Advertisement

Literature Search—Reactance in Literature

  • Patrick EhrenbrinkEmail author
Chapter
Part of the T-Labs Series in Telecommunication Services book series (TLABS)

Abstract

The first step in the literature search was finding relevant papers that dealt with reactance in the context of human–computer interaction. In order to find such papers, a literature search was performed in the ACM digital library (https://scholar.google.com/) publication database, Google Scholar (https://dl.acm.org/), as well as in ScienceDirect (https://www.sciencedirect.com/) and also in the references of identified papers. The results of the research that is described in Chaps.  2 and   3 have been published in  [7]. The texts in this chapter roughly follow the published paper but data has been reanalyzed. That publication also includes the publications [5, 6] which were published by the author of this thesis. These publications cover experiments that are presented in Chaps.  4 and   8 and are therefore not included in the current literature analysis.

References

  1. 1.
    Debora, Dhanya A., Pricilda Jaidev, U.: Consumer reactance: a review of research methodologies. Int. J. Pure Appl. Math. 118(18), 4449–4467 (2018)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brehm, J.W.: A Theory of Psychological Reactance. Academic Press, New York (1966)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brehm, S.S., Brehm, J.W.: Psychological reactance: a theory of freedom and control. Academic Press, New York (1981)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Edwards, S.M., Li, H., Lee, J.H.: Forced exposure and psychological reactance: antecedents and consequences of the perceived intrusiveness of pop-up ads. J. Advert. 31(3), 83–95 (2002).  https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2002.10673678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ehrenbrink, P., Gong, X.G., Möller, S.: Implications of different feedback types on error perception and psychological reactance. In: Proceedings of the 28th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction, OzCHI ’16, pp. 358–362. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1145/3010915.3010994
  6. 6.
    Ehrenbrink, P., Hillmann, S., Weiss, B., Möller, S.: Psychological reactance in HCI: a method towards improving acceptance of devices and services. In: Proceedings of the 28th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction, OzCHI ’16, pp. 478–482. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1145/3010915.3010978
  7. 7.
    Ehrenbrink, P., Prezenski, S.: Causes of psychological reactance in human-computer interaction—a literature review and survey. In: Proceedings of the 35th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics (ECCE), pp. 1–8. ACM, NY, USA (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1145/3121283.3121304. Electronic
  8. 8.
    Laschke, M., Diefenbach, S., Schneider, T., Hassenzahl, M.: Keymoment: Initiating behavior change through friendly friction. In: Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational, pp. 853–858. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee, G., Lee, W.J.: Psychological reactance to online recommendation services. Inf. Manage. 46(8), 448–452 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2009.07.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li, C., Meeds, R.: Factors affecting information processing of internet advertisements: A test on exposure conditions, psycholgical reactance, and advertising frequency. American Academy of Advertising. Conference of Proceedings (Online), pp. 93–101. American Academy of Advertising, Austin (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu, S., Helfenstein, S., Wahlstedt, A.: Social psychology of persuasion applied to human agent interaction. Human Technol. 4(2), 123–143 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Murray, K.B., Häubl, G.: Freedom of choice, ease of use, and the formation of interface preferences. MIS Quart. 35(4), 955–976 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roubroeks, M., Ham, J., Midden, C.: When artificial social agents try to persuade people: The role of social agency on the occurrence of psychological reactance. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 3(2), 155–165 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0088-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roubroeks, M., Midden, C., Ham, J.: Does it make a difference who tells you what to do ? exploring the effect of social agency on psychological reactance. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, Persuasive ’09, pp. 15:1–15:6. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1541948.1541970
  15. 15.
    Roubroeks, M., Ham, J., Midden, C.: The dominant robot: threatening robots cause psychological reactance, especially when they have incongruent goals. In: Ploug, T., Hasle, P., Oinas-Kukkonen, H. (eds.) Persuasive Technology, pp. 174–184. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stieger, S., Reips, U.D., Voracek, M.: Forced-response in online surveys: bias from reactance and an increase in sex-specific dropout. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 58(11), 1653–1660 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.v58:11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    White, T.B., Zahay, D.L., Thorbjørnsen, H., Shavitt, S.: Getting too personal: reactance to highly personalized email solicitations. Market. Lett. 19(1), 39–50 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zheng, X., Liu, N., Zhao, L.: A study of the effectiveness of online scarce promotion-based on the comparison of planned buying and unplanned buying. In: Proceedings of the 12th Wuhan International Conference on E-Business, pp. 247–257 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Werder (Havel)Germany

Personalised recommendations