Search results

When an audience mentally counterargues a spokesperson, the message is backfiring. In such cases, audience members are practically persuading themselves to take the opposite position advocated by the spokesperson. Yet spokespeople who are professional persuaders serving corporations often seem to instill counterargument. This paper examines the role of counterargument as the conduit through which a spokesperson's different message types affect a company during a crisis. The authors explore the paradox of spokespeople's (in)effectiveness by testing divides in research drawn from normative crisis communication theory, narrative persuasion theory and the theory of reporting bias.

Two controlled, randomized experiments are reported. Participants (total N = 828) watch video clips of media interviews of a company spokesperson fielding questions about a scandal.

In the first study, non-narrative information most effectively bolsters purchase intentions and reduces negative word-of-mouth. The effect is mediated by decreased counterargument. The second study replicates the results concerning on-topic narratives compared with spinning, while on-topic narratives and non-narratives perform equally well.

This study addresses conflicts between two distinct traditions of theory as well as between normative crisis communication and its frequent practice. Reducing counterargument matters in the context of non-narrative persuasion, and non-narratives can perform at least as well as narratives in crisis communication.

Recent research has proposed a specific female phenotype within autism spectrum disorder (ASD). It suggests females exhibit differences in social communication styles with higher levels of camouflaging and compensatory strategies, as well as variance in restrictive repetitive behaviours (RRBs); however, many existing studies have been based on either small, disproportionate or child and adolescent samples, leaving questions about the specific phenotype. This study aims to explore the sex difference and phenotype in a clinic sample of individuals diagnosed with autism.

A service evaluation of sex/ gender differences on 150 historical ASD assessment reports (75 males, 75 females) using a 103-item questionnaire developed from a quantitative review of existing literature was undertaken.

Females camouflaged more significantly than males in five different areas (thinking how to act next, preparing conversation in advance, making lists of prompts/social responses, wearing a mask/acting, less monotone voice); however, these were not maintained in post-analysis correction.

This study points the evidence towards a different phenotype of Autism that is more common in women than men rather than a unique female phenotype.