9
H1: Strength of the threat to freedom is directly correlated with magnitude of reactance.
Trait reactance proneness. Although reactance was initially conceived as situation
specific (Brehm, 1966; Wicklund, 1974), Brehm and Brehm (1981) recognized that individuals
may vary in their trait proneness to reactance arousal. Subsequently, several scholars developed
scales to measure persons’ transituational propensity to experience reactance (Dowd, Hughs,
Brockbank, & Halpain, 1988; Hong, 1992; Hong & Faedda, 1996; Hong & Page, 1989; Merz,
1983). Of the available options, Hong’s 14-item scale shows the best conceptual correspondence
with the reactance construct and the most favorable psychometric properties. In line with the
simple notion that persons high in trait reactance should be more prone to experience reactance
in response to a persuasive message, we hypothesized that:
H2: Trait reactance proneness is directly correlated with magnitude of reactance
.
The Combined Effects of Threat and Proneness. It is difficult to derive an unequivocal
hypothesis regarding the combined impact of threat and trait proneness on the magnitude of
reactance. To be sure, main effects-only findings would pose no threat to the theory. However,
an interaction between the two antecedents might also be viewed as compatible with the theory
assuming that it was ordinal in form. For example, an interaction in which person high in trait
proneness showed greater reactivity to a strong threat than weak threat seems quite plausible.
Still, it is not clear that the theory demands such a pattern of data. Lacking clear guidance from
the theory, we asked simply:
RQ3: Is there an interaction between threat and reactance proneness on magnitude of
reactance arousal? And, if so, what is the form of that interaction?
Modeling the Reactance Process
As noted earlier, reactance theory specifies a process in which antecedents of reactance
Convention