Message Pretesting Using Perceived Persuasiveness Measures: Reconsidering the Correlational Evidence
Message Pretesting Using Perceived Persuasiveness Measures: Reconsidering the Correlational Evidence
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/19312458.2019.1620711
复制
发表时间：
2020-01-02
影响因子：
11.4
通讯作者：
O'Keefe，Daniel J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
O'Keefe，Daniel J.
感知信息有效性(PME)测量被用于说服性信息预测试，以诊断不同信息在实际信息有效性(AME)上的差异。这种做法是通过指出个人的PME和AME分数之间的正相关而得到支持的。本文认为，这种相关性不能--也不能--表明信息在PME上的相对地位与他们在AME上的相对地位相匹配，因此，个人PME和AME得分之间的相关性与PME评估是否准确地识别相对更有效的信息的问题无关。只有消息的PME和AME得分之间的相关性才能表明PME测量是否能够成功地预测消息的相对AME地位。但个体的PME和AME分数之间的正相关确实表明，在形成性研究中，PME的测量可能会改变用途。
Perceived message effectiveness (PME) measures have been used in persuasive message pretesting to diagnose differences between messages in actual message effectiveness (AME). This practice has been underwritten by pointing to positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores. This essay argues that such correlations do not – and cannot – show that messages’ relative standing on PME matches their relative standing on AME, and thus correlations betweenindividuals’PME and AME scores are irrelevant to the question of whether PME assessments accurately identify relatively more effective messages. Only correlations betweenmessages’PME and AME scores can indicate whether PME measures provide successful prediction of messages’ relative AME standing. But positive correlations between individuals’ PME and AME scores do suggest a possible repurposing of PME measures in formative research.