Incidental experiences of regulatory fit and the processing of persuasive appeals

Anne M. Koenig, Joseph Cesario, Daniel C. Molden, Spee Kosloff, E. Tory Higgins

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

33 Scopus citations

Abstract

This article examines how the subjective experiences of "feeling right" from regulatory fit and of "feeling wrong" from regulatory non-fit influence the way people process persuasive messages. Across three studies, incidental experiences of regulatory fit increased reliance on source expertise and decreased resistance to counterpersuasion, whereas incidental experiences of regulatory non-fit increased reliance on argument strength and increased resistance to counterpersuasion. These results suggest that incidental fit and non-fit experiences can produce, respectively, more superficial or more thorough processing of persuasive messages. The mechanisms underlying these effects, and the conditions under which they should and should not be expected, are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1342-1355
Number of pages14
JournalPersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Volume35
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2009

Keywords

  • Attitudes
  • Depth of processing
  • Motivation
  • Persuasion
  • Subjective experience

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Incidental experiences of regulatory fit and the processing of persuasive appeals'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this