Behavior Speaks Louder than Traits
The Impact of Information Abstractness and Communication Source on Message Reception
Abstract
The impact of message abstractness on recipients is controversial. Research on person perception suggests that abstract messages are more influential, whereas research on communication and its outcomes suggests that concrete, vivid communication has greater impact. It was predicted that the latter also applies to the domain of person perception if the message contains unexpected (i.e., stereotype inconsistent) information. This prediction was tested experimentally. It was found that a message about a target person with unexpected content exerts more influence when it is concrete than when it is abstract. This effect generalized across different sources of communication (mass media and interpersonal communication). In line with earlier findings, messages from the media had a somewhat stronger effect than interpersonal communication. Implications for optimal message composition for the communication of knowledge about people are discussed.
References
(1978). Effects of media, communicator, and message position on attitude change. Public Opinion Quarterly, 42, 59–70.
(
in press ). Nomina sunt omina: On the inductive potential of nouns and adjectives in person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.(2003). On the different uses of linguistic abstractness: From LIB to LEB and beyond. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 441–453.
(2003). Persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining. Boston: Pearson.
(1999). Carrot-eaters and creature-believers: The effects of lexicalization on children’s inferences about social categories. Psychological Science, 10, 489–493.
(1970). An overview of persuasibility research. In , Foundations of communication theory (pp. 222–233). New York: Harper & Row.
(1991). Rationalist assumptions in cross-media comparison of computer-mediated communication. Behavior and Information Technology, 10, 153–172.
(2003). The impact of language and congruity on persuasion in multicultural E-marketing. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, 41–50.
(1989). Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 981–993.
(1991). Imagery and verbal memory. In , Imagery and cognition (pp. 133–182). New York: Springer.
(1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings in social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
(2003). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st century (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Erlbaum.
(1975). Time to understand pictures and words. Nature, 253, 437–438.
(1972). The informativeness of trait descriptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21, 341–344.
(1988). The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 558–568.
(1991). The linguistic category model, its bases, applications, and range. European Review of Social Psychology, 2, 1–30.
(1997). Activating representations in permanent memory: Different benefits for pictures and words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1106–1121.
(2006). Minority influence is facilitated when the communication employs linguistic abstractness. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 9, 443–451.
(2002). Linguistic context and social perception: Does stimulus abstraction moderate processing style? Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 21, 195–229.
(2005). Retrieval contexts and the concreteness effect: Dissociations in memory for concrete and abstract words. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 859–881.
(2000). How do we communicate stereotypes? Linguistic bases and inferential consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 5–18.
(2006). Communicating expectancies about others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 815–824.
