The effect of communication modality on the persuasiveness of hedges and pledges

The claim that a product advertisement aims to put forward is usually related to the product benefits. In an abstract way, claims have formats such as ‘Product X has benefit Y’ or ‘Product X leads to benefit Y’. Advertisers do not necessarily express such product claims explicitly. Claims may be left implicit because readers can easily construct them personally. If product claims are expressed explicitly, advertisers sometimes use hedges or pledges, which mark the probability that the promised benefit will occur. A hedge marks a claim as moderately probable (e.g., In most cases), whereas a pledge marks a claim as highly probable (e.g., In all cases). Experimental research to date (see §2) has shown that these probability markers are equally persuasive, and that they are not more persuasive than claims without such markers. Berney-Reddish and Areni (2005) argue that research should examine hedges and pledges in different communication modalities because people have been shown to process information differently in various communication modalities, such as print, audio, and the Internet. The present study therefore compares the persuasiveness of hedges and pledges in advertising claims in print and audio, and examines how these markers are processed in the two communication modalities.

  • Neessen, G., & Hornikx, J. (2012). The effect of communication modality on the persuasiveness of hedges and pledges in advertising claims. In Heynderickx, P., Dieltjens, S., Jacobs, G., Gillaerts, P., & Groot, E. de (red.), The language factor in international business: New perspectives on research, teaching and practice (pp. 199-214). Bern: Peter Lang. [pdf upon request]

The effects of hedges and pledges in advertisements for high and low reputation brands

Claims in advertising may vary in their use of probability markers that signal the degree to which the claim is true. Experimental research has compared hedges (which mark a claim as moderately probable) and pledges (which mark a claim as very probable). This research has generally neglected the proponent of the claims: the brand. There are reasons to believe that the brand behind the advertising affects to what extent people are persuaded by advertising claims. In two studies it was therefore investigated whether the reputation of the brand affects the persuasiveness of hedges and pledges. It was expected that hedges would be more persuasive for low-reputation brands, whereas pledges would be more persuasive for high-reputation brands. This expectation was tested in two experiments. In Study 1, hedges and pledges were compared in an ad that was provided after information about a brand’s reputation. In Study 2, hedges, plegdes and no markers were compared in an ad in which the brand’s reputation was incorporated. Both studies did not find empirical support for the hypothesis. In Study 1, hedges and pledges were found to be equally persuasive; in Study 2, pledges were found to be more persuasive than hedges.

  • Hornikx, J. (2012). The effects of hedges and pledges in advertisements for high and low reputation brands. In F. H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (Red.), Exploring argumentative contexts (pp. 307-319). Amsterdam: Benjamins. [pdf upon request]

Variations of standpoint explicitness in advertising

Empirical research has demonstrated that variation in standpoint explicitness matters. In several research reports, explicit articulations of a standpoint or conclusion have been compared to more implicit articulations. Meta-analyses of such reports (Cruz, 1998; O’Keefe, 1997, 2002) have shown that messages with explicitly stated standpoints are more persuasive than messages without such standpoints. Such effects were not found for advertising messages, for which the conclusion – buy this product – seems relatively straightforward, regardless of the articulation of the conclusion (Cruz, 1998). There are different ways in which explicit conclusions may be articulated, one of which is the use of probability markers. Advertising research has compared hedges (which mark a standpoint as moderately probable) and pledges (which mark a standpoint as very probable). In this study, it was investigated whether the reputation of the brand affects the persuasiveness of hedges and pledges. Based on a study conducted by Goldberg and Hartwick (1990), it was expected that hedges would be more persuasive for low-reputation brands, whereas pledges would be more persuasive for high-reputation brands. This expectation was put to a test in an experiment.

  • Hornikx, J. (2011). Variations of standpoint explicitness in advertising: An experimental study on probability markers. In F. H. van Eemeren, B. Garssen, D. Godden, & G. Mitchell (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 824-830). Amsterdam: Sic Sat. [pdf]

De overtuigingskracht van normatief sterke en normatief zwakke anekdotische evidentie

Vanuit normatief oogpunt zou de kwaliteit van evidentie invloed moeten hebben op de overtuigingskracht ervan. In experimenten lijkt normatief sterke evidentie ook overtuigender dan normatief zwakke evidentie, maar wanneer de boodschap langer (Hoeken & Hustinx, 2007) of natuurlijker is (Hoeken & Van Wijk, 1997) blijken ontvangers niet gevoelig voor evidentiekwaliteit. In deze studie is onderzocht of de kwaliteit van anekdotische evidentie wel effect heeft op overtuigingskracht als ook statistische evidentie aanwezig is. Nijmegenaren (N = 125) beoordeelden een brief van de gemeente Nijmegen over afvalverwerking waarin normatief sterke of zwakke anekdotische evidentie stond, die wel of niet was aangevuld met statistische evidentie. Zonder statistische evidentie had de kwaliteit van anekdotische evidentie geen effect op de overtuigingskracht, maar mét statistische evidentie was sterke anekdotische evidentie overtuigender dan zwakke anekdotische evidentie. Deze studie laat daarmee zien dat de kwaliteit van evidentie ook in een natuurlijke, realistische setting de overtuigingskracht ervan kan beïnvloeden.

  • Hornikx, J., & Houët, T. (2009). De overtuigingskracht van normatief sterke en normatief zwakke anekdotische evidentie in het bijzijn van statistische evidentie. In W. Spooren, M. Onrust, & J. Sanders (Eds.), Studies in taalbeheersing, vol. 3 (pp. 125-133). Assen: Van Gorcum. [pdf]

Normatively strong and normatively weak expert evidence

I will give an overview of studies that investigated the persuasiveness of expert evidence as well as other types of evidence. One of these studies demonstrated that the persuasiveness of expert evidence was not the same in two different cultures. Section 3 will therefore discuss the relationship between expert evidence and the cultural background of people who judge expert evidence. Special attention will be paid to the question whether people from different cultures may vary in the persuasiveness of expert evidence that is normatively strong or normatively weak according to criteria from argumentation theory. The second part of this article will report on an experiment that investigated the persuasiveness of normatively strong or normatively weak expert evidence in France and the Netherlands.

  • Hornikx, J. (2007). Cultural differences in the persuasiveness of normatively strong and normatively weak expert evidence. In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. A. Willard, & B. Garssen (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 645-650). Amsterdam: Sic Sat. [pdf]

Appreciation and the comprehension of French in advertisements

The frequent use of the English language in advertisements all over the world has been explained in a number of ways. These reasons are discussed in Section 1.1. Subsequently, we discuss the reasons for using foreign languages other than English (1.2). As we will see, one of the reasons is the symbolic meaning of foreign languages. In Section 1.3, we propose a model of how the process of symbolic meaning association could work. The first part of this paper will end with a discussion about this symbolic meaning (1.4). In fact, some researchers have claimed that the literal meaning of words or sentences in a foreign language is not important (e.g., Kelly-Holmes 2000), whereas others have shown that this literal meaning seems to matter (e.g., Cheshire/Moser 1994). In the second part of the article, we present an empirical study that was set up to examine whether the appreciation of the use of a foreign language is affected by its comprehension.

  • Hornikx, J., & Starren, M. (2006). The relationship between the appreciation and the comprehension of French in Dutch advertisements. In R. Crijns, & C. Burgers (Eds.),Werbestrategien in Theorie und Praxis: Sprachliche Aspekte von deutschen und niederländischen Unternehmensdarstellungen und Werbekampagnen (pp. 129-145). Tostedt: Attikon Verlag. [pdf]

Measuring the effect of culture in experimental persuasive effects research

Studies that investigate the influence of culture on the persuasion process need methods and instruments to measure the effect of culture. As cultural studies have most frequently used values as a starting point for cross-cultural differences and similarities (see Section 2), values have also been used to measure culture. Persuasive effects research involving different cultures inherently encounters a number of methodological problems. In Section 3, I will describe these problems and some solutions, and propose the inclusion of context variables other than values as an alternative way of measuring the ef-fect of culture in experimental persuasive effects research.

  • Hornikx, J. (2006). Measuring the effect of culture in experimental persuasive effects research. In R. Crijns, & J. Thalheim (Eds.), Kooperation und Effizienz in der Unternehmenskommunikation: inner und außerbetriebliche Kommunikationsaspekte von Corporate Identity und Interkulturalität (pp. 195-204). Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag. [pdf]

De overtuigingskracht van normatief sterke en normatief zwakke expertevidentie

Hornikx en Hoeken (2005) lieten zien dat normatief sterke expertevidentie als ondersteuning voor standpunten in Frankrijk relatief overtuigender was dan in Nederland. Vanwege de grotere machtsafstand in de Franse cultuur (Hofstede, 2001) zouden experts met een expertisegebied dat irrelevant is voor het standpunt dat ze verdedigen (normatief zwak) voor Fransen overtuigender kunnen zijn dan voor Nederlanders. Studie 1 kon dit niet bevestigen, maar liet wel een cultuurverschil in de relatieve overtuigingskracht van normatief sterke en zwakke expertevidentie zien. Beide experts waren even overtuigend voor de Fransen, die maar een klein verschil zagen in de deskundigheid van beide experts. Om te bekijken of dit kleine verschil te verklaren is door de status van de experts (hoogleraren) werd in Studie 2 de ingeschatte deskundigheid onderzocht van hoogleraren en onderzoekers met een (ir)relevant expertisegebied. De bevindingen van Studie 1 werden gerepliceerd. Fransen dichten experts – of het nu hoogleraren of onderzoekers zijn – een bredere kennis over verschillende onderwerpen toe.

  • Hornikx, J. (2006). De overtuigingskracht van normatief sterke en normatief zwakke expertevidentie in Nederland en Frankrijk. In H. Hoeken, B. Hendriks, & P.J. Schellens (Eds.), Studies in Taalbeheersing, volume 2 (pp. 120-131). Assen: Van Gorcum. [pdf]

Relative occurrence of evidence types

Persuasive texts, such as public information brochures or advertisements, aim to convince their readers to behave in a certain manner, such as to stop smoking or to buy a new car. If argumentation is used to achieve this aim, these texts are generally characterised by pragmatic argumentation, a form of argumentation by which an action is recommended on the basis of its favourable consequences. In order to enhance the persuasive effectiveness of these texts, writers may choose to support their claims with different types of evidence, namely statistical, anecdotal, causal, or expert evidence.

  • Hornikx, J. (2004). Relative occurrence of evidence types in Dutch and French persuasive communication. In Ch. M. Schmidt, D. Neuendorff, & M. Nielsen (Eds.),Marktkommunikation in Theorie und Praxis: inter- und intrakulturelle Dimensionen in der heutigen Wirtschaft (pp. 291-307). Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag. [pdf]

De relatieve frequentie van verschillende evidentietypen

Overtuigende teksten, waarin lezers worden aangespoord een bepaalde handeling te verrichten, winnen in overtuigingskracht wanneer evidentie wordt gebruikt om het waarschijnlijk te maken dat de handeling tot voordelen leidt. Een corpus van Nederlandse (n = 22) en Franse persuasieve voorlichtingsbrochures (n = 22) is geanalyseerd op de frequentie van het gebruik van vier typen evidentie: statistische, anekdotische, causale en expertevidentie. De resultaten laten zien dat cultuur van invloed is op de relatieve frequentie van de typen evidentie. Meer specifiek wordt de hypothese dat expertevidentie vaker zou vóórkomen in het Franse corpus bevestigd. Dit suggereert dat tekstschrijvers uit verschillende culturen wellicht andere ideeën hebben over welke typen evidentie het meest overtuigend zijn.

  • Hornikx, J. (2003). De relatieve frequentie van verschillende evidentietypen in Nederlandse en Franse persuasieve voorlichtingsbrochures. In: L. van Waes, P. Cuvelier, G. Jacobs & I. de Ridder (Eds.), Studies in Taalbeheersing, volume 1 (pp. 206-217). Assen: Van Gorcum. [pdf]