ArticleHealth communication2021
Deliberation and Valence as Dissociable Components of Counterarguing among Smokers: Evidence from Neuroimaging and Quantitative Linguistic Analysis.
Article in Health communication, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attentional, Affective, and Cognitive Responses to the Food and Drug Administration's "The Real Cost" Youth Cigarette and E-Cigarette Prevention Campaigns Among Young Adults.American journal of preventive medicine · 2026Article
- Pictorial warning labels reduce sharing intentions, blunt self-relevance processes elicited by social media posts promoting cannabis edibles.The Journal of communication · 2025Article
- Diminished valuation in the brain: how repeated exposure reduces health message engagement.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2025Article
- Neural reference groups: a synchrony-based classification approach for predicting attitudes using fNIRS.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Counterarguing is a key obstacle to successful persuasion. However, the difficulty of directly measuring counterarguing during message exposure limits knowledge of the underlying mechanisms. The current study combines neuroimaging and linguistic measures to unpack neurocognitive and psychological mechanisms associated with counterarguing among a sample of established smokers in response to anti-smoking messaging. We capture participants' neural activity in brain regions associated with effortful deliberation and negative argumentation during message exposure, and link it with their subsequent language patterns to further understanding of counterarguing in the brain. Greater brain activity within key regions of interest associated with deliberation and negative argumentation is associated with greater cognitive depth and less positivity in the post-scan message descriptions, respectively, among those who have lower intention to change their smoking behavior. We connect these neural representations of counterarguing with psychological theories and discuss implications that may increase the impact of persuasive communications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.