Message Pretesting Using Perceived Persuasiveness Measures

Reconsidering the Correlational Evidence

Daniel James O'Keefe*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Perceived message effectiveness (PME) measures have been used in persuasive message pretesting to diagnose differences between messages in actual message effectiveness (AME). This practice has been underwritten by pointing to positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores. This essay argues that such correlations do not–and cannot–show that messages’ relative standing on PME matches their relative standing on AME, and thus correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores are irrelevant to the question of whether PME assessments accurately identify relatively more effective messages. Only correlations between messages’ PME and AME scores can indicate whether PME measures provide successful prediction of messages’ relative AME standing. But positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores do suggest a possible repurposing of PME measures in formative research.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalCommunication Methods and Measures
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

evidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication

Cite this

@article{9a473e0462074ce18061fab21628d738,
title = "Message Pretesting Using Perceived Persuasiveness Measures: Reconsidering the Correlational Evidence",
abstract = "Perceived message effectiveness (PME) measures have been used in persuasive message pretesting to diagnose differences between messages in actual message effectiveness (AME). This practice has been underwritten by pointing to positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores. This essay argues that such correlations do not–and cannot–show that messages’ relative standing on PME matches their relative standing on AME, and thus correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores are irrelevant to the question of whether PME assessments accurately identify relatively more effective messages. Only correlations between messages’ PME and AME scores can indicate whether PME measures provide successful prediction of messages’ relative AME standing. But positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores do suggest a possible repurposing of PME measures in formative research.",
author = "O'Keefe, {Daniel James}",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/19312458.2019.1620711",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Communication Methods and Measures",
issn = "1931-2458",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Message Pretesting Using Perceived Persuasiveness Measures

T2 - Reconsidering the Correlational Evidence

AU - O'Keefe, Daniel James

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Perceived message effectiveness (PME) measures have been used in persuasive message pretesting to diagnose differences between messages in actual message effectiveness (AME). This practice has been underwritten by pointing to positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores. This essay argues that such correlations do not–and cannot–show that messages’ relative standing on PME matches their relative standing on AME, and thus correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores are irrelevant to the question of whether PME assessments accurately identify relatively more effective messages. Only correlations between messages’ PME and AME scores can indicate whether PME measures provide successful prediction of messages’ relative AME standing. But positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores do suggest a possible repurposing of PME measures in formative research.

AB - Perceived message effectiveness (PME) measures have been used in persuasive message pretesting to diagnose differences between messages in actual message effectiveness (AME). This practice has been underwritten by pointing to positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores. This essay argues that such correlations do not–and cannot–show that messages’ relative standing on PME matches their relative standing on AME, and thus correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores are irrelevant to the question of whether PME assessments accurately identify relatively more effective messages. Only correlations between messages’ PME and AME scores can indicate whether PME measures provide successful prediction of messages’ relative AME standing. But positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores do suggest a possible repurposing of PME measures in formative research.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066878497&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85066878497&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/19312458.2019.1620711

DO - 10.1080/19312458.2019.1620711

M3 - Article

JO - Communication Methods and Measures

JF - Communication Methods and Measures

SN - 1931-2458

ER -