English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The current research used the contexts of U.S. presidential debates andnegotiations to examine whether matching the linguistic style of an opponent ina two-party exchange affects the reactions of third-party observers. Buildingoff communication accommodation theory (CAT), interaction alignment theory(IAT), and processing fluency, we propose that language style matching (LSM)will improve subsequent third-party evaluations because matching an opponent'slinguistic style reflects greater perspective taking and will make one'sarguments easier to process. In contrast, research on status inferencespredicts that LSM will negatively impact third-party evaluations because LSMimplies followership. We conduct two studies to test these competinghypotheses. Study 1 analyzed transcripts of U.S. presidential debates between1976 and 2012 and found that candidates who matched their opponent's linguisticstyle increased their standing in the polls. Study 2 demonstrated a causalrelationship between LSM and third-party observer evaluations using negotiationtranscripts.

Mimicry Is Presidential: Linguistic Style Matching in Presidential Debates and Improved Polling Numbers