Magazine versus Physicians

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
College students read either pro or con passages about oral contraceptives. All passages contained the same statistical information, differing only in the way the information was interpreted. The passages were attributed either to a traditional physician, nontraditional physician, traditional magazine, or nontraditional magazine. Subjects in the pro condition were more favorable towards oral contraceptive use and subjects in the con condition were more opposed to oral contraceptive use than they were before reading the stimulus materials, thus suggesting that the same statistical information can be used persuasively to argue either for or against oral contraceptives. Males were significantly more likely to change their attitudes towards oral contraceptives than females.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: