Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Sleeper effect

The sleeper effect refers to a delayed increase in the persuasive impact of a message initially paired with a discounting cue, such as a low-credibility source, where immediate persuasion is suppressed but grows over time as the cue dissociates from the remembered message content. This dissociation occurs when recipients forget or undervalue the cue while retaining the arguments, leading to greater attitude change in delayed assessments compared to immediate ones. First identified in the late 1940s through analyses of World War II propaganda films like the "Why We Fight" series shown to U.S. soldiers, the effect was reported by Carl Hovland and colleagues as emerging opinion shifts favoring the films' messages weeks after exposure despite initial source skepticism. Subsequent refined the conditions under which the sleeper effect manifests, requiring arguments presented before the cue, sufficient from both elements, and a temporal separation allowing cue without argument loss. A of 72 experiments confirmed these parameters, showing the effect's magnitude increases when cues follow arguments and when memory for arguments persists independently of the cue. Early attempts to replicate the absolute form—where low-credibility messages outperform no-message controls over time—often failed, prompting debates on methodological artifacts like statistical or measurement delays. However, the relative sleeper effect, comparing low-credibility to high-credibility conditions, holds under the specified circumstances, distinguishing genuine dissociation from spurious gains. The phenomenon underscores causal mechanisms in , where source credibility's influence wanes through processes rather than inherent message validity, with implications for long-term formation in contexts like or . Despite academic biases potentially inflating effects in unreplicated paradigms, empirical prioritizes conditional validity over claims, cautioning against overgeneralization absent rigorous controls.

Definition and Phenomenon

Core Description

The sleeper effect is a characterized by a delayed increase in the impact of a , particularly when the message is initially accompanied by a cue such as a low-credibility source. In this process, is suppressed immediately after exposure due to the cue's influence, but over time—typically weeks—the cue's negative effect dissipates while the message content retains or gains potency, resulting in stronger at follow-up than at initial measurement. This counterintuitive temporal pattern contrasts with typical forgetting curves in , where persuasive effects usually decay. The effect manifests most reliably under specific conditions: the persuasive arguments must be strong enough to produce substantive influence if unattenuated, the discounting cue must exert an equal but opposite immediate impact to neutralize short-term persuasion, and the cue must be presented in a manner that allows dissociation from the message over time. Empirical demonstrations often involve comparing delayed persuasion scores (e.g., 4-6 weeks post-exposure) against immediate ones, revealing divergence where low-credibility sourced messages outperform no-message controls or high-credibility counterparts at delay. While early observations suggested broad applicability, subsequent research indicates the effect is not universal but emerges when true-false impact parity holds initially, as verified in controlled experiments with political or health advocacy messages. Explanations center on memory dynamics, such as the source cue fading faster than central message arguments, enabling unencumbered recall of content without the biasing association. Meta-analytic reviews confirm modest but positive delayed gains in under conditions, with effect sizes around d=0.20-0.30 in qualifying studies, underscoring its relevance to long-term formation in domains like and campaigns.

Essential Components

The sleeper effect manifests through a specific pattern of dynamics involving a compelling , an associated discounting cue, temporal dissociation, and measurable shifts in attitude influence. Central to the phenomenon is a persuasive containing strong, cogent arguments capable of generating initial attitudinal change if unhindered. This must be explicitly linked to a discounting cue—typically a low-credibility or —that temporarily undermines its impact, resulting in reduced persuasion immediately following exposure compared to messages without such cues. A key temporal element requires a delay between immediate post-exposure and a subsequent delayed , often spanning days to weeks, during which the association between the message content and the discounting cue weakens or is forgotten. This dissociation enables the message's persuasive core to exert greater influence over time, yielding higher agreement or attitude shift in the delayed condition relative to the immediate one, while often converging with or surpassing levels from credible-source controls. For the effect to reliably emerge, the discounting cue must follow presentation of the message arguments rather than precede them, and recipients should possess sufficient cognitive resources or to process the content deeply. Empirical conditions emphasize strong message quality and cue potency to ensure initial suppression followed by recovery, as weaker variants fail to produce the delayed upswing. These components, first articulated in foundational work by Hovland and colleagues, distinguish the sleeper effect from mere persistence of .

Historical Origins

Initial Discovery in WWII Propaganda Studies

The sleeper effect emerged from empirical assessments of U.S. military propaganda during , conducted by the Army's Information and Education Division to evaluate the impact of orientation films on enlisted soldiers' attitudes and morale. These studies, initiated shortly after the attack in , aimed to determine the persuasive efficacy of films produced under the , including Frank Capra's series, which sought to foster support for Allied efforts among troops potentially skeptical of foreign allies. Researchers Carl I. Hovland, Arthur A. Lumsdaine, and Fred Sheffield led key investigations, measuring attitude shifts via questionnaires administered immediately after film viewings and in delayed follow-ups. A pivotal experiment involved screening the 1943 film The Battle of Britain to over 4,000 soldiers, focusing on their perceptions of British aerial capabilities, which many initially doubted due to isolationist sentiments or reports of early RAF setbacks. Post-viewing assessments showed minimal or no attitude change toward greater confidence in British fighting effectiveness, with some groups even exhibiting slight backlash against the overt propagandistic tone. However, in follow-up tests conducted approximately 9 weeks later on a subset of 800 participants, favorable attitudes increased significantly, with statistical analysis revealing a delayed persuasion gain not attributable to ongoing exposure but to retention of the film's arguments decoupled from its source cues. Hovland and colleagues interpreted this pattern as evidence of a "sleeper effect," wherein the persuasive impact of a message from a perceived low-credibility or propagandistic source strengthens over time as recipients forget the discounting cue (e.g., awareness of manipulative intent) while retaining the core content. This finding, detailed in their 1949 volume Experiments on Mass Communication, marked the initial empirical observation of the phenomenon, influencing subsequent persuasion research by highlighting temporal dynamics in source-message interactions rather than assuming uniform immediate effects. The studies' military context underscored practical implications for wartime information campaigns, though later scrutiny noted potential confounds like selective forgetting specific to high-stakes morale-building efforts.

Early Experimental Formulations

Following the observational insights from propaganda analyses, laboratory experiments in the early 1950s provided the first controlled tests of the sleeper effect. In a seminal study, Hovland and Weiss exposed 61 undergraduates to persuasive articles on four topics—anti-histamine drugs, the use of atomic-powered submarines, movie censorship, and the medicinal use of comic books—each attributed to either a high-credibility (e.g., the New England Journal of Biology and Medicine) or a low-credibility (e.g., , the newspaper). Participants completed opinion questionnaires before exposure, immediately after reading the materials, and again after a four-week delay, allowing researchers to track changes in agreement with the message arguments. The results revealed an initial disparity in persuasion: high-credibility sources produced a 23.0% opinion shift toward the advocated position immediately after exposure, compared to just 6.6% for low-credibility sources, reflecting the expected discounting of untrustworthy communicators. Over the four-week interval, however, agreement with high-credibility messages declined by 10.7%, while agreement with low-credibility messages increased by 7.4%, narrowing the gap and demonstrating delayed persuasion from initially resisted content. Source recall also decayed significantly, dropping from 93% immediately post-exposure to around 60-64% after the delay, particularly among those who had initially resisted the low-credibility messages. Hovland and Weiss attributed this pattern to a forgetting hypothesis, positing that the source cue faded from memory faster than the message content, thereby reducing skepticism and allowing latent persuasion to emerge. To differentiate forgetting from other processes, Kelman and Hovland conducted a follow-up experiment in , focusing on whether reinstating at delayed could reverse the effect. Participants received a from a low-credibility (a purported foreign radio broadcast) advocating a on atomic testing, with opinions assessed immediately and after three weeks. In the delayed condition, one group had explicitly reintroduced ("reinstatement" group), while another did not. The non-reinstated group showed increased over time, consistent with the sleeper effect, but the reinstatement group exhibited reduced agreement compared to immediate post-exposure levels, suggesting active dissociation of the from its discounting cue rather than mere . This led to the dissociation hypothesis, which formalized the sleeper effect as arising from a growing separation between remembered message arguments and the forgotten or detached evaluation, rather than complete source oblivion. These formulations established the sleeper effect as a testable construct involving true effects (nonzero from low-credibility sources at delay) and (greater delayed impact without the cue than with it reinstated), setting the stage for subsequent mechanistic debates while emphasizing empirical measurement of opinion change over time. Early replications varied in stimuli (e.g., shifting from topics to claims) but consistently used between-subjects designs to attribute messages randomly and for characteristics.

Explanatory Mechanisms

Forgetting and Source Dissociation

The source-forgetting hypothesis, initially advanced by Hovland, Lumsdaine, and Sheffield in their 1949 analysis of propaganda experiments, posits that the sleeper effect arises as recipients gradually lose memory of a low-credibility source while retaining the persuasive message content. This selective forgetting reduces the initial discounting of the message, permitting its arguments to exert greater influence over delayed periods, such as weeks following exposure. Empirical tests, including follow-up studies with 61 participants exposed to messages from sources like (low credibility) versus the New England Journal of Biology and Medicine (high credibility), revealed immediate persuasion advantages for credible sources (23.0% opinion change) but subsequent gains for noncredible ones after four weeks (+7.4% agreement increase, p < .001). However, these same experiments indicated poorer but not absent of noncredible sources (55.3% after four weeks among initial disagreers), challenging the hypothesis's reliance on complete . Building on these observations, Hovland and Weiss refined the explanation in toward dissociation, where the discounting cue endures in but decouples from the , severing the associative link that once prompted . Unlike pure , dissociation preserves vague source recollection without tying it to content evaluation, enabling the to be assessed on substantive merits alone. A 2004 meta-analysis of 49 studies confirmed this mechanism's viability, finding sleeper effects amplified under high recipient motivation and ability (Cohen's d+ = 0.25, p < .01) and when cues followed messages, conditions fostering associative weakening. Across 11 datasets, greater discounting-cue recall correlated negatively with magnitude (B = -0.01, p < .05), yet reinstatement experiments—where delayed reminders of the reversed gains—supported dissociation over total , as persistent but unlinked cues failed to inhibit influence until reconnected. These processes distinguish from mere memory decay by emphasizing cue-message separation, with meta-analytic (d+ = 0.08 overall) linking reduced cue accessibility (not elimination) to heightened delayed . has since supplanted strict in most interpretations, as source recall often outlasts expectations of wholesale loss, yet both underscore how temporal separation erodes contextual discounting in dynamics.

Differential Decay of Message and Cue

The differential decay hypothesis attributes the sleeper effect to divergent rates of between the core persuasive message and its accompanying discounting cue, such as a low-credibility source attribution. At initial exposure, the message exerts a positive persuasive influence, but the discounting cue generates an opposing effect of comparable magnitude, yielding limited net . Over time, however, the cue's inhibitory impact dissipates more rapidly than the message's facilitative effect, as source details fade from while argument content endures, thereby enhancing overall . This mechanism requires specific structural conditions for to manifest: the cue must typically follow rather than precede the , ensuring the arguments are processed before is introduced, which facilitates greater subsequent . Empirical formulations emphasize that immediate post- must approximate a control condition (no or neutral source) for the delayed divergence to occur, with the cue's decay unlinking it from the retained without altering the 's inherent validity. Proponents, drawing from Hovland's foundational research, argue this decay pattern aligns with general principles where peripheral contextual elements (e.g., source labels) are less rehearsed and thus more prone to than central . Critiques note that while logically coherent, the assumes uniform decay kinetics across individuals and contexts, potentially overlooking moderators like message involvement or retrieval cues that could sustain .

Alternative or Complementary Theories

One complementary framework integrates the sleeper effect with dual-process models of persuasion, such as the (ELM) and the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM). Under ELM, the effect emerges when recipients possess high ability and motivation to process message arguments centrally, particularly if the discounting cue follows the message, allowing argument quality to dominate over time rather than peripheral cues like . Similarly, HSM posits simultaneous systematic processing of message content and reliance on cues, with the sleeper effect manifesting under conditions of sufficient cognitive resources, where initial cue discounting yields to enduring argument evaluation. Another explanatory approach emphasizes constructive judgment processes during delayed attitude assessment. Rather than passive retrieval of stored evaluations, attitudes may be reconstructed at follow-up, influenced by accessible message remnants while prior cue associations fade, potentially amplifying persuasion if message arguments retain salience amid reduced cue interference. This mechanism accounts for variability in the effect, as reconstruction depends on contextual cues and memory accessibility at measurement. Critiques of traditional mechanisms propose alternative interpretations centered on relative rather than absolute changes in . Observed "sleeper" increases from low-credibility sources often reflect dissipation of initial advantages from high-credibility controls, rather than genuine delayed gains; seven replication attempts (N=656) found no statistically significant absolute increases, attributing apparent effects to baseline contrasts or source-content that merely attenuates without elevating message impact. This view challenges and models by highlighting methodological artifacts, such as improper controls, over intrinsic temporal dynamics.

Empirical Support and Evidence

Foundational Experiments

The foundational experiments on the sleeper effect were conducted by Carl I. Hovland and colleagues at , building on observations from propaganda analysis. In their 1949 study published as Experiments on Mass Communication, Hovland, Arthur A. Lumsdaine, and Fred Sheffield analyzed the impact of U.S. orientation films, such as the "" series, on soldiers' attitudes toward wartime enemies like and . These films presented persuasive arguments from sources perceived as potentially biased or low-credibility due to their propagandistic nature. Immediate post-exposure attitude measures showed limited compared to groups, but follow-up assessments weeks later revealed increased , suggesting a delayed "sleeper" increase in message impact as source reservations faded. A more controlled laboratory demonstration followed in Hovland and Walter Weiss's 1951 experiment, "The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness." Participants read persuasive messages on four topics—camouflage in naval warfare, the comparative value of the atomic bomb versus other weapons, the effectiveness of penicillin, and atomic submarines for civilian use—attributed either to high-credibility sources (e.g., Life magazine or The New York Herald Tribune) or low-credibility ones (e.g., Pravda or Izvestia, Soviet publications viewed skeptically by American audiences). Opinion questionnaires were administered immediately after exposure and again after a four-week delay to 400 participants. For high-credibility sources, persuasion remained stable or slightly increased over time. In contrast, low-credibility sources yielded initially weaker persuasion (due to source derogation), but after four weeks, persuasion levels converged with those from high-credibility sources, evidencing the sleeper effect where the message arguments gained traction independent of the discounted cue. These experiments established the basic paradigm: pairing a persuasive message with a cue (e.g., low ), measuring attitudes at immediate and delayed intervals, and observing divergence where true persuasion grows over time for discounted conditions while control or high-credibility conditions stabilize. Hovland and Weiss reported effect sizes varying by topic, with stronger sleepers for arguments recipients initially resisted, such as the atomic bomb's limitations. The studies used between-subjects designs to avoid sensitization, with and control for prior opinions via pre-tests in subsets. While these findings anchored early , they relied on self-reported attitudes and assumed cue as the , later scrutinized in replications.

Meta-Analyses and Replication Efforts

A meta-analysis conducted by Kumkale and Albarracín in 2004 synthesized data from 18 experiments on persuasion judgments and 11 on memory measures, revealing a small but reliable relative sleeper effect whereby delayed persuasion for messages paired with discounting cues (e.g., low source credibility) increased compared to immediate assessments (effect size d = 0.24), though it remained below levels for high-credibility sources. The analysis specified boundary conditions, including cue placement after the message and sufficient delay (typically 1-4 weeks), with no evidence for an absolute sleeper effect where low-credibility persuasion matched high-credibility levels at delay. Memory data supported source dissociation, as recall of arguments persisted while source credibility faded, aligning with dissociation theory over pure forgetting. Replication efforts have yielded mixed results, often failing to produce robust effects but confirming relative changes under controlled conditions. Pratkanis, Greenwald, and colleagues in conducted 16 experiments and a direct replication of Gruder et al.'s 1978 study, concluding no reliable sleeper effect across variations in message quality, delay length (up to 5 weeks), and cue prominence, attributing prior positives to methodological artifacts like demand characteristics. However, they observed relative sleeper effects when cues followed strong messages, suggesting the phenomenon's fragility to procedural details rather than outright nonexistence. Subsequent work, including targeted tests of discounting cue hypotheses, has reinforced that sleeper effects emerge predictably only with post-message cues and memory-based retrieval at delay, but replication rates remain low outside these parameters due to variability in participant involvement and cue salience.

Controversies and Debates

Challenges to Existence and Replication Failures

The sleeper has faced significant skepticism due to inconsistent replication across studies, with early post-World War II experiments often failing to produce reliable evidence of delayed gains despite cues. Hovland and Weiss's 1951 foundational work reported an apparent , but subsequent attempts, such as those by Janis and Feinstein in 1960, yielded results, attributing variability to differences in message content, audience predispositions, and measurement timing. These early non-replications highlighted methodological sensitivities, including inadequate control for baseline persuasion without cues and insufficient delays between exposure and assessment, leading researchers to question the phenomenon's robustness as a general process. Further challenges emerged in the , when Pratkanis and Greenwald's series of experiments demonstrated a "relative" sleeper effect—where discounted messages converged with non-discounted ones over time—but consistently failed to find an "" effect, defined as exceeding immediate post-exposure levels or no-cue controls. They argued that apparent sleepers were artifacts of improper baselines or demand characteristics, concluding the absolute effect lacked empirical support and urging abandonment of the construct in favor of more reliable dynamics like persistence. This distinction fueled debate, as proponents of the relative variant, such as Gruder et al. in 1978, claimed partial validation, yet critics noted that without absolute gains, the did not align with the original dissociation hypothesis of message retention outpacing cue forgetting. Meta-analytic reviews have tempered but not resolved these issues, with Kumkale and Albarracín's 2004 analysis of 72 studies finding small average effects (d = 0.13 for absolute sleepers) only under stringent conditions like strong arguments paired with potent discounting cues, while most prior failures stemmed from weak manipulations. However, the review acknowledged inflating early positives and heterogeneous outcomes across paradigms, reinforcing replication difficulties; for instance, only 22% of included studies showed significant absolute effects. In the broader in , the sleeper effect exemplifies lab-bound phenomena sensitive to procedural variations, with recent direct replications (e.g., attempts) often yielding nulls absent optimized designs, underscoring boundary constraints rather than universal applicability.

Boundary Conditions and Moderators

The sleeper effect manifests under specific boundary conditions, notably requiring a persuasive paired with a cue, such as a low-credibility source, that initially suppresses agreement but later dissociates from the content. Empirical meta-analyses indicate that the effect is negligible without this initial , as high-credibility sources do not produce delayed persuasion gains for strong . For weak , a reverse sleeper effect may occur with credible sources, but the standard effect demands arguments strong enough to exert initial impact despite the cue. Key moderators include the timing of the discounting cue relative to the message: the effect strengthens when the cue (e.g., source ) follows the arguments, facilitating source (Cohen's d+ = 0.24, p < .01), whereas preceding cues yield no significant delayed increase (d+ = -0.06, nonsignificant). Message repetition and recipient factors like high outcome or prior further moderate the effect by enhancing processing ability and , leading to larger delayed under optimal conditions (d+ = 0.25, 95% CI [0.15, 0.36]). Insufficient delay—typically less than several weeks—prevents the effect, as immediate post-exposure measures show suppressed persuasion without subsequent divergence. Dissociation of the from the cue emerges as a critical mechanism moderating , with diminished cue recall over time correlating with greater gains (B = -0.01, p < .05); mere without dissociation does not suffice. Overall, the relative sleeper effect holds modestly across studies (d+ = 0.08, p < .05), but violations, such as low message impact or persistent recall, eliminate it, underscoring the interplay of cue-message linkage and temporal forgetting.

Applications and Extensions

Political and Propaganda Contexts

The sleeper effect has been applied to understand persuasion dynamics in political campaigns, particularly through negative advertising, where initially resisted attacks on opponents gain influence as source attributions weaken over time. A 1999 experimental study exposed participants to simulated political ads, finding evidence of both order-driven sleeper effects—where early negative ads increased in impact relative to later ones—and credibility-driven effects, as low-credibility attacks from partisan sources lost their discounting cue, leading to greater attitude shifts toward the targeted candidate by election-day simulations. This challenges attacked candidates to respond promptly, as delayed rebuttals may fail to counteract accumulating persuasion from forgotten source flaws. In propaganda contexts, the phenomenon originated from efforts to bolster U.S. soldiers' morale via films and messages, where low-credibility pro-Allied content initially underperformed but showed delayed opinion shifts as source skepticism dissipated, per foundational analyses by Hovland and colleagues in 1949. Modern applications extend to high-volume campaigns, such as Russia's "firehose of falsehood" model, which floods audiences with inconsistent, low-credibility narratives; here, the sleeper effect posits that repeated exposure erodes initial resistance, allowing weaker messages to embed without tied source dismissal, enhancing long-term acceptance despite verifiable inaccuracies. Empirical support for this in propaganda remains indirect, drawing from meta-analytic reviews confirming source-forgetting mechanisms under repetition and delay, though boundary conditions like audience prior beliefs moderate outcomes.

Advertising, Media, and Consumer Behavior

In , the sleeper effect manifests when persuasive , such as product claims, initially discounted due to low (e.g., a perceived as biased), gain influence over time as the discounting cue fades from while the content persists. Early experimental tests in the examined this in commercial contexts, finding that toward advertised brands could intensify after delays of one to three weeks under conditions of strong arguments paired with non-credible sources, though effects were modest and required specific message-cue separation. Contemporary research has revisited the phenomenon in , providing empirical support via the favorable differential forgetting , where true arguments are remembered better than false cues. A 2015 experiment exposed participants to mock advertisements for a fictitious , manipulating (high vs. low) and strength; results showed initial to low-credibility ads dissipating after a two-week delay, with levels converging to or exceeding those of high-credibility conditions, particularly for strong arguments. This suggests advertisers might strategically use subtle or less trusted channels for robust claims, anticipating delayed efficacy as consumers forget source reservations. In behavior, the sleeper effect influences delayed purchase intentions and brand attitudes, especially in advertising where rivals' weaknesses are highlighted by potentially suspect sources. Modeling studies indicate that in oligopolistic markets, firms can leverage sleeper effects by timing campaigns to exploit , leading to asymmetric gains over periods of months as initial wanes. However, boundary conditions apply: effects are stronger for high-involvement products and when cues are explicitly dissociated from arguments, but weak or absent in low-attention media exposures where full rarely occurs. Meta-analytic evidence from studies, applicable to contexts, confirms sleeper effects emerge reliably only when initial is low due to cues and message retention is high, with average delayed gains of 0.20 standard deviations in attitude scores across experiments. Media applications extend to sponsored content and , where transient credibility doubts (e.g., undisclosed affiliations) may yield sleeper-like boosts in endorsement over time. Yet, rapid dissemination often reinforces cues via repetition, mitigating the effect compared to traditional or broadcast with natural delays.

Recent Research Directions

Digital Media and Social Platforms

A 2023 experimental examined the sleeper effect in the context of disseminated via platforms, simulating posts about workplace safety measures. Researchers exposed 324 white-collar workers ( age 50.04 years, 61% ) to three types of posts—real news, real news with a discounting cue indicating unreliability, and —in a within-participants conducted between September and December 2021. Participants completed immediate posttests on and , followed by a 1-week delayed posttest incorporating memory recall. Key findings revealed heightened susceptibility to at the delayed posttest, with participants exhibiting stronger belief in and more positive general impressions of the over time (e.g., F(1,97)=23.63, p<0.000 for belief in ; F(1,190)=232.56, p<0.000 for non-belief conditions). content was recalled more accurately than real news (F(2,293)=36.90, p<0.000), while memory remained consistent across conditions (p=n.s.), supporting a where message content persists independently of cues. This pattern aligns with the sleeper effect mechanism, wherein the persuasive impact of low-credibility messages grows as discounting fades from , exacerbating persistence on platforms like . The study underscores vulnerabilities even among educated professionals, implying that social media algorithms amplifying initial exposure may compound delayed effects through repeated, source-detached retrievals in users' feeds. Subsequent research has linked similar dynamics to online corrections, where initial disbelief in can erode over time, potentially reactivating "sleeper" influences in digital networks without sustained source reminders. These findings highlight the need for platform-level interventions, such as persistent source labeling, to mitigate long-term from unverified .

Novel Variants and Emerging Findings

Recent research has identified variants of the sleeper effect diverging from the traditional model of strong messages discounted by low-credibility sources. One novel form occurs with weak arguments presented by credible communicators, where persuasion increases over delayed assessments when attention emphasizes the source; experiments showed mean persuasion shifts of 0.40 (p < 0.01) mediated by biased recall of source attributes aligning with the message. This mechanism relies on source derogation fading while positive source associations persist, differing from classical dissociation of negative cues. In digital contexts, emerging evidence documents sleeper effects for on social platforms. A 2021 study with 324 participants exposed to fabricated posts on workplace safety found delayed increases in belief after one week, with impressions rising from 5.85 to 6.33 in conditions (better message recall without source retention), underscoring misinformation's temporal persistence via processes. Another variant, termed the "sleeper effect from below," arises in online news where low-credibility sources paired with positive user comments boost long-term persuasiveness. A 2018 experiment tracking attitudes over two weeks revealed greater delayed shifts under this combination versus high-credibility baselines, as comments mitigate initial discounting and sustain argument impact. These findings highlight user-generated elements as moderators amplifying delayed effects in .

References

  1. [1]
    The sleeper effect in persuasion: a meta-analytic review - PubMed
    The sleeper effect means people are less persuaded immediately after a message with a discounting cue, but more persuaded later.
  2. [2]
    The Sleeper Effect in Persuasion: A Meta-Analytic Review - PMC
    The sleeper effect occurs when people are less persuaded immediately after a message with a noncredible source, but more persuaded later.
  3. [3]
    [PDF] The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness
    Since the "sleeper effect" occurs among the group which initially disagrees with an unreliable source (but subsequently comes to agree with it), it is ...
  4. [4]
    [PDF] IS IT TIME TO LAY THE SLEEPER EFFECT TO REST? '
    The "sleeper effect" has been defined as a delayed increase in the persuasive impact of a communication from a source low in credibility. This effect failed.Missing: origin | Show results with:origin<|separator|>
  5. [5]
    The Sleeper Effect in Persuasion: A Meta-Analytic Review.
    Findings from this meta-analysis indicate that recipients of discounting cues were more persuaded over time when the message arguments and the cue had a strong ...
  6. [6]
    How people can become persuaded by weak messages presented ...
    The present research introduces a new kind of sleeper effect denoting increases in persuasion for weak messages associated with credible sources.
  7. [7]
    Sleeper Effect - Kleinnijenhuis - Major Reference Works
    Sep 9, 2020 · A sleeper effect of messages from low-credibility sources was established in the pioneering work of Carl Hovland and colleagues. Such an ...Missing: origin | Show results with:origin
  8. [8]
    [PDF] In Search of Reliable Persuasion Effects: III. The Sleeper Effect is ...
    The sleeper effect in persuasion is a delayed increase in the impact of a message that is accompanied by a discounting cue. Despite a long history, ...
  9. [9]
    How people can become persuaded by weak messages presented ...
    The present research introduces a new kind of sleeper effect denoting increases in persuasion for weak messages associated with credible sources.
  10. [10]
    Sleeper Effect - Encyclopedia of Social Psychology
    A sleeper effect in persuasion is a delayed increase in the impact of a persuasive message. In other words, a sleeper effect occurs when a communication ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Experiments on Mass Communication - Gwern.net
    Jan 17, 2021 · Information and Education Division . The first study of this type was done soon after Pearl Harbor to provide data on the effective ness of ...
  12. [12]
    A "sleeper" effect in opinion change.
    In the study reported, a sleeper effect is demonstrated as a consequent of the variation of experimental treatments.
  13. [13]
    In search of reliable persuasion effects: III. The sleeper effect is dead ...
    According to the differential decay interpretation, a sleeper effect occurs when message and discounting cue have opposite and near-equal immediate impacts ...
  14. [14]
    (PDF) Empirical tests of the absolute sleeper effect predicted from ...
    Sep 29, 2025 · ... The sleeper effect is defined as a real influence generated through memory impact in a situation where persuasiveness grew over time as a ...Missing: evidence | Show results with:evidence
  15. [15]
    The Sleeper Effect _An Awakening - jstor
    The genesis of the sleeper effect lies in Hovland, Lumsdaine, and. Sheffield's pioneering investigation of the effects of a wartime pro- paganda film. They ...Missing: WWII | Show results with:WWII<|separator|>
  16. [16]
    In search of reliable persuasion effects: III. The sleeper effect is dead
    The sleeper effect in persuasion is a delayed increase in the impact of a message that is accompanied by a discounting cue. Despite a long history, ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  17. [17]
    Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? What does “failure ...
    A replication crisis in psychology occurs when replicating past study findings often fails, raising questions about false positives and the need for multiple ...
  18. [18]
    The Sleeper Effect and Negative Political Advertising
    May 31, 2013 · Our documentation of both an order-driven and a credibility-driven sleeper effect poses strategic challenges for those candidates who are ...
  19. [19]
    The Russian "Firehose of Falsehood" Propaganda Model - RAND
    Jul 11, 2016 · The following are a few examples from the literature: In a phenomenon known as the “sleeper effect,” low-credibility sources manifest greater ...
  20. [20]
    Does the “Sleeper Effect” Apply to Advertising? - Sage Journals
    Under certain conditions, the change in attitude produced by a communication may be greater after a delay than immediately after exposure to the communication.
  21. [21]
    Redressing the Sleeper Effect: Evidence for the Favorable ...
    Nov 9, 2015 · A counterintuitive effect, called the sleeper effect, predicts that attitudes toward a persuasive message have the potential to increase in ...
  22. [22]
    The sleeper effect of comparative advertising in oligopolistic markets
    This research deals with comparative advertising strategies of firms in an oligopolistic market in the presence of the sleeper effect.
  23. [23]
    Fake News and the Sleeper Effect in Social Media Posts
    Jul 17, 2023 · In summary, we found an association between fake news perception and the sleeper effect among white-collar workers over time. Recent research ...
  24. [24]
    What is unique about acceptance and correction of misinformation ...
    May 29, 2024 · A sleeper effect predicts that even if a correction is initially effective, the discounted belief can reemerge over time. Work on the sleeper ...<|separator|>
  25. [25]
    Fake News and the Sleeper Effect in Social Media Posts
    Jul 17, 2023 · In summary, we found an association between fake news perception and the sleeper effect among white-collar workers over time. Recent research ...