Probing vs Declarative Ads
Location
PANEL: Insights into Social Change & Human Behavior
CELA A019
Moderator: Mary Rose
Document Type
Presentation - Open Access
Start Date
5-1-2026 11:00 AM
End Date
5-1-2026 12:00 PM
Abstract
Finding common ground on controversial issues is essential for a functioning democracy. Can the way political messaging is packaged affect whether attitudes shift? Probing messages ask viewers how they feel on an issue, while declarative messages tell viewers how they should feel. I hypothesized that a probing message would be more effective in changing attitudes. Across two studies (N = 889, N = 158), I measured participants’ opinion on two issues (immigration and abortion). Two weeks later, participants saw an infographic supporting the opposing position with either a probing question or a declarative statement at the top. Their new opinions were measured against their old to test for change. Both issues saw significant change between time 1 and time 2 (p's < .001), but effects of condition were minimal. Opposition evaluation, perceptions of harm, and moral absolutism were also not affected by condition. This study shows that opinion change is possible even in our polarized environment, and that future research is needed to determine what methods promote more change.
Keywords:
Political psychology, Messaging, Attitude change
Recommended Citation
Young, Emily, "Probing vs Declarative Ads" (2026). Research Symposium. 46.
https://digitalcommons.oberlin.edu/researchsymp/2026/presentations/46
Major
Psychology; Politics
Project Mentor(s)
Cindy Frantz, Psychology
2026
Probing vs Declarative Ads
PANEL: Insights into Social Change & Human Behavior
CELA A019
Moderator: Mary Rose
Finding common ground on controversial issues is essential for a functioning democracy. Can the way political messaging is packaged affect whether attitudes shift? Probing messages ask viewers how they feel on an issue, while declarative messages tell viewers how they should feel. I hypothesized that a probing message would be more effective in changing attitudes. Across two studies (N = 889, N = 158), I measured participants’ opinion on two issues (immigration and abortion). Two weeks later, participants saw an infographic supporting the opposing position with either a probing question or a declarative statement at the top. Their new opinions were measured against their old to test for change. Both issues saw significant change between time 1 and time 2 (p's < .001), but effects of condition were minimal. Opposition evaluation, perceptions of harm, and moral absolutism were also not affected by condition. This study shows that opinion change is possible even in our polarized environment, and that future research is needed to determine what methods promote more change.
