Chapter Eight

Theories of Message Processing

Classic Models of Persuasion:Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Developed by Festinger Individuals have a need for

consistency between attitudes and behaviors

When we behave in inconsistent ways, we feel discomfort

Thus, if we behave in an inconsistent way, we might change our attitudes to match behavior

Classic Models of Persuasion:Theory of Reasoned Action

Developed by Fishbein and Ajzen Argues that best predictor of

behavior is behavioral intention (BI) BI is predicted by attitude (sum of

weighted beliefs: pos. & neg.) and by subjective norms (influence of others in the social environment)

Extension of Reasoned Action:

Theory of Planned Behavior

Attitude

Subjective Norms

Perc’d Beh. Control

Behavioral Intention

Behavior

Classic Models of Persuasion:Social Judgment Theory

Developed by M. Sherif, C. Sherif, and colleagues

Proposes that statements about a particular “attitude object” can be arrayed to include latitudes of acceptance, rejection, and noncommitment

Attitude change will be influenced by how new messages fit among these “latitudes”

Example In Illinois, “It is unlawful to carry or possess any

firearm on any public street or other public lands within the corporate limits of a city, village, or incorporated town, except law enforcement officers...”

This law should be changed. What is your latitude of acceptance? What is your latitude of rejection? What is your latitude of noncommitment?

Acceptance non-comRejection

Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)

Developed by Petty and Cacioppo Two routes to persuasion-- Central route involves careful

scrutiny of message logic and arguments

Peripheral route involves consideration of cues in the message environment such as source credibility and message design

Which Route Do We Take? ELM proposes that people will take

the central or peripheral route based on several factors

Motivation. If people see the message as relevant, they will be motivated to process centrally

Ability. People must have the ability and be in a situation where central processing is possible

Outcomes of the Two Routes Messages processed through the

central route lead to attitude change that is “relatively enduring, resistant, and predictive of behavior.”

Messages processed through the peripheral route lead to attitude change that will be “relatively temporary, susceptible [to change], and unpredictive of behavior.”

ELM: Critiques of the Model There has been a great deal of

research stemming from ELM ELM has also been criticized: First, many critics point out that it is

possible to take both routes to persuasion

Second, many critics believe the ELM is difficult to falsify

Heuristic-Systematic Model Developed by Chaiken Another dual processing model Systematic processing (like central route

in ELM) Heuristic processing (simple decision rules

—not much effort in processing) Experts can be trusted Consensus implies correctness

When consistent, additive effects When inconsistent, systematic supercedes,

when person is highly motivated

Inoculation Theory:

Originally proposed by McGuire, has been developed by Pfau and Burgoon

Inoculation Theory is a theory of resistance to persuasion based on the analogy of biological inoculation against disease

Components of the Process Threat: A forewarning that a

challenge to existing attitudes is possible or likely

Refutational preemption: A message in which specific challenges to existing attitudes are raised and refuted

Booster Messages are sometimes included in the inoculation process as well

The Process and Tests Inoculation Theory proposes that

when you are presented with a warning and weak arguments against one of your beliefs, you will be able to fight off that attack and subsequent attacks

Tests of the theory provide some support, but only in limited circumstances (e.g., adolescent smoking behavior)

Problematic Integration Theory Problematic Integration Theory (PIT)

proposed by Babrow as a more general theory of how individuals receive, process, and make sense of messages

PIT has most often been applied to health-related messages, but it has wide possible application in communication

What is being Integrated? PIT proposes two kinds of judgments

about events and issues in our lives Probabilistic judgments involve an

assessment of how likely something is to occur

Evaluative judgments involve an assessment of the relative good/bad outcome of a state of affairs

Not independent assessments

When is Integration Problematic? The integration of some judgments is

not problematic (e.g., high likelihood of a positive event or low likelihood of negative event)

Four forms of integration are proposed as problematic: Divergence, uncertainty, ambivalence,

and impossibility

Problematic Integration (Table 8.1) Divergence—Discrepancy between

probability & evaluative judgments Example?

Uncertainty—Unknowns so can’t make judgments Example?

Ambivalence—Mutually exclusive alternatives (similar evaluation or different) Example?

Impossibility—an event will not happen Example?

PIT & Communication Communication serves as a medium

and a resource for problematic integration (language constitutes problematic and evaluative judgments)

Comm. is a channel through which perceptions and beliefs about problematic integration flow.

Communication helps resolve the problems

Applications

Health communication Social support groups—e.g., may be

good to increase uncertainty about prognosis of breast cancer if original diagnosis was bad

End-of-life decisions—Information to help patients cope rather than to make “informed” choices.

Applications: PSAs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-Elr5K

2Vuo (I learned it by…)

http://adgallery.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/media/p/339.aspx (Shoulders)

http://adgallery.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/media/p/324.aspx (Fiction)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBtgjIwiFvI&feature=related (I’m trying it …)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPu-W06ZMgg&feature=relmfu (just once)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YaO4PMBrJI (shower)