When guilt works: a comprehensive meta-analysis of guilt appeals

Guilt appeals are widely used as a persuasive approach in various areas of practice. However, the strength and direction of the persuasive effects of guilt appeals are mixed, which could be influenced by theoretical and methodological factors.

The present study is a comprehensive meta-analysis of 26 studies using a random-effects model to assess the persuasive effects of guilt appeals. In total, 127 effect sizes from seven types of persuasive outcomes (i.e., guilt, attitude, behavior, behavioral intention, non-guilt emotions, motivation, and cognition) were calculated based on 7,512 participants.

The analysis showed a small effect size of guilt appeals [g = 0.19, 95% CI (0.10, 0.28)]. The effect of guilt appeals was moderated by the theoretical factors related to appraisal and coping of guilt arousal, including attributed responsibility, controllability and stability of the causal factors, the proximity of perceiver-victim relationship, recommendation of reparative behaviors, and different outcome types. The effect was also associated with methods used in different studies.

Overall, the findings demonstrated the persuasive effects of guilt appeals, but theoretical and methodological factors should be considered in the design and testing of guilt appeals. We also discussed the practical implications of the findings.