Freedom-threatening messages can prompt anger and counterargument.
Well supportedSeveral studies or meta-analyses point the same way.
Example
Editorial example: allow trying, deciding later or closing rather than demanding registration.
Why it works
Rains’s meta-analysis examines reactance through anger and negative cognitions, distinguishing pressure to comply from informed choice.
On the web
Explain required actions and make optional actions easy to decline. Monitor complaints and mistaken consent, not refusal alone.
When it backfires
Persuasion research does not show that polite wording solves coercion. Users need genuine control.
Sources
Meta-analytically examines reactance models involving anger and negative cognitions.
Rains, S. A. (2013). The Nature of Psychological Reactance Revisited: A Meta-Analytic Review. Human Communication Research, 39, 47–73. Open source