothing here confirms the work exists.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:8dfd29b2fd41 · see in the full table