This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: Elaboration Likelihood Model Elaboration Likelihood Model When will we process messages through the central route (cognitive elaboration)? When we’re both able and motivated to pay attention and process the facts One motivational factor: Personal relevance Motivation to process message Motivation to process message
comprehensive exams One way to manipulate relevance: Timing of Strong vs. weak arguments Strong vs. weak arguments
Examples of strong arguments: GPAs rise substantially at universities that had implemented Senior Exams Graduate schools show a stronger preference for applicants who had taken Senior Exams Students who had taken Senior Exams had higher salaries and pay increases Strong vs. weak arguments Strong vs. weak arguments
Examples of weak arguments: Senior Exams are character building challenges If Exams were implemented nationwide, students could compare their academic standing with other students Senior Exams would reinforce equality among students Example Example You get either 3 or 9 weak or strong arguments when exam policy is for this year Which conditions will persuade you most? a) 3 weak arguments b) 3 strong arguments 2nd most persuasive c) 9 weak arguments d) 9 strong arguments most persuasive Example Example You get either 3 or 9 weak or strong arguments when exam policy is for ten years from now Which conditions will persuade you most? a) 3 weak arguments less persuasive b) 3 strong arguments less persuasive c) 9 weak arguments more persuasive d) 9 strong arguments more persuasive Importance of Central Processing Importance of Central Processing
People who base their attitudes on a careful analysis of the arguments are: – More likely to maintain attitudes over time – More likely to behave consistently with attitudes – More resistant to counterpersuasion Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly Disagree Agree 1 2 3 4 5 a) World hunger is a serious problem that needs attention. b) Our country needs to address the growing number of homeless people. c) The right to vote is one of the most valuable rights of American citizens. d) Our government should spend less money on nuclear weapons and more on helping citizens improve their lives. Experiment Experiment
Participants were asked to turn pegs on a board (a very boring task) • The experimenter asked the participant to tell the next participant that it was fun • Offered $1 vs. $20 to lie, and everyone agreed • After lying, participant rated how enjoyable the peg turning task actually was Dependent variable: Would either group rate the peg turning task as enjoyable?
• Results Results
DV: How enjoyable was the peg-turning task –3 (not at all enjoyable) to +3 (very enjoyable)
1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1 $1 $20 Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance Occurs when our behavior is inconsistent with an important attitude we hold Pegturning experiment Pegturning experiment
1. 2. 3. That experiment was very boring. I told the next participant that it was great fun. I was paid $1 to tell her that. DISSONANCE! Change attitude (to be consistent with the lie) That experiment was very boring. 2. I told the next participant it was great fun. 3. I was paid $20 to tell her that. No dissonance No attitude change
1. Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive Dissonance Occurs when our behavior is inconsistent with an important attitude we hold Smokers who know cigarettes are unhealthy Lying or behaving rudely try to find ways of reducing it Cognitive dissonance is unpleasant so we Counterattitudinal actions Counterattitudinal actions An action that runs counter to our attitude (e.g., saying that the peg turning task was fun) Cognitive dissonance occurs when there’s no strong external justification for our inconsistent behavior And when we freely choose to do it Cognitive Dissonance and Smoking Cognitive Dissonance and Smoking
See yourself smoking vs. smoking is unhealthy This leads to cognitive dissonance (discomfort) How do you reduce dissonance? – Stop smoking (change behavior) – Believe that smoking is not bad for you (change beliefs/attitudes toward smoking) – Add consonant cognitions (e.g., filters are effective, “I don’t smoke as much as I used to”) – Trivialize the behavior (“Well, everyone’s gotta die eventually”) Changing behavior using dissonance Changing behavior using dissonance
Stone et al. (1994) – 72 sexually active college student participated Some students advocated condom use Then, some students recalled previous times they failed to use condoms 4 conditions: – Control condition (neither advocating nor recalling information) – Advocating only – Recall only – Hypocrisy (both advocating and recalling) DV: % who purchased condoms after study 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % who purchased condoms Hypocrisy Control Recall only Advocating Only When have you ever had to When have you ever had to make a difficult choice? Postdecisional dissonance After we’ve made a choice, we enhance the option we chose and devalue the option(s) we didn’t choose Postdecisional dissonance Postdecisional dissonance
Knox and Inkster (1968) – asked people betting on horses how confident they were Before vs. after placing their bet Seconds after placing a bet, gamblers became much more confident that their horse would win ...
View Full Document
- Fall '09