Comparative Efficacy of Preventative Inoculation Treatments and Reactive Mortification Defending Against Political Debate Attacks

Bibliographic Data

ID19218697
AuthorsDavid E Clementson (0000-0001-6915-9261, University of Georgia, corresponding author)
Year2026
Publication date2026-04-29
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Language and Social Psychology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0261-927X • E-ISSN: 1552-6526
PublisherSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0261927x261445571
OpenAlexW7160383477
LanguageEN
References cited26

Tests comparing inoculation theory's preemptive refutation and image repair theory's reactive mortification in political scandals have indicated that the two monotherapies for crisis management are as effective as each other and perform equally well in adjunctive combination. Conspicuously absent from prior testing, however, is broader inoculation (“blanket protection”). I conduct preregistered multiple-message-design experiments testing a theoretical multiple-mediation model to assess messages affecting perceived scandal cover-up, followed by perceived trustworthiness, ultimately resulting in behavioral intentions. In the first study, N = 490 U.S. voters are exposed to political debate excerpts featuring a strongly favored politician under attack for sexist and higher-ed scandals. Isolated inoculation and mortification remain superior and do not vary. In the second study, N = 209 U.S. voters’ supported politician is attacked for public safety scandals. Isolated inoculation demonstrates superiority

Crisis management · Inoculation · Order (exchange) · Politics · Public health · Behavioral Health and Interventions · Media Influence and Health · Misinformation and Its Impacts

Tools

Open DOI