Based on recent affect-cognition theories and research on social influence strategies, four experiments predicted and found that people in negative mood produced higher quality and more effective interpersonal persuasive messages than did people in positive mood. This effect was obtained for messages advocating both popular and unpopular positions (Experiments 1 and 2), and arguments produced in negative mood actually induced greater attitude change in naïve recipients (Experiment 3). Experiment 4 replicated these effects in an interactive situation, and mediational analyses showed that mood influenced processing style, resulting in the production of more concrete and thus more effective messages when in a negative mood. The role of negative affect in information processing and the production of interpersonal influence strategies in particular is discussed, and the implications of these findings for everyday interaction strategies, and for contemporary affect—cognition theorizing are considered.
What is the role of affect in the way people use language to influence others? In particular, are happy or sad persons better at producing persuasive arguments? Language is the primary medium of interpersonal communication and social influence strategies, and the ability to use language effectively is a common and challenging task in everyday social life. Although affect obviously plays an important role in many aspects of interpersonal behavior (Berkowitz, 2000, Fiedler, 2001, Fletcher, 2002, Forgas, 1994, Forgas, 2002 and Sinclair and Mark, 1992), the influence of moods on the production of social influence strategies received almost no attention in the past. Based on recent affect-cognition theories and past research on interpersonal communication, this paper will explore the possibility that low-intensity negative moods may have a beneficial influence on the quality and effectiveness of persuasive messages, due to the more concrete and externally focused information processing strategies they promote (Bless, 2001, Fiedler, 2001, Forgas, 1995 and Forgas, 2002).
Despite accumulating evidence for the role of affect in many social cognitive tasks (Bless, 2001, Fiedler, 2001, Forgas, 1995, Forgas, 2002, Fiedler and Bless, 2001, Petty et al., 1997, Petty et al., 2001, Sedikides, 1995, Sinclair and Mark, 1992 and Sinclair and Mark, 1995), insufficient attention has been paid to the role of moods in the way people use social influence strategies, and produce persuasive messages in particular. These four experiments provide convergent evidence that slight changes in incidental mood can produce significant differences in the quality and effectiveness of the persuasive arguments people produce. The reliability of these mood effects is confirmed by the fact that similar results were obtained both in hypothetical situations and in realistic interactions, with a variety of attitude and interpersonal topics, using a range of different mood induction procedures and irrespective of the popularity and social desirability of the position argued. In particular, the mediational analyses in Experiments 1, 2, and 4 provided specific evidence that mood-induced differences in the concreteness of the arguments were implicated in the observed differences in argument effectiveness, as suggested by affect-cognition theories such as the accommodation/assimilation model (Bless, 2001 and Fiedler, 2001). Experiment 4 also showed that mood effects on persuasive arguments can be reduced or eliminated when a strong external motivation is provided to participants.
