Studies investigating guilt appeals have reported mixed results, highlighting the need for further exploration into the nuances of guilt and shame in persuasive communication. Previous research by Boudewyns, Turner, and Paquin (2013) experimentally differentiated guilt appeals from shame appeals, providing critical evidence that the previous inconclusive evidence of guilt appeals may be due to those appeals being infused with shame. o enhance the understanding of guilt and shame appeals and the conditions under which they are effective, we conducted two pilot tests and a controlled experiment. These studies examined the moderating effect of efficacy on shame and guilt appeals to affect perceived manipulative intent, message effectiveness, intention, and counterarguing. Although the data did not support the hypotheses, the descriptive trend aligned with predictions. Implications from the findings are discussed, offering insights for future research on emotional appeals in persuasion. We caution readers in over-interpreting this data due to conclusive evidence of “dirty” data; data that was completed by farmers and bots.
Read
