Wieluch, Ma ina I.; P axma e ‐Ca us, Sand a
A icle — Published Ve sion
How he pe suasi eness o s a is ical e idence compa ed
o pe sonal es imonials depends on he ecipien 's
dis ance om he message issue
Jou nal o Consume Beha iou
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
John Wiley & Sons
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Wieluch, Ma ina I.; P axma e ‐Ca us, Sand a (2024) : How he pe suasi eness o
s a is ical e idence compa ed o pe sonal es imonials depends on he ecipien 's dis ance om he
message issue, Jou nal o Consume Beha iou , ISSN 1479-1838, Wiley Pe iodicals, Inc., Hoboken,
NJ, Vol. 24, Iss. 1, pp. 75-91,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/cb.2404
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/313749
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
RESEARCH ARTICLE
How he pe suasi eness o s a is ical e idence compa ed
o pe sonal es imonials depends on he ecipien 's dis ance
om he message issue
Ma ina I. Wieluch | Sand a P axma e -Ca us
Uni e si ä de Bundesweh München,
Fakul ä ü Wi scha s- und
O ganisa ionswissenscha en, P o essu ü
Allgemeine Be iebswi scha sleh e,
insbesonde e Ma ke ing, Neubibe g, Ge many
Co espondence
Sand a P axma e -Ca us, Uni e si ä de
Bundesweh München, Fakul ä ü
Wi scha s- und
O ganisa ionswissenscha en, P o essu ü
Allgemeine Be iebswi scha sleh e,
insbesonde e Ma ke ing, We ne -Heisenbe g-
Weg 39, 85577 Neubibe g, Ge many.
Email: sand a.p axma e @unibw.de
Funding in o ma ion
Deu sche Ve ein ü
Ve siche ungswissenscha e. V. (only S udy 2)
Abs ac
S a is ical ac s and pe sonal es imonials (anecdo al e idence) a e wo common
ypes o e idence used in heal h educa ion, wa ning messages, and cha i able
appeals. While s a is ical e idence p o ides agg ega ed nume ical in o ma ion, mes-
sages ha use anecdo al e idence ypically desc ibe an indi idual expe ience.
Because esea ch has no ound a s able ad an age o one ype o e idence o e he
o he , he li e a u e has sough o iden i y mode a o s ha p edic when s a is ical o
anecdo al e idence is mo e pe suasi e. This pape shows ha he ela i e pe suasi e-
ness o s a is ical e sus anecdo al e idence depends on he psychological dis ance
be ween he message ecipien and he message issue. An inc ease (dec ease) in
ecipien s' message-issue dis ance inc eases he ela i e pe suasi eness o s a is ical
(anecdo al) e idence. In addi ion, we show ha message-issue dis ance de e mines
how pe sonally use ul message ecipien s ind s a is ical and anecdo al e idence. We
also demons a e ha ecipien s' mo e abs ac (conc e e) hinking abou he mes-
sage issue p io o message exposu e inc eases he pe suasi eness o s a is ical
(anecdo al) e idence. Based on ou indings, we ecommend ha social ma ke e s
use s a is ical (anecdo al) e idence when he ecipien s' dis ance om he message
issue is high (low) and he ecipien s' hinking abou he message issue is abs ac
(conc e e). Be o e deciding on he ype o e idence, message designe s may need o
assess how abs ac o conc e e hei a ge audience hinks abou he message
issue. The sho measu e used in Expe imen 1b o his pape may be use ul. I is
adap able o di e en message con ex s and could easily be implemen ed in p e es s
o decide when o use s a is ical o anecdo al e idence.
1|INTRODUCTION
Messages in heal h educa ion, isk communica ion and cha i y ad e -
ising o en use s a is ical e idence o pe sonal es imonials o sup-
po hei claims (Small e al., 2007; Zeb egs e al., 2015). While
s a is ical e idence p o ides agg ega ed nume ical in o ma ion, such
as “30% o U.S. cance dea hs can be a ibu ed o obacco use”
(T u h Ini ia i e, 2022), messages ha use pe sonal es imonials ypi-
cally desc ibe an indi idual's expe ience, such as “John, 54, long- e m
smoke , has been diagnosed wi h lung cance ….”The li e a u e has
used a ious e ms o he la e ype o in o ma ion, mos commonly
anecdo al e idence (Cox & Cox, 2001), na a i e e idence (Ma &
Recei ed: 18 May 2023 Re ised: 4 July 2024 Accep ed: 2 Sep embe 2024
DOI: 10.1002/cb.2404
This is an open access a icle unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License, which pe mi s use, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion in any medium,
p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed.
© 2024 The Au ho (s). Jou nal o Consume Beha iou published by John Wiley & Sons L d.
J Consume Beha . 2025;24:75–91. wileyonlinelib a y.com/jou nal/cb 75
Nan, 2018), exempla s (B osius & Ba hel , 1994), pe sonal es imonials
(De Wi e al., 2008), and iden i iable li es (Slo ic, 2007). This pape
uses he e m anecdo al e idence.
Nume ous s udies ha e compa ed he e ec i eness o s a is ical
and anecdo al e idence (see F eling e al., 2020 o a e iew). While
some s udies epo an ad an age o s a is ical e idence o e anec-
do al e idence (e.g., Ho nikx, 2005), o he s udies epo he opposi e
(e.g., Win e bo om e al., 2008). Because esea ch has no obse ed a
gene al ad an age o one ype o e idence o e he o he , he li e a-
u e has sough o iden i y mode a o s ha p edic when s a is ical o
anecdo al e idence is mo e pe suasi e (e.g., F eling e al., 2020). Su -
p isingly, in he sea ch o explana ions o when s a is ical o anec-
do al e idence has a pe suasi e ad an age, he li e a u e has paid
ela i ely li le a en ion o he psychological dis ance o he message
issue om he message ecei e (T ope & Libe man, 2010). We use
he e m message issue o e e o he p oblem o appeal ha he
message aises. To suppo hei appeals, messages may p esen s a-
is ical o anecdo al e idence. Fo example, a und aising appeal o
malnou ished child en in a pa icula coun y (message issue) may ea-
u e pe cen ages o malnou ished child en in ha coun y (s a is ical
e idence) o a single child (anecdo al e idence). Thus, om he pe -
spec i e o message designe s, he choice o e idence ype may be
independen o he message issue. Howe e , we a gue ha he e ec-
i eness o anecdo al and s a is ical e idence depends on he psycho-
logical dis ance o he message issue om he message ecei e , and
hei mo e conc e e o abs ac hinking abou he message issue.
D awing on he posi i e e ec s o cons ual-le el i (e.
g., Dogan & E dogan, 2020; Pa k e al., 2020; Reczek e al., 2018), we
p opose ha messages ha combine psychologically close message
issues wi h anecdo al e idence and psychologically dis an
message issues wi h s a is ical e idence should be mo e pe suasi e
han messages ha combine close message issues wi h s a is ical e i-
dence and dis an message issues wi h anecdo al e idence. Ma and
Nan (2018) and Kim and Nan (2019) pu o wa d a e y simila p opo-
si ion. Thei easoning, and ou s, is based on he a gumen s ha ecip-
ien s' message-issue dis ance is linked o cons uc ing mo e high-
le el/low-le el ep esen a ions o he message issue (Sode be g
e al., 2015; T ope & Libe man, 2010) and ha s a is ical e idence
ends o be high-le el in o ma ion (Has all & Knobloch-Wes e -
wick, 2013), while anecdo al e idence ends o be low-le el in o ma-
ion (Kim & Nan, 2019; Yan & Sengup a, 2013).
Rela i ely ew s udies ha e examined he mode a ing e ec o
ecipien s' message-issue dis ance on he e ec s o anecdo al and s a-
is ical e idence on beha io o beha io al in en ions. Ma and Nan
(2018) and Kim and Nan (2019) es ed he in e ac ion. Howe e , Ma
and Nan (2018) ound no di e ences in he esul ing in en ions, and
Kim and Nan (2019) did no show each o he absolu e ad an ages
hey p edic ed. Thus, he empi ical e idence o he expec ed in e ac-
ion seems spa se, which may lead esea che s o ques ion he gene al
p oposi ion. Because he p oposed in e ac ion be ween e idence ype
and message-issue dis ance is heo e ically con incing, his pape
e isi s and eexamines he e ec . Fi s , we will explain why he ind-
ings o Ma and Nan (2018) and Kim and Nan (2019) do no con adic
hei a ionale and ou s, and how his esea ch di e s om p e ious
s udies.
Ma and Nan (2018) used an anecdo al message and a “non-na a-
i e”message and ound no di e ences in he esul ing in en ions.
Howe e , he “non-na a i e”message used by Ma and Nan (2018)
included de ails abou he ha m ul e ec s o smoking. Ye , he in e -
ac ion p edic ed he e is based on he a gumen ha anecdo al mes-
sages end o be low-le el in o ma ion and s a is ical messages end
o be agg ega ed, high-le el in o ma ion. Thus, he “non-na a i e”
message used by Ma and Nan (2018) may ha e p esen ed ela i ely
conc e e, low-le el in o ma ion a he han global, abs ac in o ma-
ion, and as such may ha e been inconsis en wi h he heo e ical
a ionale he au ho s we e es ing. The p esen pape will use anec-
do al and s a is ical e idence o es he a ionale. Kim and Nan
(2019) p edic ed ha anecdo al messages would be mo e e ec i e
han nonna a i e messages in a close si ua ion, while nonna a i e
messages would be mo e e ec i e han anecdo al messages in a dis-
an si ua ion. Kim and Nan (2019) ound an in e ac ion bu did no
show each o he absolu e ad an ages hey expec ed. We a gue ha
such absolu e ad an ages a e desi able bu no necessa y o suppo
he heo e ical a ionale because he manipula ed psychological dis-
ance is ela i e. Figu e 1illus a es ou easoning. Fo example, ima-
gine wo dona ion appeals ha depic indi iduals in need. One depic s
indi iduals om he same coun y as he ecipien , and he o he
depic s indi iduals om a di e en coun y. Typically, he psychologi-
cal dis ance be ween he message and he ecipien should be smalle
in he i s si ua ion (same coun y) han in he second ( o eign coun-
y). Close /less dis an , howe e , does no necessa ily mean ha he
o me message issue (same coun y) is pe cei ed by he ecei e as
psychologically close in absolu e e ms, which may be equi ed o
esul in low-le el cons ual and he p edic ed absolu e ad an age o
anecdo al o e s a is ical e idence. Fo an illus a ion o he abo e
e sus
e sus
FIGURE 1 P o o ypical e ec s o anecdo al and s a is ical
e idence as a unc ion o message-issue dis ance, as p oposed in his
esea ch (in blue), and wo examples o a eas ha migh be
conside ed wi h message issues o speci ic expe imen s (in g ey).
(As psychological closeness can be ela ed o he pe sonal ele ance
o he message issue, a main e ec o psychological closeness on
beha io o beha io al in en ions may eme ge, which is no illus a ed
in Figu e 1).
76 WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS
example, see he igh o he wo g ay a eas in Figu e 1. The e o e,
we a gue ha he heo e ical a ionale p oposed by Ma and Nan
(2018) and Kim and Nan (2019) and in his pape is al eady suppo ed
i a s a is ical message, compa ed o an anecdo al message, is ela-
i ely mo e e ec i e in a dis an si ua ion han in a close si ua ion,
and an anecdo al message, compa ed o a s a is ical message, is ela-
i ely mo e e ec i e in a close si ua ion han in a dis an si ua ion.
Consequen ly, his esea ch will p opose ela i e ad an ages. In addi-
ion, his pape es s whe he ecipien s' conc e e/abs ac hinking
abou he message issue mode a es he pe suasi eness o s a is ical
and anecdo al e idence.
By explaining why he indings o he s udies by Ma and Nan
(2018) and Kim and Nan (2019) do no con adic hei heo e ical
a ionale, and by e es ing he mode a ion wi h messages ha align
be e wi h he heo e ical explana ion, ou esea ch con ibu es o
heo y and o a be e unde s anding o he pe suasi eness o anec-
do al and s a is ical e idence. We explain and demons a e ha ecipi-
en s' message-issue dis ance (S udy 1a) and ecipien s' conc e e/
abs ac hinking abou he message issue (S udy 1b) de e mine he
e ec i eness o anecdo al and s a is ical e idence. This pape also
shows ha message-issue dis ance de e mines how pe sonally use ul
message ecipien s pe cei e s a is ical and anecdo al e idence o be
(S udy 2). This a icle is o ganized as ollows. Fi s , we desc ibe he
basic cha ac e is ics o anecdo al and s a is ical e idence. We hen
explain how he pe suasi eness o s a is ical and anecdo al e idence
should depend on he psychological dis ance o he message ecipien
om he message issue and on he ecipien 's conc e e/abs ac hink-
ing abou he message issue. In addi ion, we explain why he pe cei ed
use ulness o he in o ma ion should media e he e ec . Subsequen ly,
we p esen h ee expe imen s. Finally, we discuss he indings o ou
s udies and p o ide sugges ions o p ac ice and u u e esea ch.
2|THE PERSUASIVENESS OF
STATISTICAL AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE
Bo h s a is ical and anecdo al e idence ha e speci ic s eng hs, and
bo h ypes o e idence can pe suade message ecipien s (F eling
e al., 2020). S a is ical e idence consis s o a la ge numbe o ep e-
sen a i e cases. As such, i is highly p edic i e and is o en conside ed
mo e in o ma i e han anecdo al in o ma ion (G eene & B inn, 2003;
Hoeken & Hus inx, 2009). Anecdo al e idence is i id, speci ic, and
easily imagined, and can make an issue eel close and mo e ele an
o message ecipien s (De Wi e al., 2008; Zillmann & B osius, 2012).
Fu he mo e, iden i iable ic ims (anecdo al e idence) a e emo ionally
engaging, whe eas s a is ical in o ma ion does ha dly e oke a ec
(Cox & Cox, 2001; Slo ic, 2007). As a esul , anecdo al in o ma ion is
p ocessed less analy ically han s a is ical e idence (Escalas, 2007;
Slo ic, 2007; Small e al., 2007) and gene a es ewe coun e a gu-
men s (Kang e al., 2020; Sla e & Roune , 1996). Consis en wi h he
speci ic s eng hs o each ype o e idence, s udies ha ha e com-
pa ed he pe suasi eness o s a is ical and anecdo al e idence epo
mixed esul s. While some s udies show an ad an age o s a is ical
e idence o e anecdo al e idence (e.g., Hoeken & Hus inx, 2009),
o he s udies show he opposi e (e.g., De Wi e al., 2008; G eene
e al., 2010).
Because o he inconsis en indings, he li e a u e has sough o
iden i y mode a o s ha may p edic when s a is ical o anecdo al e i-
dence is mo e pe suasi e. Resea ch has sugges ed se e al mode a o s,
including alue cong uency (Sla e & Roune , 1996), message aming
(e.g., Cox & Cox, 2001), and pe sonal ele ance (e.g., F eling
e al., 2020). Fo li e a u e e iews, see F eling e al. (2020) and Lee
and Feeley (2016). This pape examines a mode a o ha has ecei ed
ela i ely li le a en ion in he li e a u e, namely, he psychological
dis ance be ween he message ecipien and he message issue.
Below we explain how he e ec i eness o anecdo al and s a is ical
e idence should depend on he psychological dis ance o he message
ecipien s om he message issue.
3|HOW THE PERSUASIVENESS OF
STATISTICAL AND ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE
MAY DEPEND ON MESSAGE-ISSUE
DISTANCE
3.1 |The mode a ing ole o ecei e s' message-
issue dis ance
3.1.1 | Theo e ical explana ions
Message issues may be mo e o less psychologically dis an om he
message ecipien (T ope & Libe man, 2010). Examples o message
issues ha may e oke di e en le els o psychological dis ance
include isks o sel - e sus o he s, consequences ha will occu oday
e sus yea s om now, and nea e sus a egions o dona ion
appeals (Sode be g e al., 2015). Acco ding o Cons ual Le el Theo y,
indi iduals end o o m high le el, ha is, gene al and abs ac men al
ep esen a ions, when an issue is psychologically dis an (Libe man &
T ope, 1998). In con as , when an issue is psychologically close, indi-
iduals end o o m low le el, ha is, speci ic and de ailed men al
ep esen a ions. Many s udies ha e shown he link be ween psycho-
logical dis ance and how conc e ely o abs ac ly indi iduals hink
abou an e en o objec (e.g., Fuji a e al., 2006; Li ia an e al., 2008;
Wakslak e al., 2006, see Sode be g e al., 2015 o a me a-analysis).
The li e a u e has also shown ha in o ma ion ha aligns wi h
consume s' high-le el o low-le el hinking is easie o p ocess and
mo e pe suasi e (Ca e e al., 2020; Ein-Ga & Le on in, 2013; Han
e al., 2016; Lee e al., 2010; Pa k e al., 2020; Whi e e al., 2011).
Thus, among message ecipien s who a e con on ed wi h a psycho-
logically close message issue and engage in low-le el hinking, sup-
po ing e idence ha is speci ic and conc e e should be mo e
pe suasi e han suppo ing e idence ha is global and on a supe o di-
na e le el. Among ecipien s who a e con on ed wi h a psychologi-
cally dis an message issue, suppo ing e idence ha is global and
supe o dina e should be mo e pe suasi e han e idence ha is spe-
ci ic, low-le el in o ma ion.
WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS 77
Because anecdo al e idence desc ibes he a e o a single indi id-
ual, i ends o be speci ic, low-le el in o ma ion (Kim & Nan, 2019). In
con as , s a is ical e idence uses agg ega ed nume ical in o ma ion
and is he e o e global, high-le el in o ma ion (Has all & Knobloch-
Wes e wick, 2013). Fo example, Sode be g e al. (2015, p. 526)
desc ibe “exempla s”and “si ua ional in o ma ion”( ypically p e-
sen ed in anecdo al messages) as conc e e, low-le el desc ip ions o
an e en , and “agg ega e in o ma ion”( ypically p esen ed in s a is i-
cal messages) as mo e abs ac , high-le el desc ip ions. Thus, in line
wi h Ma and Nan (2018) and Kim and Nan (2019), we a gue ha mes-
sages ha combine message issues ha a e psychologically close o
he ecipien wi h anecdo al e idence and message issues ha a e dis-
an om he ecipien wi h s a is ical e idence should c ea e a con-
s ual-le el i and be mo e pe suasi e han messages ha combine
close message issues wi h s a is ical e idence o dis an message
issues wi h anecdo al e idence.
1
The abo e easoning may implici ly
sugges ha message ecipien s i s no ice he message issue and
hen ead he suppo ing e idence ha he message p o ides. This
empo al sequence may be ue, bu i is no ele an o ou a gumen ,
which is based on he cons ual-le el i wi hin he message. Ou
a gumen emains alid i he ecipien s o he message i s ead he
anecdo al o s a is ical e idence and he eby become awa e o
he message issue. No only he message issue, bu also he ype o
e idence can de e mine he le el o abs ac ion o he message ecipi-
en 's hinking (Sode be g e al., 2015). Thus, when message ecei e s
p ocess anecdo al (s a is ical) e idence and engage in conc e e
(abs ac ) hinking, a close (dis an ) message issue aised by he mes-
sage should be mo e cons ual-le el cong uen han a dis an (close)
issue.
In addi ion, i close message issues a e mo e emo ionally engaging
han dis an message issues (Ab aham e al., 2023; Mühlbe ge
e al., 2008; Williams e al., 2014), a ec i e/na a i e e sus analy ical
p ocessing (Escalas, 2007) may p o ide a ela ed explana ion o he
in e ac ion be ween e idence ype and message-issue dis ance. Low
e sus high emo ional engagemen leads consume s o hink mo e
analy ically (Blanche e, 2006; F eling e al., 2020). Compa ed o
a ec i e p ocessing, analy ical p ocessing is mo e likely o elici c i i-
cal hinking, so pe suasion equi es s ong a gumen s (Escalas, 2007).
Because an anecdo al message p esen s only one exempla , i s
p edic i e powe is weak and i can be pe cei ed as a ela i ely weak
a gumen (Hoeken & Hus inx, 2009). Taken oge he , he endency o
engage in analy ical hinking should be highe o dis an message
issues, and he e message ecipien s should be mo e likely o ecognize
ha he in o ma ional alue o an anecdo al message is weak. In con-
as , when he message issue is close, ecipien s may be mo e likely
o engage in a ec i e p ocessing and ind an anecdo al message ela-
i ely meaning ul because hey a e less likely o ecognize i s low
in o ma ional alue.
3.1.2 | P e ious indings
Ma and Nan (2018) and Kim and Nan (2019) ha e examined he e ec
o e idence ype on beha io al in en ions as a unc ion o message-
issue dis ance. We discussed bo h expe imen s in he Sec ion 1. Kim
and Nan (2019) ound he p oposed in e ac ion bu had p edic ed
absolu e ad an ages ha hei s udy did no e eal. The nonna a i e
message ha Ma and Nan (2018) used may no ha e been high-le el
in o ma ion. Fu he mo e, he s udy asked nonsmoking s uden s o
imagine ha ei he hei bes iend (close si ua ion) o an a e age s u-
den (dis an si ua ion) smoked and o epo hei in en ions o pe -
suade he o he pe son o qui . I is possible ha his manipula ion o
psychological dis ance did no esul in di e en hinking s yles, since
69% o pa icipan s epo ed no ha ing a close iend who smokes.
The e o e, as a gued ea lie , he indings o Kim and Nan (2019) a e
consis en wi h he p oposed in e ac ion, and he indings o Ma and
Nan (2018) do no challenge he p oposed e ec . Resea ch by Ledge -
wood e al. (2010) showed ha empo al dis ance inc eases he
weigh consume s place on agg ega e compa ed o indi idualized
in o ma ion abou a p oduc 's e ec i eness, which is consis en wi h
he mode a ing e ec p edic ed he e. Ledge wood e al. (2010) did
no use anecdo al messages such as hose s udied he e (desc ibing a
pe son's a e). Howe e , he messages a e ela ed o he e idence
ypes es ed he e and o he heo e ical easoning o his pape .
Al hough Yan and Sengup a (2013) did no examine beha io al in en-
ions, hei indings a e consis en wi h ou a ionale because hey
showed ha consume s' eliance on s a is ical (anecdo al) in o ma ion
inc eased (dec eased) wi h psychological dis ance. The me a-analysis
by F eling e al. (2020) did no explici ly conside message-issue dis-
ance, bu i s indings a e consis en wi h and ela ed o he in e ac-
ion p oposed in his pape . F eling e al. (2020) epo ha anecdo al
e idence p o ed mo e pe suasi e han s a is ical e idence when pe -
sonal ele ance and emo ional engagemen we e high, whe eas s a is-
ical e idence p o ed mo e pe suasi e when pe sonal ele ance was
low. The pe sonal ele ance o a message issue can be ela ed o psy-
chological dis ance, as close message issues may eel mo e ele an
o indi iduals han dis an message issues (Sode be g e al., 2015).
3.1.3 | Hypo heses
We p opose a hypo hesis abou he ela i e e ec i eness o s a is ical
e sus anecdo al e idence (and ice e sa), depending on he psycho-
logical dis ance o he message ecipien om he message issue. This
esea ch examines psychological dis ance in ela i e e ms because,
1
Ou p oposi ion is based on he a gumen ha anecdo al e idence is conc e e, low-le el
in o ma ion, while s a is ical e idence is agg ega ed, high-le el in o ma ion. One e iewe
poin ed ou ha s a is ical e idence can be pe cei ed as conc e e in o ma ion. Fo example,
a p obabili y o 25% means one in ou people, which can be pe cei ed as conc e e when
applied o a g oup o people. Howe e , we a gue ha compa ed o exempla s, s a is ical
in o ma ion is a an agg ega e le el, mo e abs ac , and mo e likely o e oke high-le el
hinking (Sode be g e al., 2015, p. 526). To u he add ess his issue and po en ial conce n,
Expe imen 1b o his pape es s whe he ecipien s' mo e conc e e/abs ac hinking abou
he message issue (p io o exposu e o he message) de e mines he pe suasi eness o
s a is ical and anecdo al e idence (see H1b). The posi i e e ec s o cons ual-le el i on
pe suasion ha e been epea edly demons a ed (Ca e e al., 2020; Ein-Ga &
Le on in, 2013; Han e al., 2016; Lee e al., 2010; Whi e e al., 2011). Thus, i ecipien s hink
conc e ely abou he message issue and anecdo al e idence is ela i ely conc e e
in o ma ion, hen anecdo al e idence should be mo e pe suasi e han s a is ical e idence. I
ecipien s hink abs ac ly abou he message issue and s a is ical e idence is ela i ely
abs ac in o ma ion, hen s a is ical e idence should be mo e pe suasi e han anecdo al
e idence.
78 WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS
o example, a “less dis an ”message issue is no necessa ily close in
absolu e e ms and he e o e may no esul in an absolu e ad an age
o anecdo al o e s a is ical e idence (see Figu e 1). We p opose:
H1a. Recipien s' message-issue dis ance mode a es he
e ec o e idence ype on compliance in en ion such ha
he ela i e pe suasi eness o s a is ical e idence (com-
pa ed o anecdo al e idence) inc eases wi h inc easing
message-issue dis ance, and he ela i e pe suasi eness o
anecdo al e idence (compa ed o s a is ical e idence)
inc eases wi h dec easing message-issue dis ance.
Along wi h Ma and Nan (2018) and Kim and Nan (2019), we ha e
sugges ed ha cons ual-le el i is a ele an explana ion o why
ecipien s' message-issue dis ance mode a es he pe suasi eness o
s a is ical and anecdo al e idence. Thus, unde he assump ion ha
s a is ical (anecdo al) e idence is ela i ely abs ac (conc e e) in o -
ma ion, he ecipien s' abs ac /conc e e hinking abou he message
issue is he ac ual explana o y a iable o he heo e ical a ionale
p oposed he e. Posi i e e ec s o cons ual-le el i on pe suasion
ha e been epea edly demons a ed (Ca e e al., 2020; Ein-Ga &
Le on in, 2013; Han e al., 2016; Lee e al., 2010; Whi e e al., 2011).
I ecipien s hink conc e ely abou he message issue and anecdo al
e idence is conc e e in o ma ion, hen anecdo al e idence should be
mo e pe suasi e han s a is ical e idence. I ecipien s hink abs ac ly
abou he message issue and s a is ical e idence is abs ac in o ma-
ion, hen s a is ical e idence should be mo e pe suasi e han anec-
do al e idence. We p opose:
H1b. Recipien s' conc e e e sus abs ac hinking
abou he message issue mode a es he e ec o e i-
dence ype on compliance in en ion such ha he pe -
suasi eness o s a is ical e idence (compa ed o
anecdo al e idence) inc eases wi h mo e abs ac hink-
ing, and he pe suasi eness o anecdo al e idence (com-
pa ed o s a is ical e idence) inc eases wi h mo e
conc e e hinking abou he message issue.
3.2 |The media ing ole o he pe cei ed
use ulness o he message in o ma ion
Message-issue dis ance may de e mine how pe sonally use ul mes-
sage ecipien s pe cei e s a is ical and anecdo al e idence o be. The
pe cei ed use ulness o message in o ma ion is, o cou se, subjec i e
and con ex -dependen (DeLo me e al., 2009; Schwa z, 2010). When
message in o ma ion aligns wi h consume s' high-le el o low-le el
hinking, i should be p ocessed mo e luen ly and less c i ically han
when i does no (Cesa io e al., 2004; Schwa z, 2004). Fo example,
al hough a s a is ical message may be pe cei ed as in o ma i e in
p inciple, he pe cep ion o how pe sonally use ul such in o ma ion is
o he ecipien a a gi en ime may depend on he ecipien 's si ua-
ional mindse . Simila ly, while anecdo al e idence may be pe cei ed
as easy o imagine in p inciple, he pe cep ion o how pe sonally
use ul such anecdo al in o ma ion is o he ecipien a a gi en ime
may depend on he ecipien 's mindse . A combina ion o close mes-
sage issues wi h anecdo al e idence, as well as a combina ion o dis-
an message issues wi h s a is ical e idence, should make he
message “ eel igh ” o he ecipien (Cesa io e al., 2004), e oke less
c i ical hinking, and make he message eel mo e pe sonally use ul
(Ledge wood e al., 2010; Schwa z, 2004). Fu he mo e, when a mes-
sage is p ocessed mo e analy ically due o g ea e message-issue dis-
ance, ecipien s a e mo e likely o ecognize ha a single exempla
(anecdo al e idence) is no a s ong a gumen and may pe cei e he
message as less use ul han a s a is ical message. Taken oge he ,
he pe cei ed use ulness o s a is ical e sus anecdo al e idence
should depend on ecipien s' message-issue dis ance. Since he pe -
cei ed use ulness o he in o ma ion p o ided by a message de e -
mines pe suasion (Schwa z, 2010), pe cei ed use ulness should
media e he e ec s o e idence ype and message-issue dis ance on
in en ions. We p opose:
H2a. The pe cei ed use ulness o s a is ical e idence
( ela i e o anecdo al e idence) inc eases wi h inc easing
message-issue dis ance and he pe cei ed use ulness o
anecdo al e idence ( ela i e o s a is ical e idence)
inc eases wi h dec easing message-issue dis ance.
H2b. The e ec o e idence ype on beha io al in en-
ions is media ed by he pe cei ed use ulness o he
message, and he e ec o e idence ype on he pe -
cei ed use ulness o he message is mode a ed by mes-
sage-issue dis ance (mode a ed media ion).
4|EMPIRICAL STUDIES
This pape p esen s h ee expe imen s. S udy 1a es s H1a, S udy 1b
es s H1b and S udy 2 es s H1a,H2a, and H2b. Figu e 2illus a es
he e ec s es ed in Expe imen 1a.
4.1 |Expe imen 1a
4.1.1 | Me hod
S imuli and design
The s udy used a 2 (dis ance: same coun y s. o eign coun y) 2
(e idence ype: s a is ical s. anecdo al) be ween-subjec s design. The
messages asked o dona ions and desc ibed a p ojec o suppo
aca ion homes o child en wi h cance —ei he in Ge many (same
e sus
FIGURE 2 E ec s s udied in S udy 1a.
WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS 79
coun y) o in Japan ( o eign coun y). The s udy was conduc ed in
Ge many. We chose Japan because Ge many and Japan a e compa a-
ble in e ms o hei heal h ca e sys ems and he numbe o child en
wi h cance (Globocan, 2012). The s a is ical e idence message
epo ed how many new cases o childhood cance a e diagnosed
each yea . The anecdo al message old he s o y o a li le gi l wi h
cance . Appendix Ashows he messages.
P ocedu e and sample
The s udy was p og ammed in he online su ey so wa e Unipa k
(www.unipa k.com). The link o he online ques ionnai e was dis-
ibu ed by an online panel p o ide in Ge many. The s udy an-
domly assigned pa icipan s o one o he messages. Because he
panel p o ide adminis e ed he sample, we do no ha e in o ma-
ion on esponse a es wi hin he panel. Pa icipan s anged in age
om 17 o 88 (M
age
=28). The s udy included a con ol ques ion
asking in which coun y he p ojec was loca ed. Because he
coun y (Ge many o Japan) ac ed as a dis ance manipula ion, we
excluded pa icipan s who we e unable o answe his ques ion
co ec ly (43), esul ing in a inal sample o 394 indi iduals. O e -
all, 44% o he sample was emale, and he a e age age was 28.
Th ee hund ed six y-eigh indi iduals (93%) we e Ge man (16 indi-
iduals did no epo hei na ionali y, six we e om Aus ia, one
om Swi ze land, and one was F ench). O e all 46% we e
employed o sel -employed, 2% we e homemake s, 39% we e s u-
den s, 5% indica ed “o he ,”and 7% e used o epo hei occu-
pa ion. O e all 47% o esponden s had dona ed wi hin he pas
12 mon hs.
Measu es
We asked pa icipan s i hey had dona ed in he pas 12 mon hs
(yes =47%). Fu he mo e, we asked pa icipan s: “Ha e you e e
dona ed o a cance - ela ed p ojec o o ganiza ion?”(yes =19%)
because in ol emen wi h cance - ela ed p ojec s is likely o de e -
mine indi iduals' in en ions in he con ex o his s udy. A e message
exposu e, we measu ed ecei e s' in en ion o dona e wi h he i em
“How likely a e you o dona e o he p ojec desc ibed?”(1 = e y
unlikely, 7 = e y likely). The manipula ion check o psychological dis-
ance ead “I eel closely ela ed o he child en in …”[Japan o Ge -
many] (1 =no a all, 7 =s ongly). In addi ion, he s udy measu ed
desc ip i e s a is ics and included a ew ques ions no ela ed o his
a icle.
4.1.2 | Resul s
Manipula ion check
Pa icipan s in he close condi ion exp essed ha hey el mo e
closely ela ed o he child en han pa icipan s in he dis an condi-
ion (M
close
=3.47; M
dis an
=1.96; =9.91, p=.000). Thus, he dis-
ance manipula ion was success ul.
Co a ia e
Whe he pa icipan s had dona ed o a cance - ela ed p ojec in he
pas indica ed hei pas beha io and in ol emen wi h cance -
ela ed p ojec s. O e all, 19.3% o pa icipan s epo ed ha ing
dona ed o a cance - ela ed p ojec p io o he s udy. Because p io
beha io was likely o de e mine dona ion in en ions in his s udy,
and he pe cen ages di e ed ac oss he ou expe imen al g oups (e.
g., anecdo al message, close condi ion: 16%, s a is ical message, close
condi ion: 25%), we con olled o he a iable “p e ious dona ions o
cance - ela ed p ojec s”in ou analysis and included i as a co a ia e.
Below, we i s epo he ele an model wi h he co a ia e and hen,
o anspa ency, he model wi hou he co a ia e.
Tes o H1a
We pe o med analysis o co a iance (ANCOVA) wi h dona ion in en-
ion as dependen a iable, issue dis ance and e idence ype as inde-
penden a iables and p io cance - ela ed dona ions as co a ia e.
E idence ype had no signi ican main e ec (F(1, 389) =.36,
p=.551, pa ial η
2
=.001). The main e ec o issue dis ance was sig-
ni ican (F(1, 389) =27.93, p=.000, pa ial η
2
=.067). Indi iduals
we e mo e likely o dona e when dona ion ecipien s we e om he
same coun y. This nega i e main e ec o dis ance is no su p ising
because dono s end o p e e cha i ies wo king in hei own coun y
(Chapman e al., 2022; He zens ein & Posa ac, 2019). As expec ed,
he issue dis ance by e idence ype in e ac ion was signi ican (F
(1, 389) =4.51, p=.034, pa ial η
2
=.011). Fu he mo e, he e ec
o he co a ia e (p e ious beha io ) was signi ican ; esponden s who
had p e iously dona ed o a cance p ojec we e mo e likely o dona e
(F(1, 389) =29.10, p=.000, pa ial η
2
=.070). Table 1shows he
mean alues and es ima ed ma ginal means (EMM), Figu e 3illus a es
he nega i e main e ec o dis ance and he in e ac ion e ec
be ween e idence ype and dis ance. Consis en wi h H1a, he in e -
ac ion e ec shows ha an inc ease in message-issue dis ance
inc eased he ela i e pe suasi eness o s a is ical e idence, while a
TABLE 1 Compliance in en ion
ac oss he condi ions o Expe imen 1a,
means and es ima ed ma ginal
means (EMM).
Issue dis ance E idence ype Means (SD) EMM (SE) N
Close condi ion Anecdo al e idence 2.97 (1.57)
a
** 3.00 (.13)
c,d
** 102
S a is ical e idence 2.68 (1.50)
b
*2.63 (.14)
c,e
*94
Dis an condi ion Anecdo al e idence 2.00 (1.20)
a
** 1.99 (.13)
d
** 105
S a is ical e idence 2.18 (1.29)
b
*2.20 (.14)
e
*93
No e: Means wi h equal supe sc ip s a e signi ican ly di e en a he le el o .10 (a leas ), i hey a e
addi ionally ma ked wi h *, hey a e signi ican a p< .05, i hey a e addi ionally ma ked wi h **, hey a e
signi ican a p< .01.
*A p< .05.**A p< .01.
80 WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS
dec ease in message-issue dis ance inc eased he ela i e pe suasi e-
ness o anecdo al e idence. The indings p o ide suppo o H1a.
Fo anspa ency, we epo he indings o an ANOVA wi hou
he co a ia e. Again, e idence ype had no signi ican main e ec (F
(1, 390) =.14, p=.705, pa ial η
2
=.000). The main e ec o issue dis-
ance was signi ican (F(1, 390) =27.07, p< .001, pa ial η
2
=.065).
The issue dis ance by e idence ype in e ac ion was ma ginally signi i-
can a p<.10(F(1, 390) =2.80, p=.095, pa ial η
2
=.007). No e ha
he model con olling o pas beha io (ANCOVA) should p o ide mo e
eliable es ima es o he e ec s han he model wi hou he co a ia e
because pas beha io ( he co a ia e) a ec ed dona ion in en ions and
was no e enly dis ibu ed ac oss he expe imen al g oups.
Pai wise compa isons
We did no p opose an absolu e ad an age o s a is ical e idence o e
anecdo al e idence in he dis an condi ion o an absolu e ad an age o
anecdo al e idence o e s a is ical e idence in he close condi ion
because, o example, “less dis an ”is no necessa ily close (see Figu e 1).
Ne e heless, we epo pai wise compa isons. In he close condi ion,
anecdo al e idence ended o be mo e pe suasi e han s a is ical e i-
dence a p=.056 (EMM
anecdo al e idence
=3.00; EMM
s a is ical
e idence
=2.63, F(1, 389) =3.68). In he dis an condi ion, s a is ical e i-
dence was sligh ly mo e pe suasi e han anecdo al e idence bu he di -
e ence was no signi ican (EMM
anecdo al e idence
=1.99; EMM
s a is ical
e idence
=2.20, F(1, 389) =1.18, p=.278). An absolu e ad an age o s a-
is ical e idence o e anecdo al e idence in he dis an condi ion would
equi e high-le el o analy ical hinking. Howe e , i is possible ha he
child en su e ing om cance e oked compassion in he ecipien s,
which may ha e esul ed in low-le el cons ual, e en in he ela i ely dis-
an condi ion. In addi ion, a h ea ening subjec such as cance may
e okenega i eemo ions,whichmaylead o ela i ely conc e e, low-
le el cons ual e en in he dis an condi ion (Lab oo & Pa ick, 2009).
4.1.3 | Discussion o Expe imen 1a
The in e ac ion e ec sugges s ha he e ec i eness o anecdo al
and s a is ical e idence depends on message-issue dis ance. Fu he -
mo e, anecdo al e idence was mo e e ec i e han s a is ical e idence
only in he close si ua ion (p=.056), bu no in he dis an si ua ion.
In he dis an si ua ion, s a is ical e idence was as e ec i e as anec-
do al e idence (and ended o be mo e e ec i e).
We canno exclude he possibili y ha he in e ac ion e ec
be ween e idence ype and issue dis ance in Expe imen 1a was also
d i en by simila i y and iden i ica ion, since he e ec i eness o he
anecdo al message was much highe in he close han in he dis an si -
ua ion. The li e a u e has demons a ed ha anecdo al messages a e
mo e pe suasi e when he p o agonis s a e simila o he ecipien s
(De G aa , 2014; P axma e -Ca us & Wolkens oe e , 2018), and mes-
sage ecipien s a e mo e likely o iden i y wi h a pe son om hei own
coun y han wi h a pe son om a o eign coun y. Howe e , he heo-
e ical easons why we expec he e ec i eness o anecdo al and s a-
is ical e idence o depend on message-issue dis ance a e mo e gene al
(see Sec ion 3) and a e nei he dependen on no limi ed o p o agonis
simila i y e ec s. To a oid such po en ial simila i y and iden i ica ion
e ec s, Expe imen 2, which also es s H1a, manipula es he ecipien s'
message-issue dis ance as a empo al dis ance. Thus, simila i y and
iden i ica ion will no be able o explain a po en ial in e ac ion e ec
be ween e idence ype and message-issue dis ance in Expe imen 2.
4.2 |Expe imen 1b
This expe imen es s H1b and examines whe he ecipien s' con-
c e e/abs ac hinking abou he message issue mode a es he pe -
suasi eness o s a is ical and anecdo al e idence (see Figu e 4). This
s udy does no manipula e message-issue dis ance bu measu es how
abs ac ly/conc e ely indi iduals hink abou he message issue p io
o message exposu e. The expe imen ocuses on indi iduals' issue-
speci ic hinking. While indi iduals may ha e a ch onic endency o
hink mo e abs ac ly o mo e conc e ely (Hong & Lee, 2010; Valla-
che & Wegne , 1989), men al ep esen a ions should also a y wi hin
indi iduals and ac oss e en s, o example, because he e en may be
psychologically close o u he away om he indi idual (Li ia an
e al., 2008; Sode be g e al., 2015; Wakslak e al., 2006). While
ch onic endencies and issue-speci ic cons ual le els should be
ela ed, indi iduals' conc e e/abs ac hinking abou he message
issue should be mo e in luen ial in explaining he pe suasi eness o
anecdo al and s a is ical e idence and is he ocus o his s udy.
4.2.1 | Me hod
S imuli and design
The s udy manipula ed he ype o e idence (s a is ical s. anecdo al)
and measu ed pa icipan s' conc e e/abs ac hinking abou he
FIGURE 3 The e ec s o anecdo al and s a is ical e idence on
in en ions dependen on message-issue dis ance (Expe imen 1a).
e sus
FIGURE 4 E ec s s udied in S udy 1b.
WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS 81
message-issue p io o exposu e o he message. The con ex o
he s udy was ick-bo ne encephali is and he messages ecom-
mended accina ion o indi iduals li ing in a isk a ea (se e al ede al
s a es and dis ic s in Ge many a e isk a eas). The s a is ical message
epo ed cases o ick-bo ne encephali is and he like, and he anec-
do al message old he s o y o a s uden who was in ec ed by a ick
bi e. Appendix Bshows he messages.
P ocedu e and sample
The link o he online ques ionnai e was pos ed on he pla o m o a
la ge s uden communi y in Ge many. Pa icipan s ecei ed no com-
pensa ion. The s udy andomly assigned pa icipan s o one o he
messages, and he ques ionnai e was comple ed by 361 indi iduals.
Because he Ge man go e nmen 's accine agency (RKI), and he e-
o e Ge man heal h p o essionals, ecommend accina ion only o
people li ing in a isk a ea (Robe Koch Ins i u e, 2024), he messages
did no apply o 94 pa icipan s who knew hey did no li e in a isk
a ea. Since he accine is no ecommended o hem and he message
ecommenda ion did no apply o hem, hey had o be excluded om
he s udy. The inal sample consis ed o 267 indi iduals (38.2% male,
he a e age age was 24). As one accina ion is no su icien and he
accine needs o be boos e ed e e y 5 yea s, pa icipan s who had
al eady been accina ed agains ick-bo ne encephali is we e no
excluded (40% epo ed ha ing been accina ed).
Measu es
Be o e we could ask pa icipan s how conc e ely/abs ac ly hey
hough abou he message issue, we had o s a e he message issue.
Pa icipan s ead he ollowing b ie in o ma ion: “Tick bi es can in ec
humans wi h diseases such as ick-bo ne encephali is, which can
cause in lamma ion o he meninges and b ain.”To measu e how con-
c e ely/abs ac ly pa icipan s hough abou he message issue, we
adap ed a sel - epo i em om Venus e al. (2019). The i em ead
“When I hink abou ick bi es and he po en ial dange s hey pose, I
end o ha e …conc e e de ails in mind (=4); …in mind wha i
could mean o me in gene al (=+4). Pa icipan s esponded on a 9-
poin a ing scale. We chose his i em, sugges ed by Venus e al.
(2019), o wo easons. Fi s , i ocuses on he co e o he cons uc
o in e es (Be gk is & Rossi e , 2007), which can be desc ibed as ol-
lows: Whe eas low-le el ep esen a ions o e en s con ain con ex u-
alized de ails, high-le el ep esen a ions o e en s achie e abs ac ion
by omi ing seconda y de ails and ocusing on hei gene alized mean-
ing (T ope e al., 2007). Second, he sho sel - epo measu e may be
use ul in p ac ice. I does no equi e coding o pa icipan s' open-
ended esponses, such as he linguis ic ca ego y model (Semin & Fied-
le , 1991), which in ol es con o e sy o e how o in e p e he e ms
exp essed by indi iduals (Bu goon e al., 2013). And (i i explains he
pe suasi eness o anecdo al and s a is ical e idence) i could easily be
used o p e es campaigns and decide when o use s a is ical o anec-
do al e idence (see Sec ion 5). A e exposu e o he message, we
measu ed pa icipan s' in en ions o ge accina ed wi h he i em
“How likely a e you o ge accina ed?”(1 = e y unlikely, 9 = e y
likely). The s udy also measu ed desc ip i e s a is ics, asked whe he
pa icipan s li ed in a isk a ea, whe he hey had been accina ed,
and a ew o he ques ions no ela ed o his a icle.
4.2.2 | Resul s
Co a ia e
Whe he pa icipan s had been accina ed agains ick-bo ne enceph-
ali is be o e aking pa in ou s udy indica es hei gene al accep ance
o accines. In he g oup ha saw he s a is ical e idence, 44% had
been accina ed; in he anecdo al g oup, 36% had been accina ed.
We epo he esul s wi h and wi hou con olling o his a iable
(co a ia e).
Tes o H1b
As he mode a o was measu ed on a a ing scale, we an model
1 o Hayes' (2018) PROCESS mac o o es H1b. E idence ype was
he independen a iable (s a is ical e idence =0, anecdo al
e idence =1), conc e e/abs ac hinking abou he message issue
was he mode a o (4=conc e e; +4=abs ac ), and accina ion
in en ion was he dependen a iable. Table 2shows he indings. As
TABLE 2 Model 1 o Hayes' (2018) PROCESS mac o (Expe imen 1b).
Model wi h co a ia e Model wi hou co a ia e
bSE (262) pb SE (263) p
Cons an 4.148 .256 16.18 .000 5.364 .243 22.07 .000
E idence ype (E T) .350 .310 1.130 .260 .118 .350 .336 .737
Conc e e/abs ac hinking (CL) .145 .091 1.588 .114 .107 .103 1.037 .310
E T CL .391 .130 3.001 .003 .394 .147 2.672 .008
Co a ia e 2.724 .314 8.675 .000 - - - -
Condi ional e ec s o e idence ype a alues o CL
Value o CL E ec SE pValue o CL E ec SE p
16 h pe cen ile 2.12 1.178 .441 .008 2.12 .952 .498 .057
84 h pe cen ile 3.00 .822 .460 .079 3.00 1.064 .527 .044
82 WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS
in en ions o ob ain he HPV accine. Heal h Communica ion,30,
301–308.
Pa k, S. Y., Kim, E., & Moon, M. J. (2020). Designing public in o ma ion
campaigns as an e ec i e policy ool: Cons ual-le el i e ec s and
e idence om an expe imen al s udy. Jou nal o Compa a i e Policy
Analysis: Resea ch and P ac ice,22(6), 579–592.
P axma e -Ca us, S., & Wolkens oe e , S. (2018). Enhancing he e ec i e-
ness o na a i es among accine-skep ical pa en s. ACR No h Ame ican
Ad ances.
P axma e -Ca us, S., Wolkens oe e , S., & Dijks a, A. (2022). Ou come
p esence and egula o y i : Compe ing explana ions o he ad an age
o gains and losses o e non-gains and non-losses. Jou nal o Consume
Beha iou ,21(2), 310–327.
Reczek, R. W., T udel, R., & Whi e, K. (2018). Focusing on he o es o he
ees: How abs ac e sus conc e e cons ual le el p edic s esponses
o eco- iendly p oduc s. Jou nal o En i onmen al Psychology,57,87–98.
Robe Koch Ins i u . (2024). In ek ionsschu z. h ps://www. ki.de/DE/
Con en /In ek /Imp en/Imp ungenAZ/FSME/FSME.h ml.
Schwa z, N. (2004). Me acogni i e expe iences in consume judgmen and
decision making. Jou nal o Consume Psychology,14(4), 332–348.
Schwa z, N. (2010). Meaning in con ex : Me acogni i e expe iences. In B.
Mesqui a, L. F. Ba e , & E. R. Smi h (Eds.), The mind in con ex
(pp. 105–125). Guil o d.
Semin, G. R., & Fiedle , K. (1991). The linguis ic ca ego y model, i s bases,
applica ions and ange. Eu opean Re iew o Social Psychology,2(1),
1–30.
Sla e , M. D., & Roune , D. (1996). Value-a i ma i e and alue-p o ec i e
p ocessing o alcohol educa ion messages ha include s a is ical e i-
dence o anecdo es. Communica ion Resea ch,23(2), 210–235.
Slo ic, P. (2007). I I look a he mass I will ne e ac : Psychic numbing and
genocide. Judgmen and Decision Making,2(2), 79–95.
Small, D. A., Loewens ein, G., & Slo ic, P. (2007). Sympa hy and callous-
ness: The impac o delibe a i e hough on dona ions o iden i iable
and s a is ical ic ims. O ganiza ional Beha io and Human Decision P o-
cesses,102(2), 143–153.
Sode be g, C. K., Callahan, S. P., Koche sbe ge , A. O., Ami , E., &
Ledge wood, A. (2015). The e ec s o psychological dis ance on
abs ac ion: Two me a-analyses. Psychological Bulle in,141(3),
525–548.
S a is a. (2011). Welche G ünde sp echen gegen eine Be u sun ähigkei s-
e siche ung? h ps://de.s a is a.com/s a is ik/da en/s udie/199188/
um age/g uende-gegen-eine-be u sun aehigkei s e siche ung/.
S a is a. (2022). Schwellenwe e ü die A mu sge äh dung in Deu sch-
land. h ps://de.s a is a.com/s a is ik/da en/s udie/816302/um age/
mona liche -schwellenwe - ue -a mu sge aeh dung-in-deu schland-
2016/.
T ope, Y., & Libe man, N. (2010). Cons ual-le el heo y o psychological
dis ance. Psychological Re iew,117(2), 440–463.
T ope, Y., Libe man, N., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Cons ual le els and psycho-
logical dis ance: E ec s on ep esen a ion, p edic ion, e alua ion, and
beha io . Jou nal o Consume Psychology,17(2), 83–95.
T u h Ini ia i e. (2022). Tobacco and cance : Wha a e he su i al a es?
h ps:// u hini ia i e.o g/ esea ch- esou ces/ha m ul-e ec s-
obacco/ obacco-and-cance -wha -a e-su i al- a es.
Vallache , R. R., & Wegne , D. M. (1989). Le els o pe sonal agency: Indi-
idual a ia ion in ac ion iden i ica ion. Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social
Psychology,57(4), 660–671.
Venus, M., Johnson, R. E., Zhang, S., Wang, X. H., & Lanaj, K. (2019). Seeing
he big pic u e: A wi hin-pe son examina ion o leade cons ual le el
and ision communica ion. Jou nal o Managemen ,45(7), 2666–2684.
Wakslak, C. J., T ope, Y., Libe man, N., & Alony, R. (2006). Seeing he o -
es when en y is unlikely: P obabili y and he men al ep esen a ion
o e en s. Jou nal o Expe imen al Psychology: Gene al,135(4),
641–653.
Whi e, K., MacDonnell, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2011). I 's he mind-se ha
ma e s: The ole o cons ual le el and message aming in in luencing
consume e icacy and conse a ion beha io s. Jou nal o Ma ke ing
Resea ch,48(3), 472–485.
Williams, L. E., S ein, R., & Galgue a, L. (2014). The dis inc a ec i e conse-
quences o psychological dis ance and cons ual le el. Jou nal o Con-
sume Resea ch,40(6), 1123–1138.
Win e bo om, A., Bekke , H. L., Conne , M., & Mooney, A. (2008). Does
na a i e in o ma ion bias indi idual's decision making? A sys ema ic
e iew. Social Science & Medicine,67(12), 2079–2088.
Yan, D., & Sengup a, J. (2013). The in luence o base a e and case in o -
ma ion on heal h- isk pe cep ions: A uni ied model o sel -posi i i y
and sel -nega i i y. Jou nal o Consume Resea ch,39(5), 931–946.
Yan, D., Sengup a, J., & Hong, J. (2016). Why does psychological dis ance
in luence cons ual le el? The ole o p ocessing mode. Jou nal o Con-
sume Resea ch,43(4), 598–613.
Zillmann, D., & B osius, H. B. (2012). Exempli ica ion in communica ion: The
in luence o case epo s on he pe cep ion o issues. Rou ledge.
Zeb egs, S., Van den Pu e, B., Neijens, P., & De G aa , A. (2015). The di -
e en ial impac o s a is ical and na a i e e idence on belie s, a i-
ude, and in en ion: A me a-analysis. Heal h Communica ion,30(3),
282–289.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES
Ma ina I Wieluch se ed as a esea ch assis an a he Bundes-
weh Uni e si y Munich, Depa men o Economics and Manage-
men and ecei ed he doc o a e deg ee om he Bundesweh
Uni e si y Munich, Ge many. He esea ch in e es s include pe -
suasion and ad e ising e ec i eness. He wo k has appea ed in
“Ad ances in Consume Resea ch”(p oceedings o he ACR con e -
ences). P esen posi ion: Head o Depa men Public Rela ions
and Communica ion, Landes eue weh e band (S a e Fi e igh e s
Associa ion) Baye n e.V.
Sand a P axma e -Ca us is a P o esso o Ma ke ing a he Bun-
desweh Uni e si y Munich, Depa men o Economics and Man-
agemen . He esea ch in e es s include pe suasion and
ad e ising e ec i eness. She ecei ed he doc o a e deg ee om
he Uni e si y o Augsbu g, Ge many. Be o e he appoin men in
Munich, she se ed as a Lec u e in Ma ke ing a he Uni e si y o
Wollongong, Aus alia, and as an Assis an P o esso a he Uni-
e si y o Bambe g, Ge many. She has published in, o ins ance,
he Jou nal o Business Resea ch, he Jou nal o Ad e ising
Resea ch, he In e na ional Jou nal o Ad e ising, and he Jou nal o
Consume Beha iou .
How o ci e his a icle: Wieluch, M. I., & P axma e -Ca us, S.
(2025). How he pe suasi eness o s a is ical e idence
compa ed o pe sonal es imonials depends on he ecipien 's
dis ance om he message issue. Jou nal o Consume
Beha iou ,24(1), 75–91. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/cb.2404
WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS 89
APPENDIX A
The messages ha Expe imen 1a used.
Close
Anecdo al S a is ical
Anna, 4, om Munich, is su e ing om cance . Ou aca ion homes in
Ge many o e he equi ed ca e and esou ces, whe e she and he
amily can eco e hei s eng hs a e hei s ay in hospi al.
You dona ion helps heal
E e y yea 1.800 kids unde he age o 15 a e diagnosed wi h cance in
Ge many.
Ou aca ion homes in Ge many o e he equi ed ca e and esou ces,
whe e hese kids and hei amilies can eco e hei s eng hs a e hei
s ay in hospi al.
You dona ion helps heal
Dis an
Anecdo al S a is ical
Ayumi, 4, om Kyo o, is su e ing om cance .
Ou aca ion homes in Japan o e he equi ed ca e and esou ces,
whe e she and he amily can eco e hei s eng hs a e hei s ay in
hospi al.
You dona ion helps heal
E e y yea 1.800 kids unde he age o 15 a e diagnosed wi h cance in
Japan.
Ou aca ion homes in Japan o e he equi ed ca e and esou ces,
whe e hese kids and hei amilies can eco e hei s eng hs a e hei
s ay in hospi al.
You dona ion helps heal
90 WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS
APPENDIX B
The messages ha Expe imen 1b used.
APPENDIX C
The messages ha Expe imen 2 used.
Anecdo al S a is ical
Lukas, 24, s uden , had a elaxing a e noon wi h iends in he pa k.
Sunba hing, elaxing, and playing a bi o oo ball…
In he mo ning, he no iced a ick on his g oin. He had i emo ed and
ha seemed o be he end o i .
Nine days la e , Lukas de eloped a e e and a headache. The ick had
in ec ed him wi h he ick-bo ne encephali is i us and Lukas had
meningi is. He was admi ed o hospi al, bu his condi ion wo sened.
When he in ec ion sp ead o his b ain, Lukas' condi ion became c i ical.
Lukas su i ed, bu he uses a wheelchai because he in ec ion has
pa alyzed his legs. His abili y o concen a e has also been a ec ed.
Lukas has d opped ou o uni e si y and his ca ee d eams ha e aded
in o he dis ance.
P o ec you sel om ick bi es and he diseases hey can ansmi !
The Robe Koch Ins i u e ecommends accina ion o people li ing in
a eas a isk o TBE. I p o ides eliable p o ec ion o abou 5 yea s.
The accina ion would ha e p o ec ed Lukas. Ask you doc o o mo e
in o ma ion!
I is es ima ed ha 10 million people in Ge many a e bi en by icks e e y
yea . Ticks can be ound almos anywhe e he e a e plan s, including
ga dens and pa ks.
Ticks can ansmi he ick-bo ne encephali is (TBE) i us o humans.
Depending on he egion, up o 5% o icks ca y he TBE i us.
TBE can cause se e e in lamma ion o he meninges, b ain and spinal co d.
Meningi is (in lamma ion o he meninges) wi h encephali is (in lamma ion
o he b ain) lea es one in i e people (20%) wi h pe manen damage. This
o en akes he o m o pa alysis o p oblems wi h memo y and
concen a ion.
3% o people use a wheelchai a e de eloping he disease. 2% o cases
a e a al. Adul s and young adul s a e mo e likely o de elop se e e cases
han child en.
P o ec you sel om ick bi es and he diseases hey can ansmi !
The Robe Koch Ins i u e ecommends accina ion o people li ing in
a eas a isk o TBE. I p o ides eliable p o ec ion o abou 5 yea s.
Ask you doc o o mo e in o ma ion!
No e: Male pa icipan s saw he male e sion o he anecdo e (“Lukas”) and emale pa icipan s saw he emale e sion o he anecdo e (“Lea”).
Anecdo al S a is ical
No ge ing disabili y insu ance ea ly on pu s you inancial exis ence a
isk.
S e an's s o y:
S e an was only 24 and a s uden when, unexpec edly, he became
se e ely ill. Due o he disease, S e an became pe manen ly un i o
wo k. P esumably, he will ne e be able o wo k no mally. Because he
was a s uden , he is no eligible o mino go e nmen al disabili y
pension paymen s. Un o una ely, S e an had no aken ou disabili y
income insu ance o s uden s ha would ha e a o ded him mon hly
bene i s. S e an's u u e is unce ain, and his inancial exis ence is a
isk.
No ge ing disabili y insu ance ea ly on pu s you inancial exis ence a
isk.
In Ge many, 2.8 Mio. young people a e s udying. The p obabili y o a
20-yea -old o becoming pe manen ly un i o wo k be o e e i emen age
is 43%. In 90% o he cases, a se e e disease is he cause.
I s uden s ge pe manen ly un i o wo k, hey a e no eligible o he
go e nmen al pension paymen s o 38% o one's las income. I s uden s
ha e no aken ou disabili y income insu ance, hey do no ecei e
mon hly bene i s om an insu ance. I hey become un i o wo k hei
u u e is unce ain, and hei inancial exis ence is a isk.
Close condi ion
You o-do o his mon h: ind ou abou disabili y insu ance o
s uden s
Close condi ion
You o-do o his mon h: ind ou abou disabili y insu ance o s uden s
Dis an condi ion
You o-do o 2020: ind ou abou disabili y insu ance o s uden s
Dis an condi ion
You o-do o 2020: ind ou abou disabili y insu ance o s uden s
No e: The s udy was conduc ed in No embe 2019. Male pa icipan s saw he male e sion o he anecdo e (“S e an”) and emale pa icipan s saw he
emale e sion o he anecdo e (“S e anie”).
WIELUCH and PRAXMARER-CARUS 91
