The perceived message sensation value distracted target group reducing sense of threat.
Zhang and Sapp (2013)
Assessed the antecedents and consequences of psychological reactance and requests in an instructional context. Consistent with previous studies, relationship distance and perceived request politeness directly impacted reactance, which affected resistance intention.
Ball and Goodboy (2014)
Examined psychological reactance in an instructional setting and freedom restoration behaviors that occur. Forceful language and unclear instructions were antecedents to psychological reactance.
Quick et al. (2015)
After exposure to loss-frame and gain-frame narratives, this study examined the role of happiness and guilt, looking at the implications of Prospect Theory. Results showed that the gain-frame narrative was associated with happiness whereas a loss-frame narrative was associated with guilt. Contrary to previous studies, a negative association was found between guilt and reactance.
Bessarabova et al. (2015)
Explored the impact of guilt appeals on the process of reactance. Guilt appeals acted as a threat to freedom; the guiltier persons felt the more negative the attitude.
Hopp (2015)
Assessed the moderating effects of individual ability in numeracy on the message reactance potential. Individual numeracy ability significantly impacts evaluation of persuasive message with heightened reactance potential.
Sittenthaler et al. (2015)
Explored the construction and empirical evaluation of the Salzburger State Reactance Scale (SSR Scale).
Steindl et al. (2015)
A review of research, developments and findings in the area of psychological reactance since the Miron and Brehm (2006) review, and until 2015.
Quick et al. (2015)
This study examined the role of happiness and guilt in the context of exposure to loss-frame and gain-frame narrative and Prospect Theory. Results supported the idea that the gain-frame narrative was associated with happiness, whereas a loss-frame narrative was associated with guilt.
Wright et al. (2015)
Investigated the implications of Brehm’s theory of motivation intensity in comparison to Brehm’s theory of psychological reactance.
Ball (2016)
Examined the role of psychological reactance in communication, including messages encouraging compliance and perceived autonomy. Autonomy supporting messages provided participants with a sense of control, whereas freedom threatening message may trigger adoption of maladaptive attitudes and behaviors in efforts to restore or preserve independence.
Guéguen (2016)
Assessed compliance to requests when exposed to messages with refusals at the beginnings of persuasive message. Individuals are more likely to comply with requests when aware of their freedom of choice. Perceived threat to freedom increased exhibited reactance, and more resistant to compliance.
Niesta Kayser et al. (2016)
Examined the implications of threats to freedom on approach and avoidance frames. Goal framing communication styles influence the perception of request to change and experience of freedom threats.
Richards and Larsen (2017)
Assessed moderating effect of anger expression tendencies on state reactance in the persuasive health context.
Scherr and Müller (2017)
Clarified the role of social desirability of media influences, perceived persuasive intent, and reactance in the third-person perception framework. Low social desirability of media leads to third-person perception and evoke reactance.
Sukalla et al. (2017)
The theory of planned behavior was combined with persuasion narratives to examine the effects persuasion narratives on individuals’ perception on organ donation.
Debora and Jaidev (2018)
Reviewed empirical studies on consumer psychological reactance, with a focus on research methodologies.
Kim (2019)
Applied psychological reactance to the health issue of e-cigarettes. Reactance likelihood increased as a result of social pressures.
Akhtar et al. (2020)
Investigated the role of psychological reactance and restrictions to physical shopping during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Kokkoris (2020)
Investigated maximizers’ responses to restrictions of choice freedom during lockdown in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sprengholz et al. (2021)
Investigated the role of psychological reactance in response to proposed mandated vaccine policies in Germany and USA.
Reactance as a Trait
Is psychological reactance strongly associated with a disposition, or as most of the earlier research assumed, a state condition? The relationship between reactance and personality traits was discussed by Dowd et al. (1994). They identified a number of factors that may contribute to obstacles in therapeutic sessions including reactance. A psychological reactant personality profile was identified using the California Psychological Inventory – Revised (CPI-R), the Therapeutic Reactance Scale (TRS), and the Questionnaire Measuring Psychological Reactance (QMPR). Their study found that psychologically reactant individuals were less concerned with impressing others or adhering to social norms and regulations, were “somewhat careless about fulfilling duties and obligations,” were inclined to express strong emotions and feelings, and were preoccupied with future possible problems. The researchers also found that women classified as reactants displayed more capability in decision making and were more “self-assured, sociable, and action-oriented.” The psychological profile developed in this study highlighted certain similarities between reactant persons and individuals with psychopathic and narcissistic personality disorders.
Another study (Huck, 1998) found that paranoid, antisocial, and sadistic disorders were highly correlated with reactance, and that persons with histrionic, avoidant, and/or dependent disorders displayed low reactance behavior. According to Seibel and Dowd (2001), there is an optimum normal level of reactance. Once this threshold is crossed, excessive reactance behavior loses utility and begins to have a negative impact on the individual. The authors found that persons with personality disorders (e.g., obsessive-compulsive) characterized by autonomy or mistrust exhibit high reactance.
Dowd and Wallbrown (1993) tested motivational components of psychological reactance utilizing the QMPR, the TRS, and a Personal Research Form (PRF). Their findings suggest that persons high in reactance are aggressive, dominant, defensive, autonomous, quick to feel offended, and low in social desirability. In sum, they were seen as loners who are deficit in strong relations with others. Positive characteristics associated with high-reactant individuals were high levels of confidence in their beliefs and goal orientation. Persons higher on external locus of control were more likely to be reactant (Pepper, 1996). These findings contradict previous studies (Mallon, 1992; Morgan, 1986 as cited in Pepper, 1996). However, an earlier study found no significant difference in levels of reactance between internally and externally oriented persons on locus of control (Cherulnik & Citrin, 1974).
Findings from Pepper (1996) suggest that type A personalities are more reactant, oppositional, perceive more threats to freedom, and show increased attraction to the eliminated choice and non-compliance
