{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021538461538461538, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.027777777777778, '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': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
ASSOCIATION FOR CONSUMER RESEARCH

In political campaigns candidates communicate with voters for a long period of time before the actual choice decision. What these candidates say and to whom as well as how they say it, is likely critical to their success. We draw from temporal construal theory to predict that the degree of abstraction (“why” laden appeals) versus concreteness (“how” laden appeals) of the message will be differentially persuasive depending on the temporal proximity of the choice. In three studies the effect is found to be strongest for uninvolved and uninformed subjects, who are more likely to be persuaded by peripheral cues.