Introduction. Ambivalent attitudes—simultaneously holding positive and negative evaluations toward the same object—are increasingly prevalent in responses to complex societal issues such as environmental sustainability and artificial intelligence. Such attitudinal ambivalence can undermine persuasive effectiveness, reduce behavioral consistency, and intensify emotional conflict. Despite growing research on ambivalence, limited attention has been paid to comparing ambivalence across issue domains and understanding the psychological mechanisms that moderate these responses.


Purpose. This study investigates the cognitive and affective processes underlying attitudinal ambivalence toward environmental and AI-related issues, examining how information valence and issue involvement shape ambivalence intensity, emotional experiences, attitude certainty, and behavioral intentions. We hypothesize that mixed-valence messages will increase both subjective and objective ambivalence, that higher issue involvement will facilitate elaborative processing and reduce negative affect, and that AI issues will elicit greater ambivalence than environmental issues due to differences in psychological distance.


Method. Two pilot studies (N = 60 each, Taiwanese adults) are norming persuasive materials and validating emotional responses. The main experiment employs a 2 (Issue Type) × 3 (Information Valence: pro vs. con vs. mixed) between-subjects design (N = 240). Measures include subjective ambivalence (Priester & Petty, 1996), objective ambivalence (Griffin formula), discrete emotions (Plutchik-based), involvement, attitude certainty, and behavioral intentions. Power analysis (f = 0.25, α = .05, 1-β ≥ .80) supports the sample size. The study has received ethics approval (National Taiwan University REC No. 202507ES103) and funding (NSTC 114-2410-H-130-042).


Results. Data collection is in progress. Full analyses will be completed by July 2026.


Conclusions. Expected findings will contribute to dual-process persuasion models and ambivalence theory by clarifying how message structure and individual differences shape responses across issue domains, informing communication strategies for sustainable behaviors.