Current issue

The Korean Society for Journalism & Communication Studies - Vol. 65 , No. 6

[ Article ]
Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies - Vol. 65, No. 6, pp. 202-248
Abbreviation: KSJCS
ISSN: 2586-7369 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Dec 2021
Received 08 Oct 2021 Accepted 01 Dec 2021 Revised 15 Dec 2021

메시지의 생생함과 권고 구체성이 확산과 설득에 미치는 영향
김지수** ; 김현석***
**서울대학교 언론정보학과 석사 (
***서울대학교 언론정보학과 부교수 (

How Message Vividness and Recommendation Specificity Affect Diffusion and Persuasion
Jisu Kim** ; Hyun Suk Kim***
**Master, Department of Communication, Seoul National University (
***Associate Professor, Department of Communication, Seoul National University, corresponding author (
Contributed by footnote: ** now an inspector at the Seoul Yangcheon Police Station (현 서울양천경찰서 경위).

Funding Information ▼


이 연구는 메시지의 생생함과 권고 구체성이 이야기에의 몰입을 통해 경찰 홍보 동영상의 확산과 설득에 미치는 영향을 온라인 실험을 통해 검증했다. 또한, 메시지 수용자의 경찰에 대한 기존 태도 및 몰입성이 이러한 간접효과 과정을 어떻게 조절하는지 살펴봤다. 연구 결과, 생생함의 정도가 높은 경찰 홍보물은 생생함의 정도가 낮은 홍보물보다 홍보물에 대한 몰입을 더 많이 유발함으로써 해당 홍보물에 관한 대화 의도, 홍보물 공유 의도, 홍보물의 지각된 효과성, 경찰 신뢰도를 높이는 경향을 보였는데, 이러한 간접효과 양상은 경찰에 대한 기존 태도가 덜 우호적인 사람에게서만 나타났다. 연구 결과가 확산 및 설득 커뮤니케이션에서의 메시지 효과 연구와 소셜미디어를 활용한 공공 커뮤니케이션 캠페인에 대해 갖는 이론적·실천적 함의를 논의했다.


This study examined how message vividness and recommendation specificity affect the virality and persuasiveness of online police promotional videos that feature police officers arresting criminals or rescuing citizens. Specifically, the present study tested how (a) the vividness of the testimonials of police officers or citizens and (b) the specificity of recommendations to call 112 for police shape the extent to which such narrative-based police promotional videos facilitate people’s transportation into the videos, thereby heightening intentions to engage in interpersonal conversation about and social sharing of the videos (i.e., diffusion), and increasing perceived effectiveness of the videos and trust in the police (i.e., persuasion). The study further investigated how prior attitudes toward the police and transportability moderate the indirect effects of message vividness and recommendation specificity on diffusion and persuasion via narrative transportation. An online experiment (N = 532) was conducted with a 2 (message vividness [between-subjects]: high vs. low [audiovisual vs. text testimonial]) × 2 (recommendation specificity [between-subjects]: high vs. low [detailed vs. brief information about how to call 112 for police]) × 2 (video topic [within-subjects]: arrest vs. rescue) mixed design. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the four between-subjects conditions and watched two videos with different topics (i.e., arrest vs. rescue) in random order. To reduce the potential of case-category confounding, the current study used a multiple-message design approach by creating four videos for each experimental condition and showing one randomly selected video to the participants. The results indicated that prior attitudes toward police interacted with message vividness to indirectly influence diffusion and persuasion by shaping narrative transportation. Specifically, participants who watched more vivid police promotional videos, as compared to those exposed to less vivid videos, experienced greater transportation, which in turn led them to (a) have higher intentions to talk about and share the videos with their social networks, and (b) perceive the videos as more persuasive and show greater trust in the police, but only among those who had unfavorable prior attitudes toward the police. Such indirect effects of message vividness were not found among those who had more favorable prior attitudes. Message vividness did not significantly interact with recommendation specificity or transportability to affect the level of transportation. Recommendation specificity did not impact transportation, either independently or in combination with prior attitudes toward the police or transportability. The findings are discussed in light of their theoretical and practical implications for message effects research on viral and persuasive communication, and for social media-based public communication campaigns.

KeywordsDiffusion, Persuasion, Vividness, Recommendation Specificity, Message Effects
키워드: 확산, 설득, 생생함, 권고의 구체성, 메시지 효과


This paper is based on Jisu Kim's master's thesis at Seoul National University. This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2021S1A5A8065401) and the Institute of Communication Research at Seoul National University. (본 논문은 김지수의 서울대학교 석사학위논문의 일부를 수정·보완한 것입니다. 본 연구는 2021년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 인문사회분야 신진연구자지원사업[NRF-2021S1A5A8065401]과 서울대학교 언론정보연구소의 지원을 받았습니다.)

1. Bailey, J. O., Bailenson, J. N., Flora, J., Armel, K. C., Voelker, D., & Reeves, B. (2015). The Impact of vivid messages on reducing energy consumption related to hot water use. Environment and Behavior, 47, 570-592.
2. Berger, J. (2013). Contagious: Why things catch on. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
3. Berger, J. (2014). Word of mouth and interpersonal communication: A review and directions for future research. Journal of consumer psychology, 24, 586-607.
4. Berger, J., & Milkman, K. L. (2012). What makes online content viral? Journal of marketing research, 49, 192-205.
5. Bigsby, E., Bigman, C. A., & Martinez Gonzalez, A. (2019). Exemplification theory: A review and meta-analysis of exemplar messages. Annals of the International Communication Association, 43, 273-296.
6. Blonde, J., & Girandola, F. (2016). Revealing the elusive effects of vividness: a meta-analysis of empirical evidences assessing the effect of vividness on persuasion. Social Influence, 11, 111-129.
7. Boster, F. J., Kotowski, M. R., Andrews, K. R., & Serota, K. (2011). Identifying influence: Development and validation of the connectivity, persuasiveness, and maven scales. Journal of Communication, 61, 178-196.
8. Braddock, K., & Dillard, J. P. (2016). Meta-analytic evidence for the persuasive effect of narratives on beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors. Communication Monographs, 83, 446-467.
9. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 482, 306–307.
10. Cappella, J. N. (2002). Cynicism and social trust in the new media environment. Journal of Communication, 52, 229-241.
11. Cappella, J. N., Kim, H. S., & Albarracín, D. (2015). Selection and transmission processes for information in the emerging media environment: Psychological motives and message characteristics. Media psychology, 18, 396-424.
12. Ching, R. K., Tong, P., Chen, J. S., & Chen, H. Y. (2013). Narrative online advertising: identification and its effects on attitude toward a product. Internet Research, 23, 414-438.
13. Dal Cin, S., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2004). Narrative persuasion and overcoming resistance. In E. S. Knowles & J. A. Linn (Eds.), Resistance and persuasion (pp. 175-191). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Dillard, J. P., Weber, K. M., & Vail, R. G. (2007). The relationship between the perceived and actual effectiveness of persuasive messages: A meta-analysis with implications for formative campaign research. Journal of Communication, 57, 613-631.
15. Evans, R. I., Rozelle, R. M., Lasater, T. M., Dembroski, T. M., & Allen, B. P. (1970). Fear arousal, persuasion, and actual versus implied behavioral change: New perspective utilizing a real-life dental hygiene program. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 220-227.
16. Green, M. C. (2006). Narratives and cancer communication. Journal of Communication, 56, S163-S183.
17. Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 701-721.
18. Hox, J. J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2018). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
19. Humphreys, A. (2016). Social media: Enduring principles. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
20. Igartua, J. J., & Frutos, F. J. (2017). Enhancing attitudes toward stigmatized groups with movies: Mediating and moderating processes of narrative persuasion. International Journal of Communication, 11, 158-177.
21. Jackson, J., & Bradford, B. (2010). What is trust and confidence in the police? Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 4, 241-248.
22. Jackson, S. (1992). Message effects research: Principles of design and analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.
23. Jang, H. S. (2013). Confidence in the police among citizens: Focusing on the expressive perspective of confidence in the police. Korean Police Studies Review, 12(2), 213-236.
24. Jang, H. S. (2014). Determinant of confidence in the police: Comparison between instrumental perspective and expressive perspective. Korean Journal of Public Safety and Criminal Justice, 23(1), 240-261.
25. Joo, J. J. (2008). A study on the trust of public on police. The Korean Association of Police Science Review, 10(4), 329-352.
26. Jun, J. W. (2017). Transportation effects of branded entertainment storytelling on trust, attitudes, and WOM intentions. Journal of Media Economics & Culture, 15(2), 44-76.
27. Kim, H. S. (2015). Attracting views and going viral: How message features and news-sharing channels affect health news diffusion. Journal of Communication, 65, 512-534.
28. Kim, H. S., Bigman, C. A., Leader, A. E., Lerman, C., & Cappella, J. N. (2012). Narrative health communication and behavior change: The influence of exemplars in the news on intention to quit smoking. Journal of Communication, 62, 473-492.
29. Lee, D.-S. (2011). A Study on the influence of the fear of crime on police crime prevention activities awareness. The Police Science Journal, 6(2), 143-169.
30. Lee, S.-B. & Kim, Y.-H. (2014). The influence of social media-based organization-public relationship on the police image. The Police Science Journal, 9(1), 61-90.
31. Lee, S. W., & Song, K. S. (2001). An analysis of influence factors on police trust of the nation. The Korean Association of Police Science Review, 3, 151-168.
32. Leventhal, H., Jones, S., & Trembly, G. (1966). Sex differences in attitude and behavior change under conditions of fear and specific instructions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 387-399.
33. Luo, W. (2017). Testing mediation effects in cross-classified multilevel data. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 674-684.
34. Mazzocco, P. J., Green, M. C., Sasota, J. A., & Jones, N. W. (2010). This story is not for everyone: Transportability and narrative persuasion. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 361-368.
35. Morgan, S. E., Movius, L., & Cody, M. J. (2009). The power of narratives: The effect of entertainment television organ donation storylines on the attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors of donors and nondonors. Journal of Communication, 59, 135-151.
36. Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
37. O'Keefe, D. J. (2002). The persuasive effects of variation in standpoint articulation. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Advances in pragma-dialectics (pp. 65-82). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
38. O'Keefe, D. J. (2016). Persuasion: Theory and research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Ophir, Y., Brennan, E., Maloney, E. K., & Cappella, J. N. (2019). The effects of graphic warning labels’ vividness on message engagement and intentions to quit smoking. Communication Research, 46, 619-638.
40. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
41. Reyes, R. M., Thompson, W. C., & Bower, G. H. (1980). Judgmental biases resulting from differing availabilities of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 2-12.
42. Roh, J., & Kim, H. (2015). Trust in adolescents: Specific trust, general trust, public trust. Studies on Korean Youth, 26(2), 177-207.
43. Smith, S. M., & Shaffer, D. R. (2000). Vividness can undermine or enhance message processing: The moderating role of vividness congruency. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 769-779.
44. Yan, Y., & Liu, J. (2016). Effects of media exemplars on the perception of social issues with pre-existing beliefs. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93, 1026-1049.
45. Yoo, M. J. (2016). The effects of contextual priming on brand attitude toward police: The mediated moderation of valence of event through perceived warmth and competence. Unpublished matster's thesis, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
46. Yzer, M., LoRusso, S., & Nagler, R. H. (2015). On the conceptual ambiguity surrounding perceived message effectiveness. Health communication, 30, 125-134.
47. Zillmann, D., & Brosius, H.-B. (2000). Exemplification in communication: The influence of case reports on the perception of issues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

부록Ⅰ. 참고문헌
1. 노자은·김현주 (2015). 청소년의 신뢰: 구체적 신뢰, 일반신뢰, 공적신뢰. <한국청소년연구>, 26권 2호, 177-207.
2. 유민주 (2016). <맥락적 프레이밍이 경찰에 대한 태도에 미치는 영향: 따뜻함, 유능함에 대한 인식을 통한 사건 보도 방향의 매개된 조절효과>. 서울대학교 대학원 석사학위 논문.
3. 이도선 (2011). 경찰의 범죄예방활동에 대한 인식이 범죄 두려움에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구. <경찰학논총>, 6권 2호, 143-169.
4. 이상원·송건섭 (2001). 국민의 경찰신뢰에 관한 영향요인 분석. <한국경찰학회보>, 3권, 151-168.
5. 이선범·김양현 (2014). 경찰의 소셜 미디어를 통한 조직-공중관계가 경찰이미지에 미치는 영향 –대학생을 중심으로-. <경찰학논총>, 9권 1호, 61-90.
6. 장현석 (2013). 일반시민의 경찰에 대한 신뢰도 연구: 표현적 시각의 경찰신뢰도 설명을 중심으로. <한국경찰연구>, 12권 2호, 213-236.
7. 장현석 (2014). 경찰에 대한 신뢰도 결정요인. <한국공안행정학회보>, 23권, 240-261.
8. 전종우 (2017). 브랜디드 엔터테인먼트의 스토리텔링 전송 행위가 수용자에 미치는 영향: 신뢰도, 태도, 공유의도를 중심으로. <미디어 경제와 문화>, 15권 2호, 44-76.
9. 주재진 (2008). 경찰에 대한 민원인의 신뢰영향 요인에 관한 연구. <한국경찰학회보>, 10권 4호, 329-352.