ABSTRACT

This study analyzed the influence of rhetoric in the endorsement text on the willingness of the crowd to participate in citizen science projects. Four categories of endorsers were studied: professors, students, industrial researchers, and amateur researchers. Using 1243 endorsement texts from 543 citizen science projects as the corpus, the effects of the standalone techniques (ethos, pathos, and logos) and mixed-rhetoric techniques of persuasion were examined empirically. The results informed that pathos and logos had significant advantages over ethos. Taking a mixed-rhetoric approach to the endorsement text with a mix of pathos (55%) and logos (45%) maximized the appeal of citizen science projects, and the influence of this approach had an inverted U-shaped effect. On the identity of the endorsers, the professors, students, and amateur researchers shared a similar rhetorical approach, while the industrial researchers shared another. However, from the influence of endorsement rhetorical strategies, the impact of amateur researchers was consistent with that of the industrial researchers (both pathos and logos were positive); and professors (only logos was positive) and students (only pathos was positive) reveal some differences. Finally, endorsement rhetoric strategies exerted a greater influence on the humanities and social science projects than on the natural science projects.

摘要

本研究分析了背书文本中的修辞对人群参与公民科学项目意愿的影响。研究了四类认可者：教授、学生、工业研究人员和业余研究人员。使用来自 543 个公民科学项目的 1243 篇背书文本作为语料库，对独立技术（精神、情感和标志）和混合修辞说服技术的效果进行了实证检验。结果表明，悲情和标志比精神具有显着的优势。对背书文本采取混合修辞方式，将悲情（55%）和标志（45%）混合在一起，最大限度地提高了公民科学项目的吸引力，这种方法的影响力产生了倒U形效应。关于代言人的身份，教授、学生，业余研究人员采用了类似的修辞方法，而工业研究人员则采用了另一种方法。但从背书修辞策略的影响来看，业余研究者与产业研究者的影响是一致的（悲情和标识都是积极的）；教授（只有徽标是积极的）和学生（只有悲伤是积极的）揭示了一些差异。最后，背书修辞策略对人文社会科学项目的影响力大于对自然科学项目的影响力。业余研究人员的影响与工业研究人员的影响一致（悲情和标志都是积极的）；教授（只有徽标是积极的）和学生（只有悲伤是积极的）揭示了一些差异。最后，背书修辞策略对人文社会科学项目的影响力大于对自然科学项目的影响力。业余研究人员的影响与工业研究人员的影响一致（悲情和标志都是积极的）；教授（只有徽标是积极的）和学生（只有悲伤是积极的）揭示了一些差异。最后，背书修辞策略对人文社会科学项目的影响力大于对自然科学项目的影响力。