Engaging in Mental Contrasting Before Receiving a Persuasive Message: Effects on Attitude Change

Abstract

Mental contrasting is a self-regulation strategy in which fantasies about a positive future are juxtaposed to images of the relevant obstacles in the present reality (Oettingen, 2012). The current research investigated whether engaging in mental contrasting before receiving a persuasive message effects attitude change. We present three empirical studies, in which participants did not fantasize (control), indulged, or mentally contrasted about fulfilling an interpersonal wish (Study 1), an achievement wish (Study 2), or a graduation wish (Study 3). Thereafter, the participants received a persuasive message regarding the implementation of new foster care policies (Study 1, Study 2; Briñol, Petty, & Barden, 2007), or a senior comprehensive exam (Study 3; Petty & Cacioppo, 1979). The persuasive message was supported by either weak or strong arguments. A general pattern emerged, showing that participants in the control and indulging conditions were dependent on argument quality; they reported significantly more favorable attitudes when presented with strong arguments than with weak arguments. As hypothesized, participants who engaged in mental contrasting were less dependent on the quality of the arguments. In all three studies, they reported attitudes that did not significantly differ between participants who received strong arguments and those who received weak arguments. The theoretical and practical implications for mental contrasting and persuasion are discussed.