(Petty, Cacioppo, 1986)



◦Elaboration – the extent to which individual thinks about arguments contained in the communication
◦Likelihood – the probability that an event will occur
◦
}
}
}The model tells us when people are likely to elaborate, or not elaborate, on message
Low elaboration
High elaboration

}2 distinct ways (routes) people process communication
◦The CENTRAL ROUTE is characterized by cognitive elaboration. Individual carefully evaluates
arguments, considers implications of the communicator’s ideas, and relate information to their own
knowledge and values.
◦The PERIPHERAL ROUTE is very different. People examine message quickly and focus on simple cues.
Key factors are physical appeal, speaking style, music, etc. People rely on mental shortcuts.

road two.jpg
Argument evaluation
⇨ detailed thinker
Heuristics
(physical appeal, speaking style, music, etc)
⇨ cognitive miser

}The central route involves message elaboration, defined as the extent to which a person carefully
thinks about issue-relevant arguments contained in a persuasive communication


[USEMAP]liking.jpg cat.jpg puppy 2.jpg sexy girl car.jpg tom cruise.jpg sleva 1.jpg



}
bakedbeans.jpg





P1060663mini.jpg






MOTIVATION & ABILITY
Central route
Peripheral route
question mark.JPG

}Involvement
–Personally relevant issues are more likely to be processed on the central route; issues with
little relevance take the peripheral route
– (High I – Central, Low I - Peripheral)
}Need for cognition
–Personality characteristic – a need to understand the world and to employ thinking to accomplish
this goal
–Certain individuals have a need for cognitive clarity, regardless of the issue; these people will
work through many of the ideas and arguments they hear.

}People given the same information can process it differently.
◦When personal relevance was high, people evaluated the merits of the presented information.
◦When personal relevance was low, people counted the number of arguments presented and made a
simple inference: “more is better”
“Comprehensive final exam” experiment
Personally relevant issue
Personally irrelevant issue
vs.
Variables:
Speaker’s expertise
Arguments strength

High involvement
Low involvement
Favorable attitude
Unfavorable attitude
0
- 0.4
0.4
Expert source
Non-expert source
High involvement
Low involvement
Favorable attitude
Unfavorable attitude
0
- 0.4
0.4
Strong arguments
Weak arguments
When you are highly involved you care about the arguments
When you are highly involved you are likely NOT to care what source you have

}Distractions (disrupt elaboration)
}Knowledge


◦Thoughtful consideration of strong arguments will produce positive shifts in attitude
–The change is persistent over time
–It resists counter-persuasion.
–It predicts future behavior.
–
◦Thoughtful consideration of weak arguments can lead to negative boomerang effects
◦
◦Mixed or neutral messages won’t change attitudes and in fact reinforce original attitudes.

}Speaker’s credibility
}Celebrity endorsers
}But…short-lived attitude change
pepsi britney.jpg chef.jpg

Low personal relevance……………………………High personal relevance
High distraction……………………………….…………...…..Low distraction
Low accountability……………………………….……….High accountability
Low repetition………………………………………..………….High repetition
Low knowledge………………………………….……………..High knowledge
Low need for cognition……………………..………High need for cognition
Elaboration continuum
thinker.jpg

}Stability of the attitude
}Resistance to counter-persuasion
}Attitude-behavior consistency
}
Central route to persuasion
Peripheral route to persuasion
Long-lived
Short-lived
Hard to change
Easy to change
Attitude more consistent with behavior
Attitude less consistent with behavior

}If listeners are motivated and able to elaborate a message, you should rely on factual arguments
}If listeners are unable or unwilling to elaborate a message, you should rely on packaging rather
than content
}
}
}WHAT ARE FUTURE TRENDS???

}More peripheral processing
}Focus on emotions
}The role of credibility, mental shortcuts, etc…
mycky nadobi.jpg amazon.jpg

yes we can.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY&feature=PlayList&p=D94F4A0FBC23F0F5&index=0&playnext=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghSJsEVf0pU&feature=related

}Resistance to persuasion can be induced by exposing individuals to a small dose of arguments
against particular idea, coupled with appropriate criticism of these arguments
paroubek.jpg topolanek.jpg needle.jpg

}
}Forewarning
◦Individuals generate a large number of counterarguments, strengthening their opposition to the
advocated position
needle.jpg

}
}Two-sided is better…
} …but never use it when you are not able to refuse it!
needle.jpg