Coping and Construal Level Matching Drives Health Message Effectiveness via Response Efficacy or Self-Efficacy Enhancement

By Dahee Han, Adam Duhachek, Nidhi Agrawal. 2016

121 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/859bdf05b40408997a085e508954257d7e709a1b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

1. Richard E. Petty
2. P. Briñol
3. J. Teeny
4. Joseph J. Siev
5. Zakary L. Tormala
6. Derek D. Rucker
7. Kenneth G. DeMarree

In Social Psychology

1. Richard E. Petty
2. P. Briñol
3. J. Teeny
4. Joseph J. Siev
5. Zakary L. Tormala
6. Derek D. Rucker
7. Bertram Gawronski
8. L. Bergkvist

In Sociology and Political Science

1. P. Briñol
2. Richard E. Petty
3. J. Teeny
4. Joseph J. Siev
5. Zakary L. Tormala
6. Derek D. Rucker
7. Bertram Gawronski
8. Kenneth G. DeMarree

Citations in the corpus

• A Review and Conceptual Framework for Understanding Personalized Matching Effects in Persuasion (2020, background): “…al., 2004; Higgins, 2005; see Cesario et al., 2008), familiarity or fluency (Labroo & Lee, 2006; Thompson & Hamilton, 2006), self-efficacy in attaining the advocated outcome (Han et al., 2016; Sherman et al., 2006; Bostrom et al., 2013), and authenticity (Bleidorn et al., 2016; Harms et al., 2006).”