Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
V. Allen, D. Wilder (1980)
Impact of group consensus and social support on stimulus meaning: Mediation of conformity by cognitive restructuring.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39
S. Asch (1948)
The doctrine of suggestion, prestige and imitation in social psychology.Psychological review, 55 5
J. Brehm (1968)
11 – Attitude Change from Threat to Attitudinal Freedom1
L. Stuesser (1993)
An introduction to advocacy
S. Asch (1940)
Studies in the Principles of Judgments and Attitudes: II. Determination of Judgments by Group and by Ego StandardsJournal of Social Psychology, 12
S. Holm (1979)
A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test ProcedureScandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6
K. Williams, M. Bourgeois, R. Croyle (1993)
The effects of stealing thunder in criminal and civil trialsLaw and Human Behavior, 17
T. Brock, Laura Brannon (1992)
Liberalization of Commodity TheoryBasic and Applied Social Psychology, 13
T. Brock (1968)
10 – Implications of Commodity Theory for Value Change1
(1989)
For personal use only--not for distribution. The Case for Motivated Reasoning
W. J. McGuire (1964)
Advances in experimental and social psychology
T. Srull, R. Wyer (1979)
The Role of Category Accessibility in the Interpretation of Information About Persons: Some Determinants and ImplicationsJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37
R. Keeton (1973)
Trial tactics and methods
R. Petty, G. Wells, T. Brock (1976)
Distraction Can Enhance or Reduce Yielding to Propaganda: Thought Disruption Versus Effort JustificationJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34
A. Eagly, W. Wood, S. Chaiken (1978)
Causal inferences about communicators and their effect on opinion changeJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36
B. Duncan, Duncan (1976)
Differential social perception and attribution of intergroup violence: testing the lower limits of sterotyping of blacks.Journal of personality and social psychology, 34 4
J. Cacioppo, R. Petty (1979)
Effects of message repetition and position on cognitive response, recall, and persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37
I. Lorge, C. Curtiss (1936)
Prestige, suggestion, and attitudes.Journal of Social Psychology, 7
J. Forgas, K. Williams (2001)
Revealing the Worst First: Stealing Thunder as a Social Influence Strategy
S. Fiske, D. Bersoff, E. Borgida, K. Deaux, M. Heilman (1991)
Social science research on trial: Use of sex stereotyping research in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins..American Psychologist, 46
R. Baron, D. Kenny (1986)
The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.Journal of personality and social psychology, 51 6
S. Kassin, Marisa Reddy, W. Tulloch (1990)
Juror interpretations of ambiguous evidenceLaw and Human Behavior, 14
Z. Kunda (1990)
The case for motivated reasoningPsychological Bulletin, 108
R. Buehler, D. Griffin (1994)
Change-of-meaning effects in conformity and dissent: Observing construal processes over time.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67
R. Hass, K. Grady (1975)
Temporal delay, type of forewarning, and resistance to influenceJournal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11
R. Cialdini (1984)
Influence: Science and Practice
S. M. Kassin, M. E. Reddy, W. F. Tulloch (1990)
Juror interpretation of ambiguous evidence: The need for cognition, presentation order, and persuasionLaw and Human Behavior, 14
J. Forgas, K. Williams (2001)
Social Influence: Direct and Indirect Processes
S. McKelvie (1990)
The Asch primacy effect: Robust but not infallible.Journal of Social Behavior and Personality
J. McElhaney (1987)
McElhaney's trial notebook
P. Bergman (1989)
Trial advocacy in a nutshell
Thomas Mauet (1980)
Fundamentals of trial techniques
D. Griffin, R. Buehler (1993)
Role of construal processes in conformity and dissent.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65
R. Wyer, T. Srull (1986)
Human cognition in its social context.Psychological review, 93 3
S. Asch (1946)
Forming impressions of personality.Journal of abnormal psychology, 41
A. Greenwald, T. Brock, T. Ostrom (1968)
Psychological foundations of attitudes
T. Pyszczynski, L. Wrightsman (1981)
The Effects of Opening Statements on Mock Jurors' Verdicts in a Simulated Criminal Trial1Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11
R. B. Cialdini, R. E. Petty (1981)
Cognitive responses in persuasion
Stealing thunder refers to a dissuasion tactic in which an individual reveals potentially incriminating evidence first, for the purpose of reducing its negative impact on an evaluative audience. We examined whether it was necessary to frame the negative revelation in a manner that downplayed its importance, and found that stealing thunder successfully dissuaded mock jurors even without framing. We also sought to determine the mechanism by which stealing thunder operated, and found that stealing thunder led mock jurors to change the meaning of incriminating evidence to be less damaging to the individual. We also found that stealing thunder’s effectiveness did not hinge on whether or not opposing counsel also mentioned the thunder evidence, and that the stealing thunder tactic was no longer effective when opposing counsel revealed to the mock jurors that the stealing thunder tactic had been used on them.
Law and Human Behavior – American Psychological Association
Published: Jun 1, 2003
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.