Assimilation and contrast in persuasion: the effects of source credibility in multiple message situations

The present research explores a contextual perspective on persuasion in multiple message situations. It is proposed that when people receive persuasive messages, the effects of those messages are influenced by other messages to which people recently have been exposed. In two experiments, participants received a target persuasive message from a moderately credible source. Immediately before this message, participants received another message, on a different topic, from a source with high or low credibility. In Experiment 1, participants' attitudes toward the target issue were more favorable after they had first been exposed to a different message from a low rather than high credibility source (contrast). In Experiment 2, this effect only emerged when a priming manipulation gave participants a dissimilarity mindset. When participants were primed with a similarity mindset, their attitudes toward the target issue were more favorable following a different message from a high rather than low credibility source (assimilation).     

Compensatory Effects of Cognitive Characteristics of the Source,the Message,and the Receiver Upon Attitude Change

This study explored the interactive effects of four cognitive variables (perceived expertise of the source, recipients' initial attitudes, number of arguments, and message sidedness) on attitude change. A 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design was used (N = 236 Canadian students): Results showed a positive and significant main effect of initial attitude on attitude change and three significant compensatory effects of independent variables on attitude change: (a) two-sided messages were more persuasive with fewer arguments; conversely for one-sided messages; (b) high expertise compensated for low number of arguments and conversely; and (c) higher expertise was more persuasive in the case of unfavorable recipients and conversely. Results also showed that when the message was one-sided and the number of arguments was large, low expertise was more persuasive than high expertise on initially opposed recipients, which confirms the cognitive response.     

When credibility attacks: The reverse impact of source credibility on persuasion

Recent research on the self-validation hypothesis suggests that source credibility identified after message processing can influence the confidence people have in their own thoughts generated in response to persuasive messages (Briñol, Petty, & Tormala, 2004). The present research explored the implications of this effect for the possibility that high credibility sources can be associated with more or less persuasion than low credibility sources. In two experiments, it is demonstrated that when people generate primarily positive thoughts in response to a message (e.g., because the message contains strong arguments) and then learn of the source, high source credibility leads to more favorable attitudes than does low source credibility. When people have primarily negative thoughts in response to a message (e.g., because it contains weak arguments), however, this effect is reversed—that is, high source credibility leads to less favorable attitudes than does low source credibility.     

Noncompliance with Persuasive Appeals for a Prosocial,Altruistic Act: Blood Donating1

Effects of persuasive messages, responsibility denial (RD), and attitude-accessing on blood-giving attitudes, intentions, moral obligations, and behavior were examined. In Study 1, participants (n= 84) who heard a message emphasizing moral reasons for donating indicated a more favorable postmessage attitude and stronger moral obligation to donate than participants exposed to a message aimed at reducing fear, a combined moral and fear- reduction message, or no message. Combined message participants showed greatest intent to donate, yet only 14% of all participants attended a campus drive. In Study 2, low (n= 52) and high (n= 60) RD individuals heard the message arguments and were asked to access their attitudes. Low compared to high RD individuals stated a stronger sense of moral obligation, particularly when they accessed their thoughts relevant to blood donating, and behavioral intention, especially in the combined message condition. Few participants attended a blood drive (12.5%), yet most were low RD individuals from the nonaccessed attitude condition (83%). Results suggest that few individuals will engage in the altruistic act of blood donating, despite the experimental use of persuasive messages and accessing issue-relevant attitudes.     

The perceived informational basis of attitudes: implications for subjective ambivalence

Three studies tested the hypothesis that when people receive persuasive messages, their perceptions of the information on which they base their attitudes can determine feelings of subjective ambivalence. Across studies, it is shown that when elaboration (e.g., need for cognition, personal relevance) is high, people have more subjective ambivalence when they perceive that they have based their attitudes on the source of a message rather than the arguments contained in that message. When elaboration is low, this effect is reversed. These findings suggest that people can assess the informational basis of their attitudes and that these assessments influence feelings of attitude ambivalence.     

Matching the message source to attitude functions: Implications for biased processing

A study was conducted to examine the hypothesis that matching (vs. mismatching) the source of a persuasive message to the functional basis of recipients’ attitudes may lead to positively biased processing. Under conditions conducive to effortful processing, high and low self-monitors were presented with a persuasive message ascribed to a source that either matched or mismatched the functional basis of their attitudes (i.e., an expert source for low self-monitors and an attractive source for high self-monitors). The message content was either unambiguous strong, unambiguous weak, or ambiguous. As predicted, given an ambiguous message biased processing led to more agreement when the source matched (vs. mismatched) attitude functions. In contrast, an unambiguous strong message led to more agreement than an unambiguous weak message regardless of source matching (unbiased processing). Results are discussed with respect to the role of the activation and use of heuristics in biased processing.     

Source Credibility and Attitude Certainty: A Metacognitive Analysis of Resistance to Persuasion

Recent research (Tormala & Petty, 2002) has demonstrated that when people resist persuasion, they can perceive this resistance and become more certain of their initial attitudes. This research explores the role of source credibility in determining when this effect occurs. In two experiments, participants received a counterattitudinal persuasive message. When participants counterargued this message, they became more certain of their attitudes, but only when it came from a source with high expertise. When the message came from a source with low expertise, resisting it had no impact on attitude certainty. This effect was shown using both a traditional measure of attitude certainty (Experiment 1) and a well‐established consequence of certainty—the correspondence between attitudes and behavioral intentions (Experiment 2). In addition, the effect was confined to high elaboration conditions, and occurred even when participants were not explicitly instructed to counterargue. These results are consistent with a metacognitive framework proposed to understand resistance to persuasion.     

Lies and bullshit: The negative effects of misinformation grow stronger over time

In a world where exposure to untrustworthy communicators is common, trust has become more important than ever for effective marketing. Nevertheless, we know very little about the long-term consequences of exposure to untrustworthy sources, such bullshitters. This research examines how untrustworthy sources—liars and bullshitters—influence consumer attitudes toward a product. Frankfurt's (1986) insidious bullshit hypothesis (i.e., bullshitting is evaluated less negatively than lying but bullshit can be more harmful than are lies) is examined within a traditional sleeper effect—a persuasive influence that increases, rather than decays over time. We obtained a sleeper effect after participants learned that the source of the message was either a liar or a bullshitter. However, compared to the liar source condition, the same message from a bullshitter resulted in more extreme immediate and delayed attitudes that were in line with an otherwise discounted persuasive message (i.e., an advertisement). Interestingly, attitudes returned to control condition levels when a bullshitter was the source of the message, suggesting that knowing an initially discounted message may be potentially accurate/inaccurate (as is true with bullshit, but not lies) does not result in the long-term discounting of that message. We discuss implications for marketing and other contexts of persuasion.     

Attitude accessibility and message processing: The moderating role of message position

Past research suggests that pre-message attitude accessibility can influence the amount of processing of persuasives messages (with highly accessible attitudes eliciting higher levels of processing than attitudes lower in accessibility). The current research suggests that the previous conclusions are only partly true—effects of accessibility on message processing are moderated by the extent to which the persuasive message is proattitudinal versus counterattitudinal. In two experiments, pre-message attitudes and attitude accessibility were measured (Study 1) or manipulated (Study 2) prior to receiving a strong or weak persuasive message. When messages were counterattitudinal, increased pre-message accessibility was associated with greater message processing (as in past research). However, when messages were proattitudinal, increased pre-message accessibility was associated with decreased message scrutiny. Potential underlying mechanisms and implications are discussed.     

品牌熟悉对广告过程中品牌态度改变的影响

文章通过分析广告前后被试者品牌态度的变化,研究了在不同的广告态度和信息相关度条件下被试者品牌熟悉程度对品牌态度变化的影响。结果显示品牌熟悉程度对品牌态度变化的调节作用并非单向的,而是与广告态度和信息相关度交互产生作用的。当被试者不熟悉品牌且有正面的广告态度时或当被试者不熟悉品牌且信息相关度较低时广告才能产生说服效果,进而使被试者的品牌态度发生改变。     

Message sidedness in advertising: the moderating roles of need for cognition and time pressure in persuasion

Persuasion has been extensively researched for decades. Much of this research has focused on different message tactics and their effects on persuasion (e.g., Chang & Chou, 2008; Lafferty, 1999). This research aims to assess whether the persuasion of a specific type of message is influenced by need for cognition (NFC) and time pressure. The 336 undergraduates participated in a 2 (message sidedness: one-sided/two-sided) × 3 (time pressure: low/moderate/high) between-subjects design. Results indicate that two-sided messages tend to elicit more favorable ad attitudes than one-sided messages. As compared with low-NFC individuals, high-NFC individuals are likely to express more favorable ad attitudes, brand attitudes and purchase intention. Moderate time pressure tends to lead to more favorable ad attitudes than low time pressure and high time pressure. In addition, moderate time pressure is likely to elicit more favorable brand attitudes and purchase intentions than high time pressure, but does not elicit more favorable brand attitudes and purchase intentions than low time pressure. Furthermore, when high-NFC individuals are under low or moderate time pressure, two-sided messages are more persuasive than one-sided messages; however, message sidedness does not differentially affect the persuasion when high-NFC individuals are pressed for time. In contrast, one-sided messages are more persuasive than two-sided messages when low-NFC individuals are under low or high time pressure, and two-sided messages are more persuasive than one-sided messages when low-NFC individuals are under moderate time pressure.     

Cognitive Processing and the Functional Matching Effect in Persuasion: The Mediating Role of Subjective Perceptions of Message Quality

In two experiments, we examined the hypothesis that subjective perceptions of message quality mediate the functional matching effect in persuasion. In Experiment 1, participants whose attitudes and behaviors serve primarily a value-expressive function (i.e., low self-monitors) or a social-adjustive function (i.e., high self-monitors) were exposed to persuasive messages that contained value-expressive, social-adjustive, or both types of arguments in favor of voting. Functionally-relevant messages (i.e., the social-adjustive message for high self-monitors and the value-expressive message for low self-monitors) produced enhanced perceptions of message quality and persuasiveness, more positive attitudes, and more message-related behavior than functionally nonrelevant messages. Functionally mixed messages were generally more effective than messages containing only functionally nonrelevant arguments, but less effective than messages containing only functionally relevant arguments. Path analyses indicated that the influence of functional relevance on attitudes and behavior was significantly mediated by subjective perceptions of the quality of the message. In Experiment 2, we exposed participants to a functionally relevant or nonrelevant voting appeal five days before a presidential election. Results replicated those of Experiment 1; functionally relevant messages produced more favorable attitudes, and this effect was mediated by enhanced perceptions of message quality. Finally, postmessage attitudes exerted a significant influence on whether participants voted in the election, and this effect was mediated by voting intentions. Discussion focuses on the subjective nature of message evaluation and on the cognitive processes underlying the functional matching effect in persuasion.     

Motivational determinants of systematic processing: expectancy moderates effects of desired confidence on processing effort

Extending the motivational assumptions of the heuristic-systematic model (Chaiken, Liberman, & Eagly, 1989), the authors hypothesized that a discrepancy between desired and actual judgmental confidence raises processing effort only if the expectancy that processing will increase confidence is high. In Experiment 1, university students expected to review information for upcoming social judgments. Desired confidence was varied through low versus high task importance. To manipulate expectancy, low versus high perceived processing efficacy was induced via feedback. As predicted, high- (as compared to low-) importance participants expressed greater interest in receiving information and selected more information when perceived efficacy was high, and this effect was mediated via a heightened discrepancy between desired and actual confidence. These effects were not obtained under low perceived efficacy. In Experiment 2, students processed a persuasive message. Only high importance conditions were studied; processing efficacy and argument strength were manipulated. As predicted, high- (but not low-) efficacy participants processed the message systematically, as indicated by a different impact of argument strength and by mediational path analyses. It is argued that the precision of social judgment models would benefit from an explicit consideration of processing- and outcome-related expectancy variables. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Heuristic processing of distinctiveness information in minority and majority influence

The role of distinctiveness information in majority and minority influence was studied. Students read a message containing strong or weak arguments advocated by a minority or majority source. The communicator's minority (majority) status was said to be either distinctive to the target topic or nondistinctive across topics. Major dependent variables were attitude judgments and cognitive responses. Across conditions, messages were processed systematically, and a majority communicator tended to be more persuasive than a minority communicator. Most importantly, high distinctiveness led to greater influence than low distinctiveness, and this effect was independent of argument strength and minority versus majority status. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Field dependence and attitude change: Source credibility can alter persuasion by affecting message-relevant thinking

The present study shows that for a personally relevant counterattitudinal issue, a highly credible source can alter persuasibility by increasing a subject's message-relevant thinking. Previous failures to show this effect were probably due to the highly thoughtful nature of typical research subjects, when confronted with involving issues. In the present study, field-dependent and field-independent subjects heard convincing or refutable counterattitudinal speeches given by sources of high or low credibility. Results indicated that subjects who are typically low in differentiation of stimuli (field-dependent subjects) showed differential persuasion to strong and weak arguments only when they were presented by a highly credible source. For subjects who are typically high in propensity to differentiate stimuli (field-independent subjects), the arguments were differentially persuasive for both high and low credible sources. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that increasing source credibility can enhance message-relevant thought for subjects who typically do not scrutinize message content.     

The Effects of Prior Attitudes and Attitude Importance on Attitude Change and Class Impact in Women's and Gender Studies1

Attitude change in women's and gender studies (WGS) students has been a central goal of the WGS movement since its inception. Attitude change theory stresses the crucial roles of prior attitudes and attitude importance in the effectiveness of a persuasive message. This study examined attitude change dynamics in 548 WGS students drawn from 32 United States college campuses. Results provided partial support for the following hypotheses: (a) Students with attitudes discrepant from the WGS message demonstrate more resistance to attitude change when they deem these attitudes to be more important, and (b) WGS class impact is greater among students who rate class‐relevant attitudes as more important.     

Should persuasion be affective or cognitive? The moderating effects of need for affect and need for cognition

Three experiments tested the hypothesis that need for affect and need for cognition influence receptivity to affect- and cognition-based persuasive messages. Experiment 1 found that an affective message elicited more positive attitudes among individuals high in need for affect and low in need for cognition, whereas a cognitive message elicited more positive attitudes among individuals low in need for affect and high in need for cognition. Experiment 2 found that individual differences in need for affect influenced receptivity to an affect-based (but not cognition-based) message, whereas individual differences in need for cognition influenced receptivity to a cognition-based (but not affect-based) message. Experiment 3 found that individual differences in need for affect were associated with increased recognition of information from an affect-based (but not cognition-based) message, whereas individual differences in need for cognition were associated with increased recognition of information from a cognition-based (but not affect-based) message. Overall, the studies point to the importance of individual differences in need for affect and need for cognition in understanding how individuals respond to different types of persuasive messages.     

Confidence via correction: The effect of judgment correction on consumer confidence

At times, consumers are motivated to reduce the influence of a product recommendation on their judgments. Based on previous research, it is unclear whether this correction process will increase or decrease consumers' confidence in their judgments. We find that source credibility moderates the effect of correction on confidence: correction decreases confidence when a product recommendation comes from a high credibility source but increases confidence when the same message comes from a low credibility source. As a result, correction increases the effectiveness of recommendations from low credibility sources on purchase intentions. Notably, this “confidence via correction” effect is further moderated by elaboration, such that the effect is attenuated for high elaboration consumers. Our results have implications for understanding consumers' reactions to persuasive messages and for both marketing practitioners and consumer protection agencies using correction cues to influence message persuasiveness.     

Attitudes toward health-messages: The link between perceived attention and subjective strength

IntroductionMany efforts are invested in promoting healthy attitudes and behaviors; nonetheless there is no clear, definitive evidence of sustained effectiveness of those efforts in all cases.ObjectiveThe present study examined the role of perceived attention in changing attitudes toward vegetable consumption as well as the perceived stability and resistance of those changes (attitude strength).MethodParticipants were randomly assigned to read a strong or weak health communication arguing in favor of vegetable consumption. After reading the message, participants reported attitudes toward this health issue, the perceived attention, and the perceived strength associated with their evaluations.ResultsParticipants who reported high (vs. low) perceived attention showed a greater effect of argument quality on persuasion. Furthermore, such participants also reported stronger attitudes compared to those who reported low perceived attention.ConclusionThis study showed that attitudes toward vegetable consumption can be changed after reading a persuasive message, and that the extent of perceived attention moderated the extent to which those changes were perceived as stable and resistant (stronger attitudes).     

Influence of Message Sidedness,Pictures, and Need for Cognition on Beliefs and Behavior: The Terri Schiavo Case1

The Terri Schiavo case received intense national and international media coverage. The current investigation examined students' beliefs on whether or not Terri's feeding tube should have been removed, as well as attitudes and behavior. Students either received a persuasive message that came from the husband's perspective or the parents' perspective, crossed with a picture that either suggested Terri was interactive vs. one that suggested she was not. The results indicate that beliefs were altered by the perspective that students received, even after intense media coverage had presumably “hardened” attitudes. Students with low or high need for cognition were also influenced by pictures that either matched or mismatched the perspective they received.