Psychological Reactance

Four Principles of Psychological Reactance Theory

Four principles provide the foundation of PRT. Principle 1 states that reactance can only be aroused if individuals possess the knowledge that a freedom exists and feel competent in their ability to perform the behavior. Principle 2 holds that as the threatened freedom increases in attractiveness, so does the amount of reactance aroused. Principle 3 states that psychological reactance increases as the number of threats increases. A threat can take the shape of a message, a person, or any object that serves as an obstacle to performing an established behavior. Principle 4 asserts that when implied threats are present, the magnitude of reactance is greater. An implied threat is one that is inferred but not directly enforced. For instance, a message communicating a freedom threat serves as a useful example of an implied threat.

In response to nearly four decades without a measure for reactance, Jim Dillard and Lijiang Shen measured reactance by assessing anger and negative thoughts experienced following exposure to the freedom threat. Employing both anger and negative thoughts provides the best measure of reactance as opposed to treating reactance as purely a cognitive or emotional construct. Therefore, according to PRT, following exposure to a threatened or eliminated freedom, individuals will experience reactance, operationalized as a combination of anger and negative thoughts. A considerable amount of research in health communication has been conducted and supports this measure of reactance.

The majority of health communication research focuses on identifying message features associated with psychological reactance. From this research, scholars have sought to identify message features that arouse and reduce reactance from occurring. Among the studies examining message features that arouse reactance, some research has shown that controlling, forceful, and dogmatic language heighten freedom threat perceptions and are met with resistance. That is, research has found that these message features are positively associated with a freedom threat.

A second message feature positively associated with a freedom threat includes loss-framed messages. Loss-framed messages focus on the costs of engaging or not engaging in a specific behavior, whereas gain-framed messages emphasize the benefits of performing a behavior. Research demonstrates that messages focusing on the costs of engaging in a specific behavior are positively associated with reactance compared with messages focusing on the benefits of performing the recommended behavior. Additionally, messages that vividly communicate the severity of a health threat through descriptive accounts result in increased freedom threat perceptions.

[Page 1110]A wealth of PRT research identifies message strategies that mitigate reactance from arising. In addition to noncontrolling, nonforceful, nono-pionated, gain-framed, and pallid message strategies, PRT research demonstrates that postscripts reminding individuals that it is their choice to accept a message can lessen reactance. Additionally, research shows that health messages inserted into entertainment programs can reduce reactance. Similarly, empathy appeals, conceptualized as appeals encouraging individuals to take on the perspective of the character, identify with the character, and experience similar emotions portrayed by a character, can diminish reactance. Together, these latter studies suggest that identifying with characters and getting absorbed into a narrative's plot can successfully reduce reactance. In addition to these features, message novelty or the uniqueness of a message can thwart reactance. Together, research conducted by health communication researchers has produced a variety of message strategies deterring reactance from arising.

...