HTML (Español (España))
PDF (Español (España))
FLIP
XML (Español (España))
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
Acta Colombiana de Psicología complies with international intellectual property and copyright laws, and particularly with Article No. 58 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, Law No. 23 of 1982, and the Agreement No. 172 of September 30, 2010 (Universidad Católica de Colombia Intellectual Property Regulation).
Authors retain their copyright and grant to the Acta Colombiana de Psicología the right of first publication, with the work registered under Creative Commons attribution license, which allows third parties to use the published material, provided they credit the authorship of the work and the first publication in this Journal.
Abstract
This study analyses the impact of argument quality and source expertise on moral persuasion, as well as the change of a moral judgment as a function of a persuasive message. Research on the effects of argument quality and source expertise on moral persuasion is scarce, although the theories of Social Intuitionism, Dual Process and Moral Convictions suggest some hints in this regard. To study the impact of these factors on moral persuasion, an experimental study was carried out with a 2 (source expertise) × 2 (argument quality) factorial design with 433 participants. A particularly sensitive moral dilemma was designed to contrast the moral foundations of Harm-Care and Justice-Reciprocity in the context of the post-conflict in Colombia to evaluate moral judgment and potential change of judgment. The results show that although most of the participants presented resistance to persuasion, both the quality of the argument and the expertise of the source facilitated persuasion, albeit independently. Results also suggest several reflections on both dual process theories of persuasion and theories of moral judgement.
Keywords:
References
Aramovich, N., Lytle, B., & Skitka, L. (2012). Opposing torture: Moral conviction and resistance to majority influence. Social Influence, 7(1). 21-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553 4510.2011.640199
Ben-Nun Bloom, P., & Levitan, L. C. (2011). We're closer than I thought: Social network heterogeneity, morality, and political persuasion. Political Psychology, 32(4), 643-665. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2011.00826.x
Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation or¬der: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European journal of communication, 33(2), 122-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317
Briñol, P., & Petty, R. (2009). Source factors in persuasion: A self-validation approach. European review of social psychology, 20(1), 49-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280802643640
Buttrick, N., Moulder, R., & Oishi, S. (2020). Historical Change in the Moral Foundations of Political Persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(11), 1523- 1537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220907467
Cancela, A., Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2021). Hedonic vs. epistemic goals in processing persuasive communications: Revisiting the role of personal involvement. Motivation and Emotion, 45(3), 280-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11031-021-09873-7
Carpenter, C. J. (2015). A meta-analysis of the ELM's argument quality processing type predictions. Human Communication Research, 41(4), 501-534. https://doi. org/10.1111/hcre.12054
Chaiken, S., & Ledgerwood, A. (2011). A theory of heuristic and systematic information processing. En P. A. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski y E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology: Volume two (Vol. 1, pp. 246- 166.). SAGE publications.
Christensen, J., & Gomila, A. (2012). Moral dilemmas in cog¬nitive neuroscience of moral decision-making: A principled review. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36, 1249- 1264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.02.008
Clark, J. K., Evans, A. T., & Wegener, D. T. (2011). Perceptions of source efficacy and persuasion: Multiple mechanisms for source effects on attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(5), 596-607. https://doi.org/10.1002/ ejsp.787
DeBono, K. G., & Harnish, R. J. (1988). Source experti¬se, source attractiveness, and the processing of persuasive information: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 55(4), 541. https://doi. org/10.1037/0022-3514.55.4.541
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/ BRM.41.4.1149
Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2013). The moral roots of environmental attitudes. Psychological Science, 24(1), 56-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612449177
Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2015). From gulf to bridge: When do moral arguments facilitate political influence? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(12), 1665-1681. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0146167215607842
Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2019). Moral reframing: A techni¬que for effective and persuasive communication across political divides. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(12), e12501. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12501
Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2013). Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 47, pp. 55-130). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4
Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
Greene, J. (2013). Moral tribes: Emotion, reason, and the gap between us and them. Penguin.
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814-834. https://doi. org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.814
Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are di¬vided by politics and religion. Vintage.
Haidt, J., & Baron, J. (1996). Social roles and the moral judgement of acts and omissions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26(2), 201-218. https://doi. org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199603)26:2<201::AID-EJSP745>3.0.CO;2-J
Hornsey, M., Smith, J. R., & Begg, D. (2007). Effects of norms among those with moral conviction: Counter-conformity emerges on intentions but not behaviors. Social Influence, 2(4), 244-268. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510701476500
Kruglanski, A. W. (2011). Lay epistemic theory. En P. A. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski y E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology: Volume two (vol. 1, pp. 201-223). SAGE publications.
Luttrell, A., Petty, R., Briñol, P., & Wagner, B. (2016). Making it moral: Merely labeling an attitude as moral increases its strength. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 65, 82-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.04.003
Moses, J. F., & Gonzales, M. H. (2015). Strong candidate, nurturant candidate: Moral language in presidential television advertisements. Political Psychology, 36(4), 379-397. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12160
O’Keefe, D. J., & Jackson, S. (1995). Argument quality and persuasive effects: A review of current approaches. En S. Jackson (Ed.), Argumentation and values: Proceedings of the ninth Alta conference on argumentation (pp. 88-92). Speech Communication Association.
Paxton, J. M., & Greene, J. D. (2010). Moral reasoning: Hints and allegations. Topics in cognitive science, 2(3), 511-527. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01096.x
Paxton, J. M., Ungar, L., & Greene, J. D. (2012). Reflection and reasoning in moral judgment. Cognitive Science, 36(1), 163-177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01210.x
Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2006). Understanding social judgment: Multiple systems and processes. Psychological Inquiry, 17(3), 217-223. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20447327
Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2011). The elaboration likelihood model. En P. A. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski y E. T. Higgins, (Eds), Handbook of theories of social psychology: Volume two (vol. 1, pp. 224-245.). SAGE publications.
Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credi¬bility: A critical review of five decades' evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02547.x
Redacción El Tiempo. (2 de octubre de 2016). Antioquia, Santanderes y Eje, regiones que dieron el triunfo al 'No'. El tiempo. https://www.eltiempo.com/archivo/documento/CMS-16716975
Semana. (9 de febrero de 2016b). Plebiscito: polarización entre “fachos” y “castro-chavistas”. Semana. https://www.sema¬na.com/nacion/articulo/plebiscito-por-la-paz-entre-fachos-y-castrochavistas/492268/
Semana. (25 de septiembre de 2016a). “Lo que he tratado es de abrirles los ojos a los colombianos”: Alejandro Ordóñez. Semana. https://www.semana.com/nacion/articulo/alejan¬dro-ordonez-habla-del-proceso-de-paz-el-gobierno-santos-la-ideologia-de-genero-y-el-plebiscito/495287/
Skitka, L. J., Bauman, C. W., & Lytle, B. L. (2009). Limits on legitimacy: moral and religious convictions as constraints on deference to authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(4), 567-578. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015998
Skitka, L. J., Hanson, B. E., Morgan, G. S., & Wisneski, D. C. (2021). The psychology of moral conviction. Annual Review of Psychology, 72, 347-366. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-063020-030612
Steindl, C., Jonas, E., Sittenthaler, S., Traut-Mattausch, E., & Greenberg, J. (2015). Understanding psychological reactance. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 223(4), 205-214. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000222
Tormala, Z. L., & Briñol, P. (2015). Attitude change and persua¬sion: Past, present, and future directions. En M. I. Norton, D. D. Rucker y C. Lamberton (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of consumer psychology (pp 29-64). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107706552.002
Van Lange, P. A., Kruglanski, A. W., & Higgins, E. T. (2011). Handbook of theories of social psychology: Volume two (vol. 2). SAGE publications.
Wood, W. (2000). Attitude change: Persuasion and social in¬fluence. Annual review of psychology, 51(1), 539-570. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.539
Reference by
