Responses to Position-Disconfirming Meta-Advice in the Context of Conflicting Vs. Consistent Co-Presenting Messages: The Role of Reactance and Perceived Norms

Advice is a vital form of interpersonal influence, and some advice concerns advising others (i.e., meta-advice). In today’s competitive information environment, individuals often encounter both recommendations that support their stance and those that challenge it. Drawing on psychological reactance and normative influence theories, this study examines how people respond to position-disconfirming meta-advice when it is presented in different message contexts—either paired with another position-disconfirming message (consistent) or with a position-confirming message (conflicting). In an experiment, U.S. participants who were either pro- or anti-advising others to get vaccinated received position-disconfirming meta-advice under consistent or conflicting conditions. Results revealed two countervailing effects: pairing position-disconfirming with position-confirming meta-advice mitigated reactance, leading to more favorable responses to the position-disconfirming message, but it also lowered perceived norms, which in turn undermined favorable responses. These findings illuminate how context shapes responses to position-disconfirming meta-advice, with theoretical and practical implications for interpersonal influence in multi-message environments.