Testing the Durability of Persuasion From Moral Appeals About Renewable Energy

Research shows that opinions rooted in moral justifications may be more stable over time. This suggests that communicators could create more durable persuasion by adding explicit moral claims (i.e., stating that the issue is a matter of right vs. wrong) to persuasive messages. Here, using animated videos about the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, we conducted a three-stage longitudinal experiment ( N = 4,488) to test whether messages with explicit moral claims have more durable persuasive effects than similar messages without. We replicated this test across two distinct moral dimensions: harm to innocent people and contamination of nature’s purity. Our findings show that all message versions had strong immediate persuasive effects relative to a control condition, and much of those effects remained after a 3-week period. However, there were no clear advantages—in immediate effects or in durability—from adding explicit moral claims to the messages.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Science Communication
Published
2025-02-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10755470241311011
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.43

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Testing the Durability of Persuasion From Moral Appeals About Renewable Energy

Andrew Luttrell, Seth A. Rosenthal, Sanguk Lee, Abel Gustafson et al.
1 citations
Science Communication
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
1.43
article

Testing the Durability of Persuasion From Moral Appeals About Renewable Energy

Andrew Luttrell, Seth A. Rosenthal, Sanguk Lee, Abel Gustafson, Matthew H. Goldberg, Anthony Leiserowitz, Miriam Remshard
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Research shows that opinions rooted in moral justifications may be more stable over time. This suggests that communicators could create more durable persuasion by adding explicit moral claims (i.e., stating that the issue is a matter of right vs. wrong) to persuasive messages. Here, using animated videos about the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy, we conducted a three-stage longitudinal experiment ( N = 4,488) to test whether messages with explicit moral claims have more durable persuasive effects than similar messages without. We replicated this test across two distinct moral dimensions: harm to innocent people and contamination of nature’s purity. Our findings show that all message versions had strong immediate persuasive effects relative to a control condition, and much of those effects remained after a 3-week period. However, there were no clear advantages—in immediate effects or in durability—from adding explicit moral claims to the messages.

Science CommunicationVol. 47(6)
Ball State University (US), University of Cambridge (GB), Yale University (US), University of Cincinnati (US)
Heising-Simons Foundation
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
1.43
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Testing the Durability of Persuasion From Moral Appeals About Renewable Energy — Andrew Luttrell, Seth A. Rosenthal, et al. · Science Communication (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS