• Like
  • Save
The Elaboration Likelihood Model etg271112
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

The Elaboration Likelihood Model etg271112

  • 1,423 views
Published

 

Published in Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,423
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. The ElaborationLikelihood ModelPetty, R. E., & Brinol, P. (2012). The elaboration likelihood model. Pp. 224-245 in van Lange,Kruglanski & Higgins, eds, Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, vol. 1 London: SagePublications.tracing the development of theelaboration likelihood model (ELM)across three decades of research
  • 2. Discussion Flow Introduction Four Core ELM Ideas Six Phases of ELM Research Advantages of the ELM Coherence in the Field of Persuasion Real Applications of the ELM
  • 3. LEFT TO RIGHT: Richard E. Petty, John T. Cacciopo,and the textbook they wrote (1981) in their firstfew years out of graduate school - Attitudes andPersuassion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches– where their theory was named “elaborationlikelihood model”
  • 4.  Petty’s dissertation – two routes to persuasion Tony Greenwald, in PhD Committee – cognitive response Shelly Chaiken and Alice Eagly – working on heuristic-systematic model
  • 5. Four Core ELM Ideas1. Modifying people’s attitudes or other judgements can be done with a high degrees of thought or a relatively low degree of thought “elaboration continuum”
  • 6. Four Core ELM Ideas2. There are numerous specific processes of change that operate along this continuum –Low end – peripheral route to persuasion (PRP)High end – central route to persuasion (CRP)
  • 7. Four Core ELM Ideas3. It matters whether persuasion occurs as the result of relatively high or low amounts of thought –The more a judgement is based on thinking about the merits of an issue, the more it tends to persist over time, resist attempts at change, and has consequences for other judgements and behavior.
  • 8. Four Core ELM Ideas4. The ELM organizes the many specific processes by which variables can affect attitudes into a finite set that operate at different points along the elaboration continuum
  • 9. Six Phases of ELM Research Chronological stages of work on testing the theory 1. Establishing that there was a thinking continuum 2. Providing evidence that the mechanism of persuasion could be different under high and low conditions 3. Examined the consequences of attitudes changed by high vs. low thinking conditions
  • 10. Six Phases of ELM Research 4. Providing evidence for the “multiple roles” postulate [postulate #6] 5. Extending the ELM principles to other judgmental areas beyond persuasion 6. Exploration of a particular role that variables can assume in modifying attitudes or other judgments (i.e. metacognition)
  • 11. Amount of ThinkingBiases in ThinkingPHASE 1:EXPLORING THEELABORATIONCONTINUUM
  • 12. Phase 1: Exploring the ElaborationContinuum ELM allows for multiple processes that can involve different degrees of thinking ◦ A continuum ◦ Situational and individual difference variables ◦ Assumption: goal to determine how good or bad the object is ◦ Motivational and ability factors important
  • 13. Phase 1: Exploring the ElaborationContinuumAmount of Thinking To show effect of elaboration in persuasion External distraction ◦ Disrupt learning (message learning approach) ◦ Justification of extra effort (dissonance theory) ◦ Affect message processing (elaboration continuum)
  • 14. Phase 1: Exploring the ElaborationContinuumAmount of Thinking Message with many strong arguments (ability factor) ◦ HP (more favorable implications) = more +A ◦ LP (few favorable implications) = less +A ◦ Distraction = -A Message with weak arguments – opposite HPs are inclined to process more compared to LPs
  • 15. Phase 1: Exploring the ElaborationContinuumAmount of Thinking Personal Relevance – linking the message to the self (motivational factor) ◦ Experiment: comps exam for undergraduate students +PR = +Ps, arguments strong
  • 16. Phase 1: Exploring the ElaborationContinuumAmount of Thinking Positive mood = +A Need for cognition = +A ◦ Intrinsic ◦ Reduction of discomfort to doubt
  • 17. Phase 1: Exploring the ElaborationContinuumBiases in Thinking Thinking can be subjective ◦ Relevance ◦ Consistency
  • 18. Phase 1: Exploring the ElaborationContinuumBiases in Thinking Motivational and ability variables that bias processing ◦ psychological reactance ◦ balance motives ◦ impression motives ◦ self affirmation
  • 19. PHASE 2:CENTRAL ANDPERIPHERAL ROUTESTO PERSUASION
  • 20. Phase 2: Central and PeripheralRoutes to Persuasion High end – prior knowledge, schema Low end – other mechanisms (classical conditioning, self-perception, heuristics)
  • 21. Phase 2: Central and PeripheralRoutes to Persuasion Expertise of Message Source +A by high thought process (eval of arguments presented), high motivation to think +A by low thought process (reliance on expertise), low motivation to think
  • 22. CRITIQUE TO THE ELM(the HSM and other dual process theories) Comparing impact of relatively simple cues (Kruglanski and Thompson, 1999) described briefly with more complex verbal arguments = perhaps only one mechanism of persuasion
  • 23. CRITIQUE TO THE ELM(the HSM and other dual process theories) Not all dual processes! ◦ Content and process are orthogonal ◦ When goal is to scrutinize, the person will use whatever is useful information to reach that goal (whether as a cue or as substantive argument)
  • 24. CRITIQUE TO THE ELM(the HSM and other dual process theories) Experiment: a message with 3 strong arguments vs a message with 3 strong + 3 weak arguments ◦ +R, SA + WA = A ◦ -R, SA + WA = +ADifference in the use of evaluation strategy leading to different outcomes (depends on a person’s overall motivation and ability to think)
  • 25. Attitudes changed with high amount ofissue-relevant thinking are strongerthan attitudes changed with minimalobject-relevant thoughtPHASE 3:ELABORATIONAFFECTS ATTITUDESTRENGTH
  • 26. Phase 3: Elaboration AffectsAttitude Strength ◦ Stronger – persists over time, resist change, impact on other judgments and behavior ◦ Whether objective or subjective
  • 27. Phase 3: Elaboration AffectsAttitude Strength Attitudes changed with high amount of issue-relevant thinking are stronger than attitudes changed with minimal object- relevant thought ◦ Acquisition of more support for attitude, attitude becomes more accessible and internally consistent ◦ Confidence
  • 28. Phase 3: Elaboration AffectsAttitude Strength Elaboration enhances attitude strength ◦ Persistence and resistance can be independent – pairings of attitude object with positive cues persist but do not resist attack (favorable attitude memorable, but weak on argumentation)
  • 29. Phase 3: Elaboration AffectsAttitude Strength Elaboration enhances attitude strength ◦ New attitudes should replace the old and serve as guide to action ◦ Attitudes based on high thinking are still stronger, more likely to guide behavior because of certainty (confidence) People don’t have to actually engage in more thinking to attain confidence – they only have to believe they have engaged in more thinking
  • 30. Variables can: serve as cues, serve asarguments, affect the amount of thinking,affect the bias in thinking, affect whatpeople think about their thoughtsPHASE 4:MULTIPLE ROLESFOR PERSUASIONVARIABLES
  • 31. Phase 4: Multiple Roles forPersuasion Variables Experiment: Pen ad in context of comedy or bland documentary ◦ +M = +emo, +thoughts, +A ◦ -M = +emo, thoughts, +A LPs = classical conditioning, affect heuristic HPs = affect infusion (emos can make retrieval and generation of affectively congruent cognitive material more likely)
  • 32. Phase 4: Multiple Roles forPersuasion Variables When thinking is high- ◦ Emos bias thoughts ◦ Emos can be evaluated as argument
  • 33. Phase 4: Multiple Roles forPersuasion Variables “Mood as Information” ◦ Emotions can affect the extent of thinking, outside of high or low thinking and other variables ◦ -emo signals danger = need info processing ◦ +emo signals safety = no need for high thinking
  • 34. From persuasion (attitudechange) to any judgmentPHASE 5:EXTENDINGBEYOND THEPERSUASIONCONTEXT
  • 35. Phase 5: Extending Beyond thePersuasion Context Early 1990s - Duane Wegener, advisee ◦ Extension to stereotyping – how stereotypes can bias information processing, how stereotypes can serve as simple heuristics to judgment
  • 36. Phase 5: Extending Beyond thePersuasion Context Experiment: videotape of child working on intelligence tests, observers with prior knowledge of SES ◦ Not under cognitive load: +SES = +IQ (bias processing of info observed about the child) ◦ Under cognitive load: +SES = +IQ (use of SES as heuristic)
  • 37. Phase 5: Extending Beyond thePersuasion Context Numerical Anchoring ◦ Exposure to seemingly high (vs low) random number influences numeric responses to a question ◦ Experiment: SSNs and estimation of age of George Washington when he died ◦ Experiment: age of Neil Armstrong when walked the moon (w/ and w/o disruption)
  • 38. Thought Confidence – a meta-cognition that refers to a senseof how valid one’s thoughts seemPHASE 6:A NEW ROLE FORVARIABLES – SELF-VALIDATION
  • 39. Phase 6: A New Role forVariables – Self-Validation Self-Validation Hypothesis ◦ People not only generate ideas but also seek to determine their correctness ◦ November 1998, Pablo Briñol – mechanism by which the effects of an earlier behavioral manipulation (head nodding) affected attitudes ◦ Head nodding validated thoughts people had, magnifying impact on attitudes ◦ Unconvincing!
  • 40. Phase 6: A New Role forVariables – Self-Validation With Zakary Tormala ◦ Experiment: thoughts listing on new campus proposal and rating of confidence ◦ Attitudes affected by the number and valence of thoughts listed and confidence
  • 41. Phase 6: A New Role forVariables – Self-Validation Source Credibility ◦ Experiment: information about source presented after message processing ◦ SA, +T = +SC, +A (reliance on their own +T) ◦ WA, -T = +SC, -A (reliance on their own –T) Self-validation mechanism operates at high en and occurs when sense of confidence experiences is attributed to one’s own thoughts
  • 42. Advantages of the ELM Any one variable can work in multiple ways and sometimes produce opposite outcomes The same persuasion outcome can be produced by different processes Not all judgmental outcomes that look the same on the surface really are the same
  • 43. Coherence in the Field of PersuasionIntegration of Empirical Outcomes The ELM explains how and when different outcomes can occur The ELM explains how and when each effect [on changed attitude] is likely Addresses some current controversies, i.e. Implicit measures of attitudes
  • 44. Coherence in the Field of PersuasionIntegration of Different Theories of Persuasion From a primary theory of judgment to metatheory (theory about theories), i.e. Competing dissonance, Self- perception Explains how major theories of attitude change are not competitive/contradictory, but operate in different circumstances ◦ Effortful thinking – cognitive response, cognitive dissonance, mood as input ◦ Less mental effort – classical conditioning, self-perception, affect heuristic Categorizes theories based on common mechanisms involved, i.e. cue theories
  • 45. Coherence in the Field of PersuasionIntegration of Source, Message, Recipient andContext Variables Any one variable can produce persuasion in multiple ways – the classic source, message, recipient, and context variables that affect attitudes can be examined from a common perspective, i.e. ◦ Source credibility, emotions --- influence on attitudes Can shed new light in looking at traditional variables that the literature appears to have relegated to just one role, i.e. self-relevance
  • 46. Real World Applications Multi-disciplinary applications Benefits of focusing on basic processes underlying effective persuasion ◦ Identifying the processes by which variables impact attitudes essential in determining outcome ◦ The process by which an attitude is formed or changed affects the strength of attitude Recent research: Reduction of prejudiced attitudes
  • 47. Class Discussion Facilitated by: Eden T. Gallardo