| Abstract: | Compared with nonentitative groups, entitative targets are considered to elicit more elaborative processing because of the singularity or unity they represent. However, when groups serve as sources of persuasive messages, other dynamics may operate. The current research suggests that entitativity is intrinsically linked to perceptions of a group’s efficacy related to the advocacy, and this efficacy combines with the position of the appeal to determine message elaboration. When messages are counterattitudinal, entitative (efficacious) sources should elicit greater processing than nonentitative groups because of concern that the entitative sources may be more likely to bring about the negative outcomes proposed. However, when appeals are proattitudinal, sources low in entitativity (nonefficacious) should initiate more elaboration due to concern that they may be unlikely to facilitate the positive outcomes proposed. These hypotheses were supported in a series of studies. Preliminary studies established the entitativity–efficacy relation (Studies 1A and 1B). Primary persuasion studies showed that manipulations of source entitativity (Studies 2 and 3) and source efficacy (Studies 4A and 4B) have opposite effects on processing as a function of message discrepancy. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
