Abstract
The present research explores the influence of message orientation and audience power on persuasion. We propose that matching message orientation and audience power increases the message’s persuasiveness. Three studies were conducted to test the matching hypothesis and explore their underlying psychological mechanisms. Study 1 explores the influence of trait power and message orientation on persuasion. Study 2 replicates and extends the matching effect by manipulating the power state with experience recall. Study 3 examines the mediating role of perceived fluency by priming the power state with role-play imagination and excluding the potential interference of trait power and mood. The results show that matching between message orientation and audience power can improve message persuasiveness. Specifically, for low-power individuals, the concrete message was more persuasive; for high-power individuals, the abstract message was more persuasive. Moreover, perceived fluency plays a mediating role in the matching effect. The research provides a new matching perspective for the field of power and persuasion and contributes to understanding the psychological mechanism behind the message-matching effect. It has significant practical implications in the fields of communication, advertising, and political campaigns.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, C., & Berdahl, J. L. (2002). The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1362–1377. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1362
Anderson, C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Power, optimism, and risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(4), 511–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.324
Anderson, C., John, O. P., & Keltner, D. (2012). The personal sense of power. Journal of Personality, 80(2), 313–344. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00734.x
Areni, C. S., & Sparks, J. R. (2005). Language power and persuasion. Psychology & Marketing, 22(6), 507–525. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20071
Berson, Y., & Halevy, N. (2014). Hierarchy, leadership, and construal fit. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 20(3), 232–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000017
Berson, Y., Halevy, N., Shamir, B., & Erez, M. (2015). Leading from different psychological distances: A construal-level perspective on vision communication, goal setting, and follower motivation. Leadership Quarterly, 26(2), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.07.011
Briñol, P., Petty, R. E., & Barden, J. (2007a). Happiness versus sadness as a determinant of thought confidence in persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 711–727. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.711
Briñol, P., Petty, R. E., Valle, C., Rucker, D. D., & Becerra, A. (2007b). The effects of message recipients’ power before and after persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), 1040–1053. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.6.1040
Cesario, J., Grant, H., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). Regulatory fit and persuasion: Transfer from “feeling right.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(3), 388–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.388
Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2016). Dynamics of communicator and audience power: The persuasiveness of competence versus warmth. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(1), 68–85. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucw006
Ein-Gar, D., & Levontin, L. (2013). Giving from a distance: Putting the charitable organization at the center of the donation appeal. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(2), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.002
Faul, Franz, Erdfelder, Edgar, Lang, Albert-Georg., & Buchner, Axel. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 453–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.453
Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Gruenfeld, D. H., Whitson, J. A., & Liljenquist, K. A. (2008). Power reduces the press of the situation: Implications for creativity, conformity, and dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1450–1466. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012633
Galinsky, A. D., Rucker, D. D., & Magee, J. C. (2015). Power: Past findings, present considerations, and future directions. In M. Mikulincer, P. R. Shaver, J. A. Simpson, & J. F. Dovidio (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology®. APA handbook of personality and social psychology, Vol. 3. Interpersonal relations (p. 421–460). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14344-016
Guinote, A. (2008). Power and affordances: When the situation has more power over powerful than powerless individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(2), 237–252. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012518
Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55(11), 1217–1230. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1217
Higgins, E. T., Idson, L. C., Freitas, A. L., Spiegel, S., & Molden, D. C. (2003). Transfer of value from fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1140–1153. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1140
Holtgraves, T., & Lasky, B. (1999). Linguistic power and persuasion. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(2), 196–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X99018002004
Ji, W. B., & Peng, S. Q. (2011). Advertising orientation and persuasion: A psychological distance perspective. Journal of Marketing Science, 7(2), 23–31. http://www.jms.org.cn:8081/jms/CN/Y2011/V7/I2/23
Jin, L., & Huang, Y. (2019). How power states influence the persuasiveness of top-dog versus underdog appeals. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 29(2), 243–261. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1069
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110(2), 265–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.265
Kim, H., Rao, A. R., & Lee, A. Y. (2009). It’s time to vote: The effect of matching message orientation and temporal frame on political persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(6), 877–889. https://doi.org/10.1086/593700
Kraus, M. W., Chen, S., & Keltner, D. (2011). The power to be me: Power elevates self-concept consistency and authenticity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(5), 974–980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.017
Lammers, J., Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2013). Power gets the job: Priming power improves interview outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(4), 776–779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.02.008
Lammers, J., Galinsky, A. D., Gordijn, E. H., & Otten, S. (2012). Power increases social distance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(3), 282–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611418679
Lammers, J., Stoker, J. I., & Stapel, D. A. (2009). Differentiating social and personal power: Opposite effects on stereotyping, but parallel effects on behavioral approach tendencies. Psychological Science, 20(12), 1543–1549. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02479.x
Lee, A. Y., & Aaker, J. L. (2004). Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.205
Lee, A. Y., Keller, P. A., & Sternthal, B. (2010). Value from regulatory construal fit: The persuasive impact of fit between consumer goals and message concreteness. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 735–747. https://doi.org/10.1086/605591
Magee, J. C., & Smith, P. K. (2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 158–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312472732
Mayer, J. D., & Gaschke, Y. N. (1988). The experience and meta-experience of mood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(1), 102–111. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.55.1.102
Min, D., & Kim, J. (2013). Is power powerful? Power, confidence, and goal pursuit. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 30(3), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.12.001
Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). The secret life of fluency. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(6), 237–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.014
Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2015). Emotion and persuasion: Cognitive and meta-cognitive processes impact attitudes. Cognition and Emotion, 29(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2014.967183
Petty, R. E., Briñol, P., & Tormala, Z. L. (2002). Thought confidence as a determinant of persuasion: The self-validation hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5), 722–741. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.5.722
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Schmid Mast, M., Jonas, K., & Hall, J. A. (2009). Give a person power and he or she will show interpersonal sensitivity: The phenomenon and its why and when. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(5), 835–850. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016234
Schmid, P. C., & Schmid Mast, M. (2013). Power increases performance in a social evaluation situation as a result of decreased stress responses. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(3), 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1937
Smith, P. K., & Trope, Y. (2006). You focus on the forest when you’re in charge of the trees: Power priming and abstract information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 578–596. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578
Smith, P. K., Wigboldus, D. H. J., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2008). Abstract thinking increases one’s sense of power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(2), 378–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.12.005
Snefjella, B., & Kuperman, V. (2015). Concreteness and psychological distance in natural language use. Psychological Science, 26(9), 1449–1460. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615591771
Stel, M., Dijk, E. V., Smith, P. K., Dijk, W. V., & Djalal, F. M. (2012). Lowering the pitch of your voice makes you feel more powerful and think more abstractly. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(4), 497–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611427610
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440–463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963
Wakslak, C. J., Smith, P. K., & Han, A. (2014). Using abstract language signals power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036626
White, K., Macdonnell, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2011). It’s the mind-set that matters: The role of construal level and message framing in influencing consumer efficacy and conservation Behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(3), 472–485. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.48.3.472
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Ning Liu contributed to the conception and design of the research. Mingyu Yuan performed the experiments, analyzed the data, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. Ning Liu and Mingyu Yuan revised the manuscript. Both authors have contributed equally to this work and share first authorship.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
No conflict of interest exists in the submission of this manuscript, and manuscript is approved by all authors for publication. I would like to declare on behalf of my co-authors that the work described was original research that has not been published previously, and not under consideration for publication elsewhere, in whole or in part. All the authors listed have approved the manuscript that is enclosed.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Ethical Approval Statement
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Shandong Normal University Human Research Ethics Advisory Panel (Psychology) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Conflict of Interest Statement
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix A. The Sense of Power Scale
Please answer the following questions truthfully based on the actual situation of your relationship with others, and make your agreement rating for the following statements on one of the seven degree levels below. And put a "√" above the corresponding number.
Disagree strongly | Disagree | Disagree a little | Neither Agree nor disagree | Agree a little | Agree | Agree strongly | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. I can get him/her/them to listen to what I say | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
2. My wishes do not carry much weight. (r) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. I can get him/her/them to do what I want | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
4. Even if I voice them, my views have little sway. (r) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
5. I think I have a great deal of power | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
6. My ideas and opinions are often ignored. (r) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
7. Even when I try, I am not able to get my way. (r) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
8. If I want to, I get to make the decisions | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
Appendix B. The Recall Task for manipulating power
High-power priming
Please recall a particular incident in which you had power over another individual or individuals. By power, we mean a situation in which you controlled the ability of another person or persons to get something they wanted, or were in a position to evaluate those individuals. Please describe this situation in which you had power—what happened, how you felt, etc.
Low-power priming
Please recall a particular incident in which someone else had power over you. By power, we mean a situation in which someone had control over your ability to get something you wanted, or was in a position to evaluate you. Please describe this situation in which you did not have power—what happened, how you felt, etc.
Appendix C. The Role Imagination for manipulating power
High-power priming
Imagine that you are the managing director in the marketing organization has 20 employees working under you. The organization promotes various products to the public, and the role of you is to distribute the work that subordinates must complete, set goals for the team, approve project proposals, and accept or decline new clients. You know the work well and make all decisions within the company. You determine the salary and the workload of all employees. Please describe from morning throughout the evening, and as vividly as possible, a day in your work role.
Low-power priming
Imagine that you are the the employee in the marketing organization works in a team of 20 people. The organization promotes various products to the public, and the role of you is to complete any task that the managing director assigns to you, and to follow instructions regarding goals in this marketing organization. You must also keep records about projects and prepare paperwork for new clients accepted by the director. You know the work well and strictly follow the procedures set by the director. Your salary and workload are determined by the director. Please describe from morning throughout the evening, and as vividly as possible, a day in your work role.
Appendix D. The Manipulation check of power
After completing the above section, please rate your agreement with the following statements based on the content of the situation you have filled out on the following 7 degree scale.
Disagree strongly | Disagree | Disagree a little | Neither agree nor disagree | Agree a little | Agree | Agree strongly | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
I tried to control the interaction | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
I felt dominant | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
I felt powerful | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
I felt my willing didn't figure at all | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
I felt up to the task | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
I felt competent | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
I felt comfortable in the assigned role | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
I did not feel at ease with the assigned role | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
Appendix E. The Attitude evaluation (the election campaign message)
Please read the promotional materials below.
You have read the relevant information of the promotional materials, please answer the following questions according to your actual ideas, there is no right or wrong answer, please answer carefully.
Disagree strongly | Disagree | Disagree a little | Neither agree nor disagree | Agree a little | Agree | Agree strongly | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. I am willing to vote for candidates | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
Very Negative | Negative | Negative a little | Neither negative nor positive | Positive a little | Positive | Very Positive | |
2. My attitude towards candidates | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. My attitude towards the message | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
Appendix F. The Attitude evaluation (the environmental protection message)
Please read the publicity materials below.
You have read the relevant information of the publicity materials, please answer the following questions according to your actual ideas, there is no right or wrong answer, please answer carefully.
Disagree strongly | Disagree | Disagree a little | Neither agree nor disagree | Agree a little | Agree | Agree strongly | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. I am willing to recycle | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
Very Negative | Negative | Negative a little | Neither negative nor positive | Positive a little | Positive | Very Positive | |
2. My attitude towards recycling | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
3. My attitude towards the message | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
Appendix G. the Manipulation check of persuasion messages
After reading this message, what do you think of it: | Concreteness | …… …… …… | Abstraction | |||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | ||
Detail | …… …… …… | Generalization | ||||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
Appendix H. the Perceived fluency
When you read this message: | Feel wrong | …… …… …… | Feel right | ||||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |||
Most ordinary | …… …… …… | Very attention grabbing | |||||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |||
Not convincing | …… …… …… | Very convincing | |||||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
Appendix I. The Brief Mood Introspection Scale
Below are adjectives to describe your mood. Please tick the number that best represents your current mood according to your true feelings.
Definitely do not feel | Do not feel | Slightly feel | Definitely feel | Definitely do not feel | Do not feel | Slightly feel | Definitely feel | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lively | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Drowsy | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Happy | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Grouchy | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Sad | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Peppy | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Tired | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Nervous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Caring | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Calm | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Content | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Loving | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Gloomy | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Fed up | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Jittery | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Active | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yuan, M., Liu, N. Power and persuasion: The value of message-audience matching and fluency. Curr Psychol 42, 17632–17648 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02915-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02915-4