TY - JOUR
T1 - Enriching the inoculation construct: The role of critical components in the process of resistance
T2 - The role of critical components in the process of resistance
AU - Pfau, Michael
AU - Tusing, Kyle James
AU - Koerner, Ascan F.
AU - Lee, Waipeng
AU - Godbold, Linda C.
AU - Penaloza, Linda J.
AU - Yang, Violet Shu Huei
AU - Hong, Yah Huei
PY - 1997
Y1 - 1997
N2 - This investigation tested the effectiveness of inoculation treatments on 790 participants. The study probed the relationship between threat and involvement, their role in inoculation, and the nature of cognitive processes triggered via inoculation. The pattern of results suggests that inoculation elicits threat, threat contributes to resistance, and resistance is most pronounced for more involved receivers and on behalf of more involving topics. Finally, the results shed additional light on the process of inoculation but revealed a process considerably more intricate than was initially predicted. Structural equation analyses indicated that inoculation and involvement exert parallel, but independent, effects throughout the process of resistance. Both contributed directly to resistance, and both indirectly furthered resistance, but along unique paths. Whereas inoculation elicited receiver threat, which indirectly enhanced resistance through its sizable and immediate impact on Phase 2 attitudes, involvement contributed to the process of counterarguing and, thus, exerted a delayed indirect impact on Phase 3 attitudes.
AB - This investigation tested the effectiveness of inoculation treatments on 790 participants. The study probed the relationship between threat and involvement, their role in inoculation, and the nature of cognitive processes triggered via inoculation. The pattern of results suggests that inoculation elicits threat, threat contributes to resistance, and resistance is most pronounced for more involved receivers and on behalf of more involving topics. Finally, the results shed additional light on the process of inoculation but revealed a process considerably more intricate than was initially predicted. Structural equation analyses indicated that inoculation and involvement exert parallel, but independent, effects throughout the process of resistance. Both contributed directly to resistance, and both indirectly furthered resistance, but along unique paths. Whereas inoculation elicited receiver threat, which indirectly enhanced resistance through its sizable and immediate impact on Phase 2 attitudes, involvement contributed to the process of counterarguing and, thus, exerted a delayed indirect impact on Phase 3 attitudes.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031504353&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031504353&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1997.tb00413.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1997.tb00413.x
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0031504353
SN - 0360-3989
VL - 24
SP - 187
EP - 215
JO - Human Communication Research
JF - Human Communication Research
IS - 2
ER -