Chapter 5 - Cognitive Influences on Attitudes

Question 1

Yale Model of Persuasion

Answer 1

Messages change people’s attitudes by presenting an incentive for attitude change (utilitarian or social benefits)

Question 2

How can incentives be influence (Hovland et al.)? (3)

Answer 2

1. Source - different (ex. expert, likeability, attractive) and low or high vested interest
2. Context (size of audience, weather, fear appeal)
3. Target (mood, who, interested, self-esteem, intelligence)

Question 3

Hovland et al.’s three processing stages for persuasive messages to work (3)

Answer 3

1. Notice/pay attention to message
2. Comprehend it
3. Accept message’s conclusions

Question 4

Information-Processing Paradigm (McGuire) (6 stages)

Answer 4

1. Presentation Stage
2. Attention Stage
3. Comprehension Stage
4. Yielding Stage
5. Retention Stage
6. Behaviour Stage

Question 5

Compensation Principle for IPP

Answer 5

Opposing effect sizes at different stages should produce curvilinear effects on persuasion (ex. high self-esteem ^ change of attending but less driven to agree)

Question 6

Criticisms of Information-Processing Paradigm (2)

Answer 6

1. Does not explain how message acceptance emerges

2. Cannot explain effects of weak messages

Question 7

Cognition-in-Persuasion Model (Albarracin)

Answer 7

People who receive a message have a specific interpretation of it based on information available at the time

Question 8

Persuasion understood by cognitive responses (DEFINE)

Answer 8

Message relevant thoughts following a message based on (1) beliefs, (2) communication itself, (3) other factors
Attitude change more likely if people generate +ve cognitive responses

Question 9

Acceptance-Yielding-Impact Model or Believe x Evaluation Model (Fishbein and Ajzen)

Answer 9

Messages should cause attitude change when they change beliefs underlying attitudes and/or their evaluations of those believes
Focus on salient** beliefs

Question 10

How does AYI Model work?

Answer 10

If new attitude reflects ^ acceptance of message (adds to beliefs) then yielding has occurred
Message can also affect other beliefs indirectly (ex. laundry detergent as harmful)

Question 11

Expectancy x Value Perspective

Answer 11

Belief change can occur by altering either (1) expectancies associated w/ beliefs or (2) values associated with them
Difficult to test*

Question 12

The two dual-process models of persuasion (2)

Answer 12

1. Elaboration Likelihood Model
2. Heuristic-System Model

Two main ideas:

• High motivation and ability should cause strong arguments to influence attitudes more than weak arguments
• Low motivation or ability should mean attitudes affected by simple cues (ex. heuristics)

Question 13

Elaboration Likelihood Model seven propositions (7)

Answer 13

1. Aim to attain correct attitude*
2. # /nature of elaboration can vary
3. Vars can affect attitudes as arguments or as cues*
4. Motivation ^ argument scrutiny
5. Motivation and Ability ^ use of arguments over cues
6. Biased processing = biased issue-relevant thoughts
7. Elaboration causes strong attitudes

Question 14

Heuristic-System Model eight propositions (8)

Answer 14

1. Aim to attain correct, value-expressive OR image-maintaining attitude
2. Heuristic processing and systematic processing
3. Least effort and sufficiency principle if low confidence needed
4. Ability hypothesis (heuristic easier than systematic)
5. Additivity Hypothesis (H and S can co-occur with independent effects)
6. Bias Hypothesis - heuristics can affect systematic
7. Attenuation Hypothesis - When contradiction, S will reduce use of H
8. Enhancement Hypothesis - when confidence needed is high but ability is low, will rely more on heuristics

Question 15

Dual process models and Comprehensive Exam schedule study

Answer 15

1. Personal relevant (timing) x expertise of group recommending x content (strong or weak arguments
2. Ps rated attitude toward exam
   Results: when personal relevance, strong arguments led to ^ favourably (no effect of expertise)
   When personal relevance was low, more favourable if from expert source

Question 16

Differences in scrutiny between ELM and HSM

Answer 16

ELM - weigh strengths/weaknesses more strongly when biases present
HSM - heuristic process affects nature of people’s message content (bias hypothesis)

Question 17

Role of heuristics such as expertise in ELM and HSM

Answer 17

ELM - expertise (1) acts as cue for more/less evaluation when motivation low, (2) scrutinized as argument when motivation high, (3) affect motivation when elaboration not determined by other variables
HSM - expertise act as a heuristic (bias) for more processing only when they contradict gist of message

Question 18

Advertising by untrustworthy or trustworthy source dual-process study

Answer 18

More scrutiny when untrustworthy source was endorsing product

Question 19

STOP REVIEW UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE ELM AND HSM MODELS

Answer 19

GO GO GO!!!

Question 20

Testing HSM predictions when strength of argument is moderate study

Answer 20

1. Ps given info about product, manipulated relevance x credibility x argument strength (strong, weak, moderate)
   Results: when low relevance, Ps attitudes more +ve following highly credible source (argument strength had no impact)
   When high relevance, strong argument persuaded Ps and credibility had no impact
   BUT when neutral and relevance was high** source contributed to attitude

Question 21

Unimodal Model (Kruglanski)

Answer 21

Persuasion through a single process where any info that is relevant to the attitude judgment can be used as compelling evidence to form an attitude even when info is a cue
I.e. source is relevant as its own argument

Question 22

Criticism of unimodal model (2)

Answer 22

1. Low validity as previous studies found differences in cues and content even when dependent on each other (9 vs. 3 weak arguments)
2. Dual process model states than any variable can serve multiple roles (ie. cue CAN be an argument under high relevance)

Question 23

Meta-cognitive Model

Answer 23

Role of meta-cognitions (thinking about thoughts) in attitude formation and change
Predicts when we receive new info but do not agree, we still remember it but tag as invalid

Question 24

Persuasive Interventions effect in Meta-Cognitive Model

Answer 24

1. introduce new evaluative association with attitude object

2. Reshape old association

Question 25

Meta-Cognitive Model and predictions for explicit and implicit measurements

Answer 25

Explicit: At conscious level attitude may appear unchanged
Implicit: Unconscious level may appear ambivalent
(seen at both measurements if new info is added AND believed)

Question 26

People descriptions switched and the Meta-Cognitive Model study

Answer 26

Ps corrected judgments on explicit measures but showed evidence of conflict on implicit measures