“Handicapped” or “handi‐capable?”: The effects of language about persons with disabilities on perceptions of source credibility and persuasiveness
- 1 January 1998
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Communication Reports
- Vol. 11 (1) , 21-31
- https://doi.org/10.1080/08934219809367682
Abstract
This study examined how four types of language about people with disabilities affected perceptions of communicators’ credibility and persuasiveness. Students read scenarios in which a communicator depicted people with disabilities as heroic, disabled, normal, or pathetic. Students then rated communicator's credibility and persuasiveness. Results indicated that communicators describing people with disabilities as pathetic were perceived to be less trustworthy and competent than the other three communicators, less sociable than the communicator who depicted people as heroic, and less persuasive than communicators who depicted people as heroic and disabled.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- The effect of joke type and audience response on the reaction to a joker: Replication and extensionHUMOR, 1995
- The prediction of preference for sick humorHUMOR, 1994
- Getting It RightSigns: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 1992
- PC at Last! PC at Last! Thank God Almighty, We are PC at Last!Journal of Communication, 1992
- Political Correctness and Cultural StudiesJournal of Communication, 1992
- Charity advertising: For or against people with a mental handicap?British Journal of Social Psychology, 1990
- Language About People with DisabilitiesJournal of Counseling & Development, 1988
- Field dependence and attitude change: Source credibility can alter persuasion by affecting message‐relevant thinkingJournal of Personality, 1983
- Sexist language and person perception: Evaluation of candidates from newspaper articlesSex Roles, 1983
- The Effects of Three Types of Profane Language in Persuasive MessagesJournal of Communication, 1973