“Inside your Mind”: What Neuroscience Tells Us about Persuasive Communication and Information Sharing

Meet Ella, a 17-year-old high school student. On a Sunday morning, Ella encounters a Facebook post about an upcoming local climate rally. Ella pauses, she feels a bit hesitant whether or not to share this information on her page. What makes her do so and what stops her? What exactly is going on in her mind? And is there evidence allowing us to peep into, even partially, such complex thought processes that are hidden behind each of the simple “share” button-clicks?

Communication neuroscience is here to help. This growing field makes use of neuroscientific methods to answer communication science questions. One commonly used neuroscientific method is fMRI, standing for “functional magnetic resonance imaging” [1]. The name may sound perplexing, but it can be explained with simpler words. fMRI measures small changes within the blood flow of brain regions. Why blood flow? Because blood carries oxygen, and that is what our brain needs to function. When a brain region is working hard on a task (e.g., thinking of sharing), it uses more oxygen, which can be tracked with fMRI. The signal then allows researchers to pinpoint the regions that are becoming more active in thinking about sharing.

For example, one study [2] let participants read abstracts of newspaper articles and report how much they wanted to share them with others while going through fMRI. Looking at the neural activity, the authors found that when sharing intention is higher, the neural activity was also higher in regions commonly implicated in self-related thoughts, and social cognition. What does this mean? Let us return to Ella’s story. When seeing the climate rally post, Ella would probably have many thoughts: Does it matter to me? Or my friends? Would my friends think I’m smart or responsible for sharing this? Ella’s brain is juggling with so many questions, not just whether she agrees with the information at hand, but also how much this information matters for her close friends and loved ones. Together, these self and social-related concerns would give rise to her final sharing decision.

To conclude, Ella’s example showcases how our mind handles persuasive messages, and that communication neuroscience allows us to take a peek into what is happening in our brain – the notoriously complex ``black box’’. Importantly, this helps to validate that the hypothesized psychological processes influencing sharing decisions (i.e. thinking about self and others) are indeed biologically grounded and trackable. Maybe the next time a climate advocacy group launches a campaign to reach more, they could confidently use these insights to create more effective messages. For example, instead of simply stating, “Climate change is real,” they could craft a message resonating with personal and social values, like:

"Taking action on climate change helps protect the future for you and your loved ones.  Think about the people around you. By joining the rally, you are not only being responsible, but also helping to ensure a healthier planet for everyone—for us, our loved ones, and future generations."

Xinyao Zhang is a PhD candidate at the Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR) at the University of Amsterdam. Her research project is part of the Research Priority Area Polarisation, with a focus on individual-level behaviors that may give rise to political polarisation online. The project involves a wide range of methodologies, including survey experiments and physiological measures such as neuroimaging.

References

[1] Harmon-Jones, E., & Beer, J. S. (2009). Methods in social neuroscience. Guilford Press eBooks. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BA88835950 

[2] Baek, E. C., Scholz, C., O’Donnell, M. B., & Falk, E. B. (2017). The value of sharing information: a neural account of information transmission. Psychological Science, 28(7), 851–861. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617695073