Niu Minxue, Mower Provost Emily, Jurgens David, Gelman Susan A, Kross Ethan, Orvell Ariana
Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
School of Information, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 8;15(1):1347. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-83440-1.
Persuasion plays a crucial role in human communication. Yet, convincing someone to change their mind is often challenging. Here, we demonstrate that a subtle linguistic device, generic-you (i.e., "you" that refers to people in general, e.g., "You win some, you lose some"), is associated with successfully shifting people's pre-existing views in a naturalistic context. Leveraging Large Language Models, we conducted a preregistered study using a large ([Formula: see text] = 204,120) online debate dataset. Every use of generic-you in an argument was associated with an up to 14% percent increase in the odds of successful persuasion. These findings underscore the need to distinguish between the specific and generic uses of "you" in large-scale linguistic analyses, an aspect that has been overlooked in the literature. The robust association between generic-you and persuasion persisted with the inclusion of various covariates, and above and beyond other pronouns (i.e., specific-you, I or we). However, these findings do not imply causality. In Supplementary Experiment 2, arguments with generic-you (vs. first-person singular pronouns, e.g., I) were rated as more persuasive by open-minded individuals. In Supplementary Experiment 3, generic-you (vs. specific-you) arguments did not differentially predict attitude change. We discuss explanations for these results, including differential mechanisms, boundary conditions, and the possibility that people intuitively draw on generic-you when expressing more persuasive ideas. Together, these findings add to a growing literature on the interpersonal implications of broadening one's perspective via a subtle shift in language, while motivating future research on contextual and individual differences that may moderate these effects.
说服在人际交流中起着至关重要的作用。然而，要说服某人改变主意往往具有挑战性。在此，我们证明了一种微妙的语言手段——泛指的“你”（即指代一般人的“你”，例如“有得必有失”）——在自然情境中与成功改变人们预先存在的观点相关联。利用大语言模型，我们使用一个大型（[公式：见正文] = 204,120）在线辩论数据集进行了一项预注册研究。在一个论点中每使用一次泛指的“你”，成功说服的几率就会增加高达14%。这些发现强调了在大规模语言分析中区分“你”的特定用法和泛指用法的必要性，而这一点在文献中一直被忽视。无论纳入各种协变量，还是在考虑其他代词（即特定的“你”、“我”或“我们”）之后，泛指的“你”与说服之间的稳健关联依然存在。然而，这些发现并不意味着存在因果关系。在补充实验2中，使用泛指的“你”（与第一人称单数代词，例如“我”相比）的论点被思想开放的个体评为更具说服力。在补充实验3中，使用泛指的“你”（与特定的“你”相比）的论点并不能差异预测态度的改变。我们讨论了这些结果的解释，包括不同的机制、边界条件，以及人们在表达更有说服力的想法时直观地使用泛指的“你”的可能性。总之，这些发现为关于通过语言的微妙转变拓宽视角的人际影响的不断增长的文献增添了内容，同时激发了对可能调节这些影响的情境和个体差异的未来研究。
