LibraryMyths: claims about copy and persuasion not to rely onv6 · Updated Report

Myths: claims about copy and persuasion not to rely on

Status: canonical list for this organization; the Research log holds its passes. Each entry has a verdict and its evidence. Before citing a memorable number or a named effect in a principle, brief or page, check it here. Claims about mentioning AI and its legal floor are in the do-not-rely-on list of the note on mentioning AI. Verdicts: failed (a preregistered replication or a direct measurement found no effect, or the data were fabricated), overgeneralized (real under narrow conditions, quoted as a law), misattributed (credited to the wrong source), unsourced, misapplied (true for something else), unlawful (prohibited toward consumers under the cited law, whatever its effect). A phrase after a verdict limits its scope.

Psychology

ClaimVerdictEvidence
Hard-to-read text makes people think harder and solve problems betterfailed17 pooled experiments found no effect (Meyer et al. 2015). Easy text reads as more credible and more true.
Ask early, because users run out of willpower (ego depletion)failed23 labs, N 2,141, d 0.04 (Hagger et al. 2016).
Confident body language in the hero image changes behaviour (power posing)failedFailed replication; the lead author no longer believes the effect (Ranehill et al. 2015, Carney).
Subtle background images or words steer choices (social priming)failedFlag and currency priming did not replicate in Many Labs (Klein et al. 2014); Kahneman wrote that he "placed too much faith in underpowered studies" (Kahneman 2017).
More choice always kills conversion (the jam study as law)overgeneralizedMeta-analytic mean effect about zero; overload appears only with complex sets, hard tasks, unclear preferences or time pressure (Scheibehenne 2010, Chernev 2015).
A decoy plan reliably pushes buyers to the target (the Economist example)overgeneralizedThe example is an unpublished classroom demo; 91 attempts produced only 11 reliable effects, and with verbal or pictorial descriptions the effect fell to chance (Yang and Lynn 2014; Frederick et al. 2014).
Signing at the top of a form makes people honestfailedData fabricated; paper retracted (Data Colada 98).
Anything resting only on Dan Ariely's researchfailedTwo retractions (2021, 2026) and two expressions of concern (Ariely credibility).
Losses loom twice as large, so always frame as a lossovergeneralizedAverage loss aversion about 2 in risky choice, but smaller for small stakes and experienced buyers, and contested (loss aversion). Test gain against loss framing.
Making people feel short of money or time changes how they decide (scarcity mindset priming)failed4 of the 18 originally significant studies replicated, and the original authors dispute the audit (O'Donnell et al. 2021). These studies concern lacking resources, not product scarcity cues: real, stated limits are fine; fake ones are unlawful.
"Be a [noun]" identity wording guarantees a liftfailedThe "be a voter" effect failed a large field test (Gerber et al. 2016).
Nudges reliably workovergeneralizedAfter publication-bias correction information and assistance nudges show about zero; defaults remain strong in their own meta-analysis (Maier 2022, Jachimowicz 2019).
The Hook model and the Fogg model are validated scienceovergeneralizedUseful checklists, not tested predictive theories (Fogg, Eyal).
People trust algorithms more than people, so lead with AI (algorithm appreciation)overgeneralizedAppreciation appears only when AI seems more capable and personalization is unnecessary; otherwise people show aversion (Qin et al. 2025). It fades with expertise and personal stakes (do not rely on).
Fake countdowns, fake stock, unverified reviews or invented "was" prices are clever growth tacticsunlawfulProhibited or regulated toward consumers in Germany: UWG annex numbers 7 (false claim that an offer is available only for a very limited time), 23b and 23c (unverified and fake reviews); section 5 UWG on false statements about availability, price advantages and price, which presumes a reduction misleading when the earlier price was charged only briefly; section 11 PAngV for price reductions on goods (legal context, not legal advice; https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/uwg_2004/__5.html, https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/uwg_2004/anhang.html and https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/pangv_2022/__11.html, read 29 October 2026).

Web reading and testing

ClaimVerdictEvidence
People have an eight-second attention span, shorter than a goldfishunsourcedCommonly traced to a 2015 Microsoft Canada marketing report that cited a secondary stats site; no study measures attention span as one number, and the claim has no primary scientific source.
Visuals are processed 60,000 times faster than textunsourcedNo primary source located.
Communication is 7 percent words, 38 percent tone, 55 percent body languagemisappliedMehrabian: the numbers apply only to communicating feelings and attitudes; "Unless a communicator is talking about their feelings or attitudes, these equations are not applicable" (http://www.kaaj.com/psych/smorder.html).
The three-click rulefailedJoshua Porter, UIE, 2003: no correlation between click count and success or satisfaction (44 users, 8,000+ clicks) (https://articles.centercentre.com/three_click_rule/).
Users do not scrollovergeneralized43 percent of viewing time is below the fold, but attention drops sharply at the fold (Fessenden 2018).
Users read exactly 20 percent of wordsovergeneralizedA 2008 model estimate from 2005 logs of a small panel; direction, not a constant (Nielsen 2008).
Good web writing improves usability by 124 percentovergeneralizedReal result, one site, 51 users, against a deliberately promotional control (Morkes and Nielsen 1997).
Grade 5 to 7 copy doubles conversionovergeneralizedCorrelation across pages with very different offers (Unbounce 2024).
Changing a button colour or CTA wording lifted conversion by X percentovergeneralizedIn roughly 2,600 categorized tests out of 6,700, the average effect was 0.0 percent for colour and minus 0.3 percent for CTA wording (Qubit 2017).
Experts and B2B buyers want sophisticated, technical languagefailedPreference for plain versions rose with education, to 86 percent among lawyers (Trudeau 2012); needless complexity lowers judged intelligence (Oppenheimer 2006).
Inline validation cuts errors by 22 percent (Baymard)misattributedWroblewski and Etre 2009, 22 participants (Wroblewski 2009).
46 percent of people judge credibility by designovergeneralized46.1 percent of comments, not of people, in a study of 2,684 participants; it does not show cause (Fogg et al., Consumer WebWatch, October 2002: https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/how-do-people-evaluate-a-web-sites-credibility/, read 29 October 2026).
You have 50 milliseconds to make a first impressionmisappliedLindgaard et al., Behaviour & Information Technology, 2006: about visual appeal judgments, not comprehension of copy.
Five times as many people read the headline as the bodymisappliedOgilvy, 1963, about print ads (Ogilvy). The direction holds on the web; the number is not web data. CXL's 2018 eye tracking of a 300-word article found 97 percent read the title and 60 percent skimmed to the end (web reading note).
Most A/B tests winfailedReal win rates are 8 to 33 percent even at Microsoft, Google, Booking and Airbnb, and many "wins" are false positives (Kohavi et al. 2022).
Optimize for AI answers with llms.txt or special markupunsourced for searchGoogle says no special files or markup are needed for AI Overviews or AI Mode; GEO tactics rest on one lab paper (Google 2025, GEO). A file written for an agent that a user points at the site is a different job; see the agent-reader principles.
E-E-A-T is a ranking factormisappliedGoogle: E-E-A-T is not itself a ranking factor; trust matters most (Google helpful content).

Copywriting canon

ClaimVerdictEvidence
Long copy always outsells short copyovergeneralizedLength follows awareness and the size of the decision; Ogilvy stressed it most for expensive purchases (disagreements).
A new category name makes you the category kingovergeneralizedSurvivorship bias; only 7 percent of the Nasdaq IPOs Dunford examined created a new category (Play Bigger critique).
Curiosity headlines outperform clear onesfailed for product pagesCaples: "For every curiosity headline that succeeds in getting results, a dozen will fail"; curiosity belongs in ads and content for readers not yet looking (Caples).

Oddlynew Copy and Messaging PrinciplesSign in

Referenced by