Cited by 272Psychology of Social InfluenceLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisRhetoric and Communication Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of rhetorical questions on persuasion: A cognitive response analysis.

Petty, Richard E., Cacioppo, John T., Heesacker, Martin·1981·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.40.3.432

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 21 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–271 of 271

Metadata

Authors
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Heesacker, M.
Affiliations
University of Missouri (US)
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
1981-03
Volume
40
Issue
3
Pages
432-440
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2088131499
Cited by
272
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 3
FWCI
24.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychology of Social Influence
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Rhetoric and Communication Studies
Keywords
rhetorical questions, persuasion, cognitive responses, argumentation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review