We go into a state of opposition when we perceive our freedoms as being threatened – this is the basic claim of Brehm’s (1966) Psychological Reactance Theory. This reaction typically occurs in response to prescriptive messages that seem to limit personal freedom, whether they concern public health directives, environmental campaigns, or political messaging. Such communications can inadvertently prompt defensive behaviors, including ignoring advice or acting contrary to it.
Recent research highlights that reactance poses a significant challenge in addressing complex societal issues—often referred to as ‚wicked problems’—like climate change, which demand widespread cooperation and collective action. These problems are multifaceted and lack simple solutions, making effective communication crucial. By understanding the specific triggers of negative reactions to certain messages, we can refine our communication strategies to minimize resistance and foster greater cooperation.
In the digital realm, where information travels at the speed of light and emotions can escalate just as quickly, we are witnessing the birth of a new kind of reactance.
This isn’t just about resistance to change—it’s about the rapidity and collectiveness of pushback against perceived restrictions.
What are Wicked Problems?
Wicked problems are issues that are complex, interconnected, and difficult to solve. They do not have clear solutions and often involve conflicting interests. Examples include climate change, public health crises, and global migration challenges. These problems require cooperation across different sectors of society, and the communication around them is especially sensitive to resistance and opposition.
Previous models, such as the intertwined model proposed by Dillard and Shen (2005), were groundbreaking in their time and provided essential insights into how people experience reactance as a combination of anger and negative thoughts.
However, these models left some theoretical areas unclear, particularly regarding how emotions and thoughts interact.
Our Psychological Reactance Process Model (PRPM) builds upon this groundwork, offering a more deeper understanding of reactance’s ‚intertwined core‘ by distinguishing between the emotional and cognitive processes that drive resistance.
Reactance involves more than simply rejecting a message; it encompasses the emotional response elicited when people’s choices are constrained, often characterized by feelings of anger.
We argue that this new digital reality necessitates a revised reactance model, emerging from the intersection of social psychology and communication sciences. This approach must recognize both the media-driven reality and the underlying emotional processes that fuel reactance motivation.
Cognitive Appraisal Theory helps us understand how people evaluate such situations and explains why individuals may react in diverse ways.
For example, if a message advocating climate action is perceived as unfairly limiting personal choices, it may provoke intense feelings of anger, which then fuel resistance. By understanding reactance as an emotional process, we can better identify the specific triggers of these defensive behaviors and how they unfold.
Cognitive Appraisal Theory (CAT) is a psychological framework for understanding how emotions arise from different sets of appraisals—such as control, responsibility, certainty, or relevance. For example, having control may lead to anger, while lack of control can result in anxiety. CAT explains why people may experience different emotions in similar situations based on their evaluations.
The Psychological Reactance Process Model (PRPM) Explained
The Psychological Reactance Process Model (PRPM) provides insight into how individuals respond when their freedom is perceived as threatened, incorporating both emotional and cognitive processes. This model progresses through several key dimensions that shape the overall experience and resulting behaviors associated with reactance. It was initially developed during the dissertation work of Katharina Hajek (will be linked here after publication) and was significantly expanded through collaborative theoretical and empirical efforts with Lara Kobilke in the bidt-project described here.
As the dissertation is still in progress and the theory paper is currently being submitted, we present a preliminary model in graphical form, with a full description of the model to follow. As soon as all relevant papers are published, we add the final model.
The Psychological Reactance Process Model Explained
The Appraisal Dimension: Multilevel Evaluation
The appraisal dimension is the starting point of the reactance process. It involves a comprehensive assessment of the perceived threat to one’s freedom and consists of two distinct sub-appraisal sets:
Evaluating the freedom restriction, identifying someone responsible, assessing the freedom’s relevance to personal goals. This involves evaluating how much the perceived freedom is restricted. Assessing one’s capability to respond to the perceived freedom threat.
Reactance Motivation:
Driving the Reaction
The second stage steers the visible and/or measurable reaction. This dimension captures the motivational energy that propels the individual towards specific behaviors in the emotivational component which is added by cognitive evaluations that steer a strategy for handling the situation.
Finally, reactance is also a physiological experience, coming along a higher heart-rate, a neurological footprint and nonverbal expressions.
Reactance Behavior: From Avoidance to Approach
Different to previous models, we conceptualize reactance behavior as ranging from avoidance (e.g., withdrawing from the message or situation) to approach (e.g., actively opposing or counterarguing against the perceived limitation); both dedicated to serve the individual in coping with the situation.
Importantly, these behaviors can be either more emotionally driven, or more cognitively driven where behaviors are the result of strategic reasoning, such as crafting a counterargument or rationalizing one’s stance.
Applications of the Model
The PRPM helps researchers investigate specific types of reactance and the dynamic processes that lead to resistance behaviors. By breaking down reactance into these detailed components, the model enables a deeper understanding of why different people respond in different ways to the same message and how specific characteristics of messages—such as tone or framing—can influence the type of resistance triggered.
This approach is valuable for communicators tackling „wicked problems.“ It offers practical insights into how to craft messages that minimize resistance, effectively navigate the emotional and cognitive triggers of reactance, and encourage constructive engagement rather than defensive opposition.
The full paper will be published here after publication