24 pages., via online journal., The present study investigated the effects of communication styles, source expertise, and audiences’ preexisting attitudes in the contexts of the debate regarding genetically modified organisms. A between-subject experiment (N = 416) was conducted manipulating communication styles (aggressive vs. polite) and the expertise of the communicator (scientist vs. nonscientist) in blog articles. The results showed significant effects of communicator expertise and individuals’ preexisting attitudes on writer likability and message quality, depending on the communication style used. Expectancy violation was found as a significant mediator that explains the differences. These findings provided a plausible explanation for the way in which communication styles work in science communication contexts and offered practical implications for science communicators to communicate more strategically.
29 pages, via online journal, Using an online between-subject experiment, this study tested the effects of message framing (gain vs. loss), reference point (self vs. other), and modality (text vs. infographics) in the scenario of recycling promotion. The findings identified that modality determines under what circumstances message strategies make a difference in risk perception and optimistic bias. In particular, only when paired with infographics and other-referencing point are loss-framed messages more effective than gain-framed messages in increasing risk perception and reducing the self-other gap in perceived benefits. Moreover, risk perception variables and the self-other risk perceptual gap were significant predictors of promoted behavioral intentions.
