ELABORATION LIKELIHOOD MODEL CTU LIVE CHAT Developed by
ELABORATION LIKELIHOOD MODEL CTU LIVE CHAT Developed by. Richard Petty. & John Cacioppo
Two mental routes to changing an attitude • Central processing • Thinking actively about argument • Peripheral processing • Shorthand way to accept/reject an argument
Central route processing • Involves message ELABORATION • “Extent to which a person carefully thinks about issue-relevant arguments contained in a persuasive communication. ” • Ideas are scrutinized carefully • Goes beyond simple understanding • Receiver generates attitude relevant thoughts about persuasive message
Central Route: Biased or Objective • Central route processing can be characterized by objective or biased elaboration on argument • Objective processing equals objective evaluation of argument • Biased processing most likely to occur with vested interest or unbalanced amount of information
Peripheral processing • Does not involve elaboration • “Without any active thinking about the attributes of the issue or the object of consideration. ” • No extensive cognitive work required for decision making • Receiver relies on a variety of CUES to make quick decisions • Cues allow us to travel along the peripheral route on auto pilot
Peripheral route: Cues for “Click, Whirr” • • • Reciprocation Consistency Social proof Liking Authority Scarcity
ELM as a continuum • Routes are not mutually exclusive • Central and Peripheral are poles on a cognitive processing continuum • Elaboration likelihood determinant • Most receive middle ground attention
Motivation for elaboration • Personal relevance • Need for cognition • “I usually end up deliberating about issues even when they don’t affect me personally. ” • “I prefer my life to be filled with puzzles I must solve. ” • “I prefer to think about small, daily projects to long-term ones. ” • “Thinking is not my idea of fun. ”
Ability for elaboration • Freedom from distraction • Distraction disrupts elaboration • Concentration must be possible • Sufficient prior knowledge • Receiver must be able to understand information in order to be able to elaborate on it
Elaborated arguments • Based on PERCEIVED strength • Strong argument is one that generates favorable thoughts when heard and scrutinized • Arguments can be • Strong = favorable thoughts • Weak = unfavorable thoughts • Neutral = neutral thoughts
Power of elaboration • Enhanced thinking will lead to stronger attitude change • Positive or negative attitudes • Persistent over time • Resistant to counterpersuasion • Predictable in terms of behavior • Except Neutral (No change)
The other side: Peripheral Cues • Most messages are processed this way out of necessity (info overload) • Differs both qualitatively and quantitatively from central route • Cues aid in making quick decisions • Speaker credibility • Reaction of others • External rewards
Back to the continuum • Single persuasion variables can take on multiple roles: argument, cue, or an elaboration moderator • Peripheral cues can stimulate elaboration (leading to central route processing)
Practical Utility of ELM • High Elaboration Likelihood: • Motivation and Ability present • Focus on the argument itself • Support essential • Cogent argument • Maximum Effect • Low Elaboration Likelihood: • Motivation and Ability absent • Focus on cues within delivery • Specious argument • Minimum Effect
Praise for ELM theory • Instrumental in integrating the literature on source, receiver, message, and context effects • Has become a springboard for new research
Criticism of ELM theory • Involvement distinction exists • Precludes a multi -channel processing • Methodological problems • No conceptual understanding of good argument
- Slides: 16