The potential of inoculation in promoting resistance to the effectiveness of comparative advertising messages

Pfau, Michael

doi:10.1080/01463379209369818

Cited by 79 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 58 publications

(87 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…McGuire (1964) posited that an attitudinal resistance inoculation treatment warns the individual of a future attitudinal attack against an existing, yet vulnerable, attitude and then presents weakened counter-attitudinal arguments to build attitudinal resistance. The effectiveness of inoculative treatments in maintaining attitudes in the presence of counterattitudinal persuasive messages has been supported by laboratory experiments (e.g., Pfau et al, 2004Pfau et al, , 2006 and successfully tested in applied settings such as political campaigns Pfau & Burgoon, 1988;Pfau, Kenski, Nitz, & Sorenson, 1990), public relations (Burgoon, Pfau, & Birk, 1995;Wan & Pfau, 2004), and advertising Pfau, 1992). In addition, the theory is supported by research in adolescent health-preventative contexts, including smoking (Pfau & Van Bockern, 1994;Pfau, Van Bockern, & Kang, 1992;Szabo & Pfau, 2002) and drinking (Godbold & Pfau, 2000).…”

Section: The Inoculation Process Of Conferring Resistance To Influencementioning

confidence: 75%

“…During the 1990s, research investigated the impact of involvement as an independent variable, proposing that involvement may act as a precondition for inoculation (Pfau, 1992). Pfau, Tusing, Koerner, et al (1997) conceptualized issue involvement as ''the importance or salience of an attitude object for a receiver' ' (p. 190).…”

Section: The Inoculation Process Of Conferring Resistance To Influencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inoculating Against Pro-Plagiarism Justifications: Rational and Affective Strategies

Compton¹,

Pfau

2008

Journal of Applied Communication Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Student plagiarism continues to threaten academic integrity. This investigation assessed whether an inoculation message strategy could combat university plagiarism by protecting student attitudes against pro-plagiarism justification arguments. Additionally, we sought theoretical confirmation of previous findings on involvement and accessibility in inoculation, examined the effects on vested interest, and evaluated matching and mismatching strategies in terms of affect-and rationality-based inoculation treatment messages and subsequent attack messages. A total of 225 students participated in three sessions spanning six weeks. Results indicated that none of the inoculation treatments conferred resistance as measured in attitude toward plagiarism, but all treatments enhanced involvement and attitude accessibility, and the fear-and rationality-based treatments enhanced vested interest. Additionally, fear-based treatments derogated the source of the message. Results also suggest that a matching strategy is superior with both affect-and rationality-based attack messages, such that inoculation treatments are most effective when using the same argument bases (e.g., affective or rational) as the attack message. These results offer guidance for crafting communication campaign strategies to reduce the occurrence of student plagiarism offenses. Keywords: Inoculation; Resistance to Influence; PlagiarismCognitive and affective factors keep many students from violating academic codes of conduct by plagiarizing their work. Love and Simmons (1998) found that students who resist the temptation to plagiarize do so for rational, cognitive reasons (such as fairness to original authors) and affect-based reasons (such as fear and anticipated

show abstract

Section: The Inoculation Process Of Conferring Resistance To Influencementioning

confidence: 75%

Section: The Inoculation Process Of Conferring Resistance To Influencementioning

confidence: 99%

Inoculating Against Pro-Plagiarism Justifications: Rational and Affective Strategies

Compton¹,

Pfau

2008

Journal of Applied Communication Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, several researchers have concluded that inoculation works better at promoting resistance when individuals face the same arguments in attack messages as opposed to novel attack arguments (e.g., Anderson & McGuire, 1965;McGuire, 1961aMcGuire, , 1961bMcGuire & Papageorgis 1962;Pfau & Burgoon, 1988;Pryor & Steinfatt, 1978), others have reached the opposite conclusion (e.g., Pfau, 1992;Pfau & Burgoon, 1988), and others have found no significant difference between novel and expected attacks (e.g., Pfau, Kenski, Nitz, & Sorenson, 1990;Wan & Pfau, 2004). Understanding whether inoculation confers more resistance to novel or expected attack arguments has important implications.…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Inoculation Theorymentioning

confidence: 97%

A Meta-Analysis of Research on Inoculation Theory

Banas¹,

Rains²

2010

Communication Monographs

338

278

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A meta-analysis of 54 cases testing the effectiveness of inoculation theory at conferring resistance and examining the mechanisms of the theory was conducted. The analyses revealed inoculation messages to be superior to both supportive messages and notreatment controls at conferring resistance. Additionally, the results revealed refutational same and refutational different preemptions to be equally effective at reducing attitude change. However, the data were not consistent with some predictions made in narrative reviews of inoculation. No significant increase in resistance as a function of threat or involvement was found. Further, instead of a curvilinear effect for delay on resistance, the point estimates from our meta-analysis revealed equivalent resistance between immediate and moderate delays between inoculation and attack, with a decay in resistance after two weeks.

show abstract

“…Refutational same treatments raise and refute the same arguments featured in a subsequent attack; refutational different treatments feature generic arguments that are not contained in a later attack. Research findings consistently indicate that inoculation is equally effective whether refutational same and different treatments are used (McGuire, 1961a(McGuire, , 1962(McGuire, , 1964McGuire & Papageorgis, 1962;Papageorgis & McGuire, 1961;Pfau, 1992Pfau, , 1997Pfau & Burgoon, 1988;Pfau et al, 2004;Pfau et al, 1990;Pfau et al, 2003;Pfau, Szabo, et al, 2001;Pfau et al, 1997).…”

Section: An Antidote To the Influence Of Front-group Stealth Campaignsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is a myriad of applications of inoculation that make the theory so interesting. Inoculation has been applied to a number of applied contexts, in essence, protecting people's attitudes from persuasive campaign messages: in marketing Pfau, 1992), public relations (Burgoon, Pfau, & Birk, 1995;Wan & Pfau, 2004), politics Pfau & Burgoon, 1988;Pfau, Kenski, Nitz, & Sorenson, 1990), and other domains.…”

Section: An Antidote To the Influence Of Front-group Stealth Campaignsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Corporate Front-Group Stealth Campaigns

Pfau

Haigh²,

Sims

et al. 2007

Communication Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examined corporate front-group stealth campaigns. An experiment was conducted to examine the influence of front-group stealth campaigns on a variety of measures. It was anticipated that corporate front-group stealth campaigns, which feature names that mask the true interests of sponsors, positively affect public opinion, unless they are exposed as intentionally misleading, in which case they boomerang against sponsors. The experiment examined the potential of the inoculation strategy to preempt the influence of corporate front-group stealth campaigns. The pattern of results supported all of these expectations. Front-group stealth campaigns proved to be effective, at least in the short term. Front-group stealth campaigns eroded public attitudes toward the issue in question and boosted perceptions of the front group, but not the corporate sponsor. However, when front-group stealth campaigns were subsequently exposed, positive effects dissipated and perceptions of corporate sponsors boomeranged. Results revealed that inoculation can protect against the influence of front-group stealth campaigns.

show abstract

The potential of inoculation in promoting resistance to the effectiveness of comparative advertising messages

Cited by 79 publications

References 58 publications

Inoculating Against Pro-Plagiarism Justifications: Rational and Affective Strategies

Inoculating Against Pro-Plagiarism Justifications: Rational and Affective Strategies

A Meta-Analysis of Research on Inoculation Theory

The Influence of Corporate Front-Group Stealth Campaigns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About