Differences in actual persuasiveness between experiential and professional expert evidence

C.F. Burgers, A.M. De Graaf, S. Callaars

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

This study investigates the persuasiveness of different types of expert evidence. Following Wagemans (2011), two types of experts were distinguished that can be used in expert evidence: experiential experts (who base their expertise on personal experience) and professional experts (who base their expertise on professional knowledge). In a between-subjects experiment (N = 179), these different types of experts were included in a news report on a political issue. Results indicate that the perceived expertise and persuasiveness of professional experts was higher than that of experiential experts. Perceived expertise completely mediated the effects of the different types of expert evidence on persuasion. These results point towards a recommendation of using professional expert evidence over experiential expert evidence in reporting on political issues.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)194-208
JournalJournal of Argumentation in Context
Volume1
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2012

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Differences in actual persuasiveness between experiential and professional expert evidence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this