Persuasion: One & TwoFactor Models 02/25/2014
Day 1 February 25 th
1930s70s: Defining factors that influence persuasion
Descriptive research> what are the variables that effect attitude change/persuasion?
Many factors interact with each other
Few cases in which there were main effects
Mid to late 1970s: Move toward analytic research
Why do factors have the effects they do?
Models of Persuasion:
Elaboration likelihood model (ELM)
HeuristicSystematic model (HSM)
Elaboration Likelihood Model
Understand why certain audiences comprehend certain messages and are
persuaded by certain sources.
Continuation of elaboration
Persuasive Message> Message Elaboration
Different elaboration causes different effects
Elaboration is effected by: Motivation to do the processing of the message content
Personal relevance: issues important to them, how directly someone would be affected by something.
Accountability: to what extent will you be accountable for your views; must defend their beliefs
Need for cognition: high in this tend to process information much more, more likely to elaborate a message.
Attitude Congruence: need to have consistent attitudes
No distraction, pressure (cognitive flow)
Able to comprehend: extent that the arguments are clear and easy to process.
Relevant knowledge available.
Elaboration ▯ Thoughts about the message content
Unfavourable thoughts> little persuasion (no attitude change)
Favourable thoughts> attitude change towards message
Central route> attitude change is based off the message content
Permanent and more accessible changes in attitude
Message Elaboration is low then one will rely on peripheral cues
Motivation is low to elaborate on the contents of the message
Ability is low
Rely on the source credibility, expertise
Presentation quality Mere exposure; conditioning
Use of the peripheral route to persuasion
Temporary attitude change OR no change
Context Cues: peripheral route
Elaboration: central route
Depends on the use of elaboration> as elaboration increases the use of context cues decreases and start
to use the central route more than the peripheral route.
Testing the ELM
Processing motivation or ability (manipulations done in experiments).
Personal relevance of topic (motivation)
Extent of distraction (ability)
Strength of arguments
High Elaboration and Attitudes
More persuasion with strong arguments, more elaboration
Less persuasion with weak arguments, more elaboration
Strengthening of current position Boomerang effect change in opposite direction
High elaboration attitudes:
More predictive of behaviour
More resistant (if established through the central route)
Variables in the ELM
Roles for other variables:
Peripheral cue: ‘shortcut’ to attitude formation
Argument attractiveness of the source is an argument for purchasing a particular product
Biasing factor can shift our level of elaboration up or down
Attractive source may cause us to process the message more or less.
Direction of processing done (that results from the processing).
Amount of processing done (increase or decrease elaboration).
Source Variables in ELM: Expertise
Peripheral cues: “Expert agrees, it must be true.”
Extent of processing: “Expert agrees, I should pay attention.”
Influences the amount of elaboration.
Metacognition: “Expert agrees, message probably correct, and I can trust my own reactions to the message
Give greater credibility to the cognitions that are consistent with the expert, since they must therefore be
Biasing Factor: “Expert agrees, what else might agree?”
Biasing the cognitions that are consistent with the arguments being presented by the source.
Argument: Expert agrees, reason for me to agree as well.”
Increasing on the Elaboration Continuum moving from peripheral cues to extent of processing to biasing
factor to argument. Persuasion: One & Two Factor Models 02/25/2014
Day 2 February 26 h Persuasion: One & Two Factor Models 02/25/2014
Two routes that lead to persuasion: central and peripheral route; one that looks at the arguments presented
and the other uses contextual cues.
Central route: argument elaboration
Peripheral route: no elaboration, cues such as the attractiveness of the source, audience, etc.
As one route increases in use, the other route decreases in use> move up or down the Elaboration
The route used is determined by motivation and capability.
Attitude change depends on the thoughts formed from the argument presented to the individual
Evaluation of message is positive= attitude change
No change can also occur
With low elaboration, then peripheral cues/source variables lead directly to attitude change or persuasion.
With high elaboration, then these source variables have different function; may bias the amount of
elaboration or colour the kinds of cognitions evaluated.
Source Variables in ELM: Attractiveness
Low levels of elaboration:
Peripheral cues: Evaluative conditioning
No processing, thinking
Feel positive about an attractive source (celebrity endorsement).
Extent of processing: “should pay attention to attractive source.” Persuasion: One & Two Factor Models 02/25/2014
Biasing factor: lead us to do more processing of the information contained in the argument, colour our
cognitions of the message (make them more positive).
In the middle of the continuum
High levels of elaboration:
Only when attractiveness is relevant to the product
Argument: “if I use this product, I will look as good as she does.”
Process attractiveness as an argument for the use of a particular product or service.
Source Variables in ELM: Bias
When the argument is for something that is related to self interest
Only shows up in the mid range of the elaboration continuum
Biasing: more positive, fewer negative cognitive responses to unbiased source.
Negative cognitions towards a bias source
Message Variables in ELM: Quality
Low elaboration= quality of arguments are not important
Not evaluating the message
High elaboration= message quality has a greater and greater effect
Attitude change decreases if message quality is low, increases if message quality is high.
Message Quality Interactions
Issue involvement: High involvement= quality more important (higher relevance to the individual
which increases elaboration).
Function Matching: argument addresses important concerns of the audience, high match= quality
Less relevance= less elaboration= less importance of message quality
Mood: negative mood= quality more important (higher on the elaboration continuum). Persuasion: One & Two Factor Models 02/25/2014
Need for cognition: High need= quality more important
High on the elaboration continuum, need to process information and think about what the message is
Message Variables in ELM: Quantity
Low elaboration= influenced by the quantity of the argument
High elaboration= content is more important than quantity
Message Variables in ELM: PrimacyRecency
Message order may influence attitude change in a particular direction.
When giving pros and cons towards a particular attitude object.
If you want people to agree with something>
High elaboration: influenced more by the first arguments they hear> Primacy Effect (bias towards the
Low elaboration: influenced more by the last things they hear>Recency effect
Audience Variables in ELM: Affect
Low levels of elaboration affect is a peripheral cue
Associate good mood with the arguments being presented
Moderate amount of elaboration
Mood serves as information, reason to believe that the cognitions I have are correct towards the attitude
Moderate amount of elaboration Persuasion: One & Two Factor Models 02/25/2014
Positive affect increases the amount of processing
Can change the amount of processing being done
High elaboration will bias the way that we think about the attitude object.
Negative affect> think about negative things, less accepting
Positive affect> think about positive things, more accepting
Bias the valence of the arguments and the attitude object
Audience Variables in ELM: Self Esteem
Peripheral Cue: at the low end of the Elaboration continuum
Low elaboration, high self esteem= less attitude change
Low elaboration, low self esteem= more attitude change
Motivation: motivator to increase or decrease the amount of processing of the argument.
Moderate amount of elaboration
Low self esteem= slightly less attitude change
High self esteem= more attitude change
Depends on when you remind or ask someone about their self esteem.
Ask individual about their self esteem before the message, high self esteem= less attitude change.
Assume that the individual with high self esteem is that they are more sure about their beliefs and will tend
to generate counter arguments against the attitude object.
Low self esteem individuals are less likely to come up with counter arguments= more attitude change.
Ask individual about their self esteem after the message, high self esteem= more attitude change. Persuasion: One & Two Factor Models 02/25/2014
High self esteem individuals have generated a lot of cognitions consistent with the message and are a lot
more confident with the accuracy of those evaluations they generated during the message.
Early peripheral cues can bias processing of later message info—but not the other way around.
Things that occur before the message can bias later message
Content of the message never can bias processing
Motivational conditions for biased processing: Shift processing up or down on the elaboration continuum.
Desire to maintain consistency with current attitudes/beliefs> against developing counterattitudes.
To maintain or enhance self image> is the message position consistent with our self image?
Consistent with our self image= bias more processing, more positive cognitions.
Ability conditions for biased processing> moving up or down on the continuum.
Onesided knowledge about the issue is usually already contained by the individual> contrary information
will bias us against processing the message.
Positive mood primes towards positive thoughts
Criticisms of ELM
EL not determined beforehand: Cannot predict what role variable will play in persuasion (do no know where
Allows for simul