scispace - formally typeset
Z

Zakary L. Tormala

Researcher at Stanford University

Publications -  90
Citations -  8119

Zakary L. Tormala is an academic researcher from Stanford University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Persuasion & Certainty. The author has an hindex of 39, co-authored 89 publications receiving 7216 citations. Previous affiliations of Zakary L. Tormala include Indiana University & Ohio State University.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Mediation Analysis in Social Psychology: Current Practices and New Recommendations

TL;DR: The authors argue that the focus in mediation analysis should be shifted towards assessing the magnitude and significance of indirect effects, arguing that the collective evidence raises considerable concern that focusing on the significance between the independent and dependent variables is unjustified and can impair theory development and testing.
Journal ArticleDOI

Thought confidence as a determinant of persuasion: the self-validation hypothesis.

TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the possibility that another meta-cognitive aspect of thinking is also important, i.e., the degree of confidence people have in their own thoughts.
Journal ArticleDOI

What doesn't kill me makes me stronger: the effects of resisting persuasion on attitude certainty.

TL;DR: A metacognitive framework for understanding resistance to persuasion is proposed, which suggests that when people perceive their own resistance, they form inferences about their attitudes that adjust for situational factors.
Journal ArticleDOI

Implicit Ambivalence From Attitude Change: An Exploration of the PAST Model

TL;DR: The present research suggests that when attitudes change, the old attitude can remain in memory and influence subsequent behavior.
Journal ArticleDOI

Source Credibility and Attitude Certainty: A Metacognitive Analysis of Resistance to Persuasion

TL;DR: The authors explored the role of source credibility in determining when resistance to persuasion occurs and found that when participants counterargued this message, they became more certain of their attitudes, but only when it came from a source with high expertise.