152
DUAL CMN PROCESSING MODELS
Cognitive response model
People are active information processors
A persons cognitive responses to a message have an effect on persuasion
Cognitions generated in response to persuasive messages determine both the
direction and magnitude of attitude change
People actively relate information contained in a persuasive message to their
existing feelings and beliefs about the message
Cognitive responses vary in terms of favorability and magnitude
Different messages features can impact the predominant valance of targetgenerated thoughts
The thought-listing task is a method for assessing cognitive responses
Messages that prompt predominantly favorable target-generated thoughts should
be persuasive
Messages that prompt mostly unfavorable target-generated thoughts should be
unpersuasive
For messages that elicit mostly favorable thinking, enhanced thought should
increase persuasion
For messages that elicit mostly unfavorable thinking, enhanced thought should
decrease persuasion
General processing notions
Langers study
Mindful versus Mindlessness
Dual Process Models
ELM (Elaboration likelihood model) and HSM (Heuristic-systematic model) posit
2 routes to persuasion
The central (ELM) or systematic (HSM) route is characterized by comprehensive
issue-relevant thinking
The peripheral (ELM) or heuristic (HSM) route is characterized by the use of
simple judgment rules
The two routes exist on a continuum of elaboration
Two broad classes of factors influence degree of elaboration: ability and
motivation
Ability
o Distraction
o Prior knowledge
Motivation
o Involvement
o Need for cognition
o Multiple sources with multiple arguments
Nature of persuasive process
Under conditions of high elaboration the resulting attitude depends upon whether
the person has predominantly favorable or unfavorable thoughts about the
advocated position
Operation of simple judgment cues is inferred from the influence of peripheral
cues on attitudes
Types of simple judgment rules include credibility, liking, consensus, and
superficial message characteristics
Changes in attitude that result mostly from central/systematic processing will
show greater temporal persistence, greater prediction of behavior, greater
resistance to counterpersuasion
Differences in the models
According to ELM, one route tends to be dominant
HSM makes specific predictions on how the two routes impact each other (guided
by the sufficiency principle)
o Sufficiency principle
o Additivity effects
o Interaction effects
Source Characteristics
Credibility
Liking
Similarity
Attractiveness
Credibility
Judgment made by a message recipient
Concerns the believability of a message source
Expertise and trustworthiness are dimensions of credibility
Factors Impacting Credibility
Information concerning education, occupation, and experience
Nonfluencies
Citation of sources of evidence
Position advocated (expectancy-violation)
Knowledge bias
Reporting bias
Liking
Impact of Credibility
The more involved a receiver is with the issue in the message the less credibility
matters
The position of the source can impact the direction of credibility's effects
High credibility is more persuasive with a counterattitudinal message
Low credibility is more persuasive with a proattitudinal message
Identifying the source after the message minimizes the effect of credibility
Liking
In general, liked sources are more influential than disliked sources
The effects of liking can be overridden by credibility
The effect of liking on influence is obtained under conditions of low issue
involvement
Disliked sources can be more effective than liked sources
Similarity
No overarching generalization of the impact of similarity on persuasiveness
There are many ways in which one might perceive oneself to be similar or
dissimilar to other person
Similarity impacts persuasiveness indirectly
Perceived attitudinal similarity is associated with greater liking of the source
Perceived similarity can impact judgments of expertise
Perceived similarity can impact judgments of trustworthiness
Attractiveness
There is no overarching generalization of the impact of physical attractiveness on
persuasiveness
Physical attractiveness influences persuasion through its effect on liking for the
source
Effects of physical attractiveness on persuasion are limited to low-involvement
topics
MESSAGE FEATURES
Message Features
Implicit versus explicit conclusions
One-sided versus two-sided messages
Evidence
Motivational appeals
Implicit versus explicit conclusions
For an explicit message the author provides premises and states the resulting
conclusion
For an implicit message the author provides premises and the target must derive
the resulting conclusion independently
Why might explicit conclusions be more effective?
o Receivers are less likely to misunderstand the point of a message
Why might implicit conclusions be more effective?
o Receivers may be more persuaded because they reached the conclusion on
their own
Overall explicit conclusion messages are more effective
The advantage of explicit conclusion messages occurs independent of target
intelligence
One-sided versus two-sided
One-sided messages present arguments in favor of an advocated position
Two-sided messages present arguments in favor and against an advocated position
Two types of two-sided messages
o Non refutational
Opposing arguments are mentioned but not argued against
o Refutational
Opposing arguments are presented and shown to be inferior to the position
advocated
Two-sided messages are more effective than one-sided messages as long as the
two-sided message is refutational
Two-sided nonrefutational messages are usually less effective than one-sided
messages
Evidence
Evidence is information provided to support a message argument
There are three conditions for the effective use of evidence:
o Targets are aware that evidence is being presented
o Targets must cognitively process the evidence
o Targets must evaluated the evidence as legitimate
Overall, targets are more persuaded by messages with evidence than messages
without evidence
Researchers have investigated the differential impact of evidence type
Narratives describe a specific instance or a case study
Statistics provide a numerical summary of a large number of cases
There are inconsistent findings concerning the advantage of one type of evidence
over the other
Messages that employ both types of evidence are more persuasive than messages
that use only one type of evidence
Motivational Appeals
Message-irrelevant vs. message-induced
o Message-irrelevant affect is affect that bears no logical relevance to the
message content
o Message-induced affect occurs due to the message content
Moods vs. emotions
Fear Appeals
Fear is aroused when some stimulus/situation is perceived as threatening to the
self and out of ones control
Can be innate or learned
Fears action tendency is to escape from the threatening stimulus/situation
In general, greater fear is associated with attitude and behavior change
What makes a fear appeal?
o Some define a fear appeal as a message that contains graphic message content
o Others define a fear appeal as a message that arouses fear or anxiety in
message targets
Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM)
When exposed to a fear appeal the receiver can take part in either danger control
or fear control
Danger control is associated with constructive problem and solving approaches to
fearful situations
Fear control is associated with denial or panic concerning the fearful situation
The levels of response-efficacy and self-efficacy experienced in response to a fear
appeal determines whether one takes part in danger or fear control
Response efficacy is the belief that a recommended solution to the fearful
situation will be effective
Self efficacy is the belief that one can effectively perform the recommended
behavior
People who have high perceptions of both response and self efficacy will take part
in danger control
Those low in either (or both) types of efficacy will take part in fear control
Guilt
Guilt is an unpleasant emotional state associated with possible objections to a
persons actions, inactions, circumstances or intention (Baumeister)
Guilt is unpleasant arousal similar to anxiety
Guilt as an influence tactic
Negative State Relief Model (NSR)
o People are motivated to reduce negative affect
Boster et al. employed positive self-feeling messages to influence people
experiencing guilt
The manner by which people reduce negative affect can be unrelated to the
stimulus that produced the negative affect (people want to make up for what they
have done)
Anticipated guilt
Anticipated feelings can shape behavioral choices
Targets avoid taking part in behaviors that would make them feel negative affect
DITF
Door in the Face
Sequential request strategy
Consists of 2 requests
The first request is a set up
The second request is the target request
DIFT leads to greater compliance than when the target request alone
Requests tend to be of a prosocial nature
One explanation for the effectiveness of DITF is anticipated guilt
Rejection of the initial request creates guilt in the target
Compliance with the target request gives the influence target opportunity to
reduce feelings of guilt
If this explanation is true then,
o DITF should be more effective when the initial request arouses guilt
o DITF should be more effective when the target request is viewed as a means
to reduce negative feelings
Millar (2002)
Tested OKeefe and Figge (1997) claim that DITF owes its effectiveness to
reduction of anticipated guilt
Participants take part in what appears to be a study.
After the participant receives credit, the experimenter states he or she is looking
for volunteers to take part in a study on healthy eating.
All participants (except control group) received a DITF request
DITF REQUEST
Large (initial) request
o We need you to keep a detailed record of your meals for the next 3 months
and then mail the record back to the department. This will involve writing
down the type and amount of food you consume at each meal. Will you be
willing to volunteer to keep this log?
Smaller (target) request
o Will you keep a detailed record of your meals for only 4 days and then mail
the record back to the department?
GUILT INDUCTION AND REDUCTION MANIPULATIONS
Participants received a guilt induction once the initial request was refused
Guilt induction
o High guilt
Your refusal to record your meals for 3 months will cause considerable
damage to the departments efforts to help others eat healthy diets
o Low guilt
Your refusal to record your meals for 3 months will not really damage the
departments effort to help others eat healthy diets
Guilt reduction manipulation
o High reduction
However you can do something that was equally helpful by keeping a
record for just the next 4 days
o Low reduction
However you can do something, although it is not nearly as helpful, by
keeping a record for just the next 4 days
DEPENDENT VARIABLE
Compliance
The participants verbal indication to perform the behavior
Percentage of Verbal Compliance
Guilt Reduction
Guilt Induction
Low
High
Low
High
20.8
17.4
25.0
65.4
Theory of Psychological Reactance
Psychological reactance (Brehm, 1966))
We like to preserve our established prerogatives/freedoms
Whenever free choice is limited or threatened, the need to retain our freedoms
acts as a motivational force
When people feel that their freedom to behave or think in a certain way is
restricted they experience psychological reactance and attempt to restore their
freedom
Nature of reactance
A form of psychological arousal
Motivational state
Occurs due to the need for self-determination and desire to occur ones own
environment
Desire to restore or demonstrate attitudinal freedom
Reactance, Resistance, and Persuasion
A persuasive attempt can be perceived as a threat to perceived freedom
The reaction to a persuasive attempt will be a motivating pressure toward
reestablishing the threatened freedom
Restoration of freedom
Ignoring the persuasive attempt
Derogating the source
Embracing the attitude threatened by the recommendation
Producing even more of the undesired behavior
Magnitude of reactance
Reactance is experienced along a continuum of magnitude
Things that impact the magnitude of reactance experienced:
o The perceived importance of the behavior to the individual
o The proportion of free behaviors limited, reactance increases as the proportion
of behaviors limited or threatened increases
o The magnitude of threat of elimination
Low levels of reactance occur:
o When magnitude threat of elimination is small
o Low importance behaviors
o When magnitude of threat of elimination is extremely large
Moderate levels of reactance occur
o Moderate number of small magnitude threats
o Moderately important behaviors
o Moderate threats of elimination that can be realistically alleviated
High levels of reactance
o High number of small magnitude threats
o Very important threats to freedom
o Large threats of elimination that can be realistically alleviated
Forewarning
Two types of forewarning:
o Simply warn people they will hear a persuasive message
o Warn people by telling them about the topic and position taken in the
persuasive message
Both tactics can induce resistance to persuasion but do so by different processes
o Reactance
o Stimulation of counterarguing before receiving the message
Stimulation of anticipatory counterarguing
When people are forewarned of topic and position they produce
counterarguments.
When people have more time between the forewarning and the message they
produce more counterarguments
Inoculation Theory
Inoculation
Promoting resistance to persuasion by exposing people to small doses of the
opposing view
Inoculation theory was initially testing with cultural truisms
Cultural truisms are beliefs in ones culture that everybody holds and no one
attacks
Two different types of treatments have been investigated
o Supportive treatments simply give receivers arguments supporting the truism
o Refutational treatments first show receivers a weak argument against the truism
and then refutes this argument
The refutational treatment is more effective in promoting resistance to persuasion
than the supportive treatment
The refutational treatment induces resistance to other antitruism arguments
The combination of refutational and supportive treatments is more effective than
refutational alone
The effectiveness of inoculation has been explored with nontruisms
o Little difference in the effectiveness of supportive and refutational treatments
o Resistance produced by refutational treatments generalizes to novel arguments
o Messages utilizing both supportive and refutational treatments are more
effective than messages with just supportive treatments