Further explored the psychological profile of a psychologically reactant person as well as delved into corrective techniques for developmental issues that arise due to separation and individuation. Identified that individuals have an optimum level of reactance that balances issues of engulfment and separation. Personality disorders based on trust and autonomy were a predictors of reactance.
Baumeister et al. (2002)
Explored a narcissistic reactance theory approach to sexual coercion and rape. Findings concluded that theories of reactance and narcissism combined are a good tool of analysis when exploring cases of rape.
Buboltz et al. (2002)
Analyzed and assessed the factor structure of the Therapeutic Reactance Scale (TRS). The results showed that reactance is seemingly a multidimensional construct with four relatively independent structures underlying psychological reactance. The use of a one-dimensional score may not give an accurate picture of the reactance level/potential of an individual.
Buboltz et al. (2003)
Assessed the relationship between variables concerned with origins of family and psychological reactance. Findings suggest that five family dimensions (cohesion, conflict, moral-religious emphasis, independence and achievement orientation) can encourage psychological reactance.
Dillard and Shen (2005)
Develop four alternative conceptual perspectives on the nature of reactance utilizing a combinations of cognition and affect. Anger and negative cognition mediated threat to freedom and trait reactance. . .
Seeman et al. (2005)
Further elaborated the profile of a psychologically reactant person by implementing the five-factor model of personality as measured by the NEO PI-R. Results suggested that highly reactant individuals appear very independent and somewhat suspicious, they are likely to be skeptical of others intentions, competitive, intolerant, distrustful, secretive, and detached, and they put on a good social face but are actually uncomfortable in social situations
Shen and Dillard (2005)
Assessed the psychometric properties of the 11 item version of the Hong’s Psychological Reactance Scale. Concluded that a single score on the HPRS is theoretically and empirically justifiable.
Jonason and Knowles (2006)
Assessed the one-dimensional measure of Hong Psychological Reactance Scale. Concluded that the scale is only moderately stable and reliable although its one-dimensional characteristic appears to be the most consistent and reliable construct.
Quick et al. (2011)
Examined the effectiveness of character framing and freedom-threating language in persuasiveness, as well as the moderating effects of trait reactance and issue involvement on freedom threat perception.
Kim et al. (2013)
Assessed effects of freedom threat, argument quality and insult as message features in independently producing feelings of anger and negative thought and explain message failure.
Rains (2013)
Reviewed Dillard and Shen (2005) study on the nature of psychological reactance and provided support for the use of the intertwined model.
De Las Cuevas et al. (2014)
Assessed the factor structure and psychometric properties of the Hong Psychological Reactance scale (Spanish version) in psychiatric outpatient care.
De Las Cuevas et al. (2014)
This study explored depression among psychiatric outpatients and their stringent adherence to treatments. The association between health locus of control, self-efficacy, and reactance was examined.
Richards and Banas (2015)
Examined the possibility of inoculating against/decreasing psychological reactance in a health campaign message aimed to reduce excessive alcohol consumption. Simply warning audiences about the possibility of negative reactions to health messages can improve efficacy.
Scott and Quick (2012)
Examined family communication patterns as a means of explaining how interpersonal talk influences peoples’ response to persuasive messages about organ donation using reactance theory. Family conformity orientation and family conversation orientation moderate the relationship between willingness to communicate with family about organ donation and psychological reactance.
Murray and Matland (2015)
An exploration into the effects of social interactions and social pressure techniques utilized by campaigns to increase voter turn-out. Reactance emerges as a negative backlash of persuasive mobilization techniques as majority perceives invasion of privacy.
Lee et al. (2015)
Investigated the effects of communal versus exchange styles and how these created impressions influence consumers’ perceived irritation to brand messages. Additionally, the effect of trait reactance and communication styles on the perceived level of irritation caused by the brand messages were examined.
Middleton et al. (2015)
Explored relationships between psychological reactance and emotional intelligence (EI). Males with lower behavioral reactance have higher scores on EI subscales of self-control, well-being, and emotionality, and males with higher verbal reactance have higher scores on EI subscales on self-control, well-being, sociability, and emotionality. Whereas females with higher verbal reactance have higher scores on EI subscales of emotionality and sociability.
Shen (2015)
Investigated three potential antecedents to psychological reactance: threat to freedom, message frame, and behavioral choice utilizing the intertwined model of reactance measure. Threat to freedom and the loss frame increased psychological reactance while the gain frame and offering behavioral choice had a reversed effect. When the threat to freedom was high, offering choice and gain frame were most salient.
Shen and Coles (2015)
Analyzed the process of psychological reactance in fear appeal. Psychological reactance can be mitigated or avoided if high levels of fear are reduced by efficacy information/positive valence information.
Sittenthaler et al. (2015)
In an attempt to extend past work on reactance examines the degree to which people’s responses to a legitimate vs. an illegitimate constraint. Different responses were observed to illegitimate and legitimate restrictions. Immediate arousal is experienced with illegitimate restrictions and delayed physiological arousal with legitimate restrictions.
Ungar et al. (2015)
Assessment of long-standing effects of an increase intake of fruits and vegetables and reactance. Limited reactance was evoked from those individuals who were tasked with providing documentation and monitoring their consumption of fruits and vegetables in contrast to those who were task of changing their fruits and vegetables consumption.
Arnold and Vakhrusheva (2016)
Opposing delusions in patients may evoke feelings of reactance and fortify the unyieldingness of their delusions. Effort to correct delusions may lead to reactance as patients interpret these efforts as transgressions on their freedom.
Brown et al. (2016)
Examined the association between psychological reactance and HIV-related stigma among women living with HIV. Overall, psychological reactance, opposition and irritability were positively associated with anxiety and depressive symptoms.
