Mood effects on attitude judgments: Independent effects of mood before and after message elaboration.

Investigated the independent effects of induced mood on the encoding of persuasive messages and on the assessment of attitude judgments. In Exp 1, positive or negative mood was induced either before the encoding of a counterattitudinal message or before the assessment of attitude judgments. When mood was induced before message presentation, Ss in a bad mood were more persuaded by strong than by weak arguments, whereas Ss in a good mood were equally persuaded by strong and by weak arguments. When Ss encoded the message in a neutral mood, however, the advantage of strong over weak arguments was more pronounced when Ss were in a good rather than in a bad mood at the time of attitude assessment. In Exp 2, Ss exposed to a counterattitudinal message composed of either strong or weak arguments formed either a global evaluation or a detailed representation of the message. Positive, negative, or neutral mood was then induced. Ss in a good mood were most likely and Ss in a negative mood least likely to base their reported attitudes on global evaluations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Processing deficits and the mediation of positive affect in persuasion.

Motivational and cognitive mediators of the reduced processing of persuasive messages shown by recipients in a positive mood were tested. Ss in positive or neutral moods read strong or weak counterattitudinal advocacies for either a limited time or for as long as they wanted. Under limited exposure conditions, neutral mood Ss showed attitude change indicative of systematic processing, whereas positive mood Ss showed no differentiation of strong and weak versions of the message. When message exposure was unlimited, positive mood Ss viewed the message longer than did neutral mood Ss and sytematically processed it rather than relying on persuasion heuristics. These findings replicated with 2 manipulations of mood and 2 different attitude issues. We interpret the results as providing evidence that reduced cognitive capacity to process the message contributes to the decrements shown by positive mood Ss. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of source magnification of cognitive effort on attitudes: An information-processing view.

In Exp I 120 undergraduates viewed a videotape of 1 or 3 speakers presenting 1 or 3 arguments in favor of a counterattitudinal position. The 3-source/3-argument message produced significantly more persuasion than any of the other conditions, which did not differ from each other. It is suggested that each time a speaker appears, the recipient "gears up" to process the message and that if either speaker or argument is repeated, further thinking about the arguments is minimal. Exp II (30 Ss) excluded an alternative to this processing interpretation by showing that Ss exposed to the multiple-source/multiple-argument message did not infer that the pool of proproposal arguments was larger than that inferred by other Ss. In Exp III (100 Ss), Ss exposed to 3 compelling arguments purportedly produced by 3 different persons generated more positive thoughts and were more persuaded than Ss who read the same high quality arguments presumably generated by 1 person. However, Ss exposed to 3 weak arguments purportedly produced by 3 different persons generated more negative thoughts and were less persuaded than Ss who read the same low quality arguments attributed to 1 source. Overall, results indicate that increasing the number of sources of a message increases thinking about the message content. This increased thinking can result in either increased or decreased persuasion, depending on the cogency of the message arguments. (16 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Majority and minority influence: Source-position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny.

Two experiments addressed the issue of whether endorsement of a position by a numerical majority or a minority leads to greater scrutiny of the information presented in a persuasive message. In Exp 1, a counterattitudinal position was endorsed by a majority or a minority and was supported by strong or weak arguments. Argument quality had a larger impact on attitudes with majority than with minority endorsement. In Exp 2, a proattitudinal or a counterattitudinal message was endorsed by a majority or a minority and was supported by strong or weak arguments. When the source and message position were unexpected (i.e., majority-counter and minority-pro messages), argument quality had a larger impact on attitudes than when the source and message position were expected (i.e., majority-pro and minority-counter messages). Thus, either majority or minority endorsement can enhance message scrutiny if the source-position pairing is surprising. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion.

Tested the view that the number of arguments in a message could affect agreement with a communication by serving as a simple acceptance cue when personal involvement was low but could affect agreement by enhancing issue-relevant thinking when personal involvement was high. In addition to manipulating the personal relevance of the communication topic, both the number and the quality of the arguments in the message were varied. In a pilot study with 46 undergraduates, when the issue was of low relevance, Ss showed more agreement in response to a message containing 6 arguments (3 strong and 3 weak) than to messages containing either 3 strong or 3 weak arguments. Under high involvement, however, the 6-argument message did not increase agreement over the message containing only 3 strong arguments. In the full experiment, 168 undergraduates received either 3 or 9 arguments that were either all cogent or all specious under conditions of either high or low involvement. The manipulation of argument number had a greater impact under low than under high involvement, but the manipulation of argument quality had a greater impact under high than low involvement. Results indicate that increasing the number of arguments in a message could affect persuasion whether or not the actual content of the arguments was scrutinized. (53 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

When motives clash: Issue involvement and response involvement as determinants of persuasion.

College students heard a strong or weak message after learning whether the message issue would have relevance to their personal lives outside the laboratory (high or low issue involvement) and whether they would later discuss the message issue (high or low response involvement). Judging from subjects' recall of message information, either high issue involvement or high response involvement was sufficient to instigate high levels of attention to the message. Issue-involved-only subjects, however, were most strongly influenced by message quality. They agreed more with and had more favorable thoughts about strong relative to weak messages, and they were most likely to engage in attitude-consistent behavior. Response-involved-only subjects were not affected by message quality, either on public attitude and thought measures or on a private behavioral measure. Response-and-issue-involved subjects were in between these extremes. Message quality had modest effects on their thoughts and attitudes, but not on their behavior. These results suggest that issue involvement encourages systematic processing that is sensitive to how well message arguments concur with personal standards. In contrast, response involvement encourages expression of attitudes that satisfy self-presentational needs. This expression may be mediated by message processing that is either biased toward moderation or nonintegrative, or by outward impression management, or both. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses.

Two experiments with 96 undergraduates tested the hypothesis that high issue involvement enhances thinking about the content of a persuasive communication. Exp I varied involvement and the direction of a message (pro- or counterattitudinal). Increasing involvement enhanced persuasion for the proattitudinal but reduced persuasion for the counterattitudinal advocacy. Exp II again varied involvement, but both messages took a counterattitudinal position. One message employed compelling arguments and elicited primarily favorable thoughts, whereas the other employed weak arguments and elicited primarily counterarguments. Increasing involvement enhanced persuasion for the strong message but reduced persuasion for the weak one. Together the experiments provide support for the view that high involvement with an issue enhances message processing and therefore can result in either increased or decreased acceptance. (43 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment.

High- and low-task-importance Ss (367 undergraduates) read a strong or weak unambiguous message or an ambiguous message that was attributed to a high- or low-credibility source. Under low task importance, heuristic processing of the credibility cue was the sole determinant of Ss' attitudes, regardless of argument ambiguity or strength. When task importance was high and message content was unambiguous, systematic processing alone determined attitudes when this content contradicted the validity of the credibility heuristic; when message content did not contradict this heuristic, systematic, and heuristic processing determined attitudes independently. Finally, when task importance was high and message content was ambiguous, heuristic and systematic processing again both influenced attitudes. Yet, source credibility affected persuasion partly through its impact on the valence of systematic processing, confirming that heuristic processing can bias systematic processing when evidence is ambiguous. Implications for persuasion and other social judgment phenomena are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of cost, normative support, and issue importance on motivation to persuade in-group deviants.

Persuading in-group deviants to become normative may carry costs that outweigh the advantages of group consensus. This study investigates the effects of potential cost, normative support, and issue importance on group members’ efforts to change the views of in-group deviants (N = 115). In line with previous research into bystander intervention, the authors show that when costs are low, high levels of either importance or normative support are sufficient to increase persuasion action tendency. When costs are higher, higher levels of both issue importance and normative support are necessary to increase persuasion action tendency. In addition, content analysis of messages sent to in-group deviants show that high potential costs and low levels of issue importance reduce the proportion of messages sent that are persuasive. These results are discussed in terms of theories of approach/avoidance and social identity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Social identification effects in group polarization.

Tested a model of group polarization derived from social identity theory, proposing that if group members conform to group norms, attitude polarization could occur only if group members perceive those norms as more extreme than they "objectively" are. In Exp I, 60 undergraduates perceived attitude-relevant information attributed to speakers who were categorized as a group as representing a more extreme position of the issue than when the same information was attributed to noncategorized individuals. Attitude polarization occurred when Ss believed the information came from their in-group. As predicted, this polarization resulted from Ss' adoption of the "extremitized" in-group norm. In Exp II, categorization was manipulated by focusing 42 Ss on their group performance or on their individual performance. When Ss were focused on their group membership, group norms were perceived as more extreme, and attitude polarization due to conformity to these extremitized norms occurred. When Ss were focused on their individual performance, no extremitization occurred, and attitudes shifted to a more neutral position on the issue. (34 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion.

Studied the relation among need for cognition (NFC), message processing, and persuasion. 57 pairs of undergraduates holding approximately the same attitude toward instituting senior comprehensive exams but differing widely in their scores on a NFC scale participated in Exp I. Ss read a set of either strong or weak arguments supporting the recommendation that senior comprehensive exams be instituted. Results reveal that argument quality had a greater impact on the message evaluations and source impressions provided by Ss high than by those low in NFC and that Ss high in NFC reported expending more cognitive effort and recalled more message arguments regardless of argument quality. The findings from Exp I were replicated in Exp II (110 female undergraduates) with a different topic (i.e., raising student tuition) and cover story. The inclusion of a postcommunication attitude measure revealed that the attitudes of Ss high in NFC were more affected by argument quality than those of Ss low in NFC. These studies document a reliable difference among individuals in their tendency to derive information from and elaborate on externally provided message arguments. (39 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The impact of cultural collectivism on reward allocation.

Two studies, with 224 American and 240 Chinese university students, tested the idea that the collectivism of a culture leads to different styles of reward allocation with in- and out-group members. The 1st study used an out-group situation, in which Ss were led to believe that they worked with a partner whom they would not meet, to obtain a group reward. The collectivistic Chinese Ss were found to follow the equity norm more closely in dividing the group reward than the individualistic American Ss when pressure of social evaluation was removed. In the 2nd study, Ss read a scenario in which an allocator worked with either an in- or out-group member. The allocator had either a low or high input and used either the equity or equality norm to divide a group reward. Compared with American Ss, Chinese Ss liked an allocator who divided the group reward equally with an in-group member more and regarded such an allocation as fairer. When Ss were asked to assume that they were the allocator and to hypothetically divide the reward, Chinese Ss followed the equity norm more closely than did American Ss when the recipient was an out-group member or when the Ss' input was low. However, when Ss' input was high and the recipient was an in-group member, Chinese Ss followed the equality norm more than did American Ss. Findings are discussed in terms of the desire for maintaining group solidarity in a collectivist culture. (42 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Discrepant social communications.

Observed 32 children (13–42 mo old) individually in the presence of their mothers. Eight messages systematically varied between the visual and auditory channels were given by the experimenter. Some messages asked S to approach; other messages asked S to stay away. Some were congruent and others discrepant across channels. Order of presentation was counterbalanced across Ss. All Ss approached the experimenter when he unambiguously invited them with a smiling face, affirmative head nods, manual beckoning, and a pleasant tone of voice, saying, "Come here." When the experimenter's request to approach or to stay away was on one channel only, that is, was either visual or auditory, about three-fourths of the Ss conformed to it, approaching or staying away as requested. When requests were discrepant across channels, behavior was more variable, but more Ss conformed to the auditory than to the visual message. The messages constitute a Guttman scale, a unidimensional and cumulative hierarchy based on the individual patterns of responses to them. (20 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

How children learn to listen: The effects of modeling feedback styles on children's performance in referential communication.

48 kindergartners and 48 2nd graders participated as listeners in a referential communication task with an adult speaker. Ss were presented with sets of 4 pictures and asked to choose the referent on the basis of a speaker's message. The messages were either adequate or ambiguous, describing 2 of the 4 possible referents. Ss were instructed to ask questions if they needed more information. Prior to these trials, Ss were exposed to 1 of 3 modeling conditions in which they viewed an adult listener responding to ambiguous messages by asking either general questions, specific questions, or specific questions accompanied by an explanation of the underlying strategy. A 4th group received no modeling. Although each of the modeling groups was successful in increasing the frequency of the modeled question, older Ss benefited more from modeling than younger children. Age differences suggested that the effectiveness of modeling interacted with children's existing cognitive abilities. Auxiliary evidence pointed to the role of information processing in children's abilities to deal with ambiguous communications as listeners. (16 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effect of presenting a message in written form on young children's ability to evaluate its communication adequacy.

Conducted 2 experiments to test the hypothesis that a total of 90 1st-grade beginning readers could evaluate the referential-communicative adequacy of simple, 2-word messages better if they saw them written out while hearing them spoken than if they only heard them spoken. Oral-plus-written messages did prove significantly easier for the Ss to evaluate than did oral-only ones. They were also easier to evaluate than control oral-plus-written messages, in which the words were written as 2 illegible scribbles rather than printed clearly. This facilitation effect was equally strong whether the legible written message remained visible during message evaluation or was erased almost immediately after being written. Reading the message apparently did not improve message evaluation by improving message recall: Message evaluation and message recall were uncorrelated. The results seem consistent with D. R. Olson's (1981) theory that learning to read and write helps children attend to and analyze the literal meaning of a message. (10 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Vividness can undermine the persuasiveness of messages.

Research that presented messages on 2 social issues tested the idea that vividness effects are most likely when message recipients are not constrained to pay attention to the information. When a low level of attentional constraint was established by presenting a message to Ss in a seemingly incidental manner, vivid messages were less memorable and less persuasive than pallid messages. Process data suggested that the vivid elements in a message (i.e., colorful language, picturesque examples, and provacative metaphors) interfered with Ss' reception of its essential meaning and thereby reduced its memorability and persuasiveness. In contrast, when Ss' attention was constrained by instructing them to attend to a message, its vividness had no impact on their memory for its contents or on it persuasiveness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The maverick effect: Increased communicator credibility as a result of abandoning a career.

Used questionnaire responses to select 200 undergraduates who did not hold extreme opinions on the topics of unidentified flying objects and ecology. Ss were assigned to 1 of 4 groups and heard a communicator deliver messages either for or against 1 of the 2 issues. One-half of the Ss in each of 4 conditions heard a message from a "maverick" who had quit an organization over the issue he was now discussing. The other 1/2 heard a person who was a member of an organization and who delivered a message in line with the official position of that organization. The "mavericks" were perceived as fairer and more trustworthy than the "nonmavericks," but not as more expert. The mavericks' conclusions were perceived as better justified by the facts, and more opinion change was elicited toward their positions, as measured by the percentage of Ss changing and by the pre-post communication position of audiences. (French summary) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Persuasiveness of in-group and out-group political messages: The case of negative political campaigning.

Two experiments investigated the processes underlying evaluation of in-group and out-group political messages from candidates involved in a negative political campaign. The effectiveness of different types of attack messages depended on (a) the political affiliation with the source and target of an attack message and (b) the justification provided for the attack. Experiment 1 demonstrated that the content of the attack messages affected evaluations of an in-group candidate but not of an out-group candidate. Experiment 2 indicated that the use of "apparent justification" for attack messages resulted in more positive evaluations of an out-group source but diminished preference for an in-group source. The results indicate that although participants were sensitive to message content from both in-group and out-group sources, less stringent criteria were used when evaluating out-group political messages that when evaluating in-group political messages. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of the use of introductory rhetorical questions versus statements on information processing.

A strong or weak message was introduced to 160 undergraduates with either rhetorical questions or statements under high or low issue involvement. Introductions with rhetorical questions were found to produce more favorable thoughts and a more positive attitude than statements when strong arguments were employed, and more unfavorable thoughts and less positive attitude when weak arguments were employed. Introductions with rhetorical questions led to more favorable thoughts than statements when involvement was low and to more unfavorable thoughts and a less positive attitude when involvement was high. It is argued that introductions with questions arouse the reader's uncertainty and motivate more intensive processing of message content than statements. The possibility of a nonmonotonic relation between issue involvement and persuasion given a strong counter-attitudinal message is suggested. (31 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Openand closed-mindedness and the ability to differentiate source and message.

"It was hypothesized that the more open an individual's belief system, the greater should be his ability to distinguish between the message content and the message source and to judge each on its intrinsic merits. Seventy-six Ss judged six source-statement pairs on a series of Semantic Differential scales. The sample was equally divided between open and closed Ss and these two groups were further equally divided between those Ss using the source as the reference point for judging the statements and those using the statement as the reference point for judging the source. The results provided evidence that open and closed individual do differ in their relative ability to differentiate between sources and messages and to evaluate them independently in a more or less realistic communication situation." Open minded Ss were performing better than closed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)