{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01585014409221902, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.52112676056338, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Quantitative evaluation of persuasive appeals using comparative meta-analysis

ABSTRACT Message appeals are a key component of communication campaigns and an important source of campaign influence. However, research on them is heavily fragmented and it is difficult to generalize findings from the many diverse field studies. Based on a large and unique data set using quantitative and qualitative meta-analyses, this research provides measures of the relative impact of each type of appeal, as well as the major differences among them, and identifies the moderating variables that lead to a better understanding of each. This investigation is based on persuasion research, which provides a framework for understanding the unique characteristics of these advertising appeals. It highlights empirical gaps in the academic literature and acts as a conceptual guide for our research hypotheses. Results reveal weaker effect sizes than those previously reported in the literature and show important differences among appeals that lead to a “hierarchy of appeals.” Specifically, emotional appeals, led by sex and humor, appear to be more effective than fear and rational appeals. The study finds new theoretical and empirical generalizations; some results are counterintuitive and differ from findings generated from single appeal studies. Findings are of theoretical and practical importance.