Is Biased Processing of Strong Attitudes Peripheral? An Extension of the Dual Process Models of Attitude Change

1999 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 589-605 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eun-Yeong Na
Keyword(s):  
Attitude Change ◽  
Resistance To Change ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Attitude Strength ◽  
Extended Model ◽  
Main Hypothesis ◽  
Dual Process Models ◽  
Boomerang Effect ◽  
Biased Processing

It was suggested that the dual process models of attitude change should be extended to include the biased processing of strong attitudes. The main hypothesis of the extended model is that too much involvement intrinsic in strong attitudes may hinder objective processing, resulting in resistance to change even under strong message. Both attitude change and cognitive response measures in a 3 (attitude strength) x 2 (message quality) factorial design experiment supported the extended model. Only the holders of moderate attitudes showed greater attitude change when given a strong, rather than a weak, message. When given a strong message, holders of strong attitudes showed a boomerang effect by generating relatively greater counter-arguments (implying a central but biased processing with high motivation) in contrast with holders of weak attitudes who generated indifferent appeals and greater change in attitude regardless of the quality of the argument (implying a peripheral processing with low motivation).

Dual Process Models of Persuasion

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Luttrell
Keyword(s):  
Attitude Change ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Persuasive Communication ◽  
Persuasive Messages ◽  
Dual Process Models ◽  
The Face ◽  
Heuristic Systematic Model ◽  
Likelihood Model ◽  
New Generation

Issues of attitudes and attitude change are the foundation of many social processes. Psychologists have long sought to understand people’s opinions and evaluations and many studies have sought to understand how, why, and when those attitudes change in the face of persuasive communication. Early persuasion research identified many variables that influence the effectiveness of persuasive messages. These variables include characteristics of the communicator, the recipient, and the message itself. Over the years, however, the evidence for these influences became rather mixed, prompting a new generation of persuasion psychologists to ask whether there was a sensible pattern underlying it. This question ushered in several new approaches to thinking about persuasion. These “dual process” models proposed key moderators, identifying the conditions under which certain variables would and would not produce attitude change. A particularly influential model has been the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), which proposed that the audience’s motivation and ability to think deeply about a persuasive message determines how much a given characteristic of that message will change the audience’s attitude. Other models, such as the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM), have contributed additional insights about the “when” and “why” of attitude change. In sum, these nuanced accounts of attitude change have been demonstrated time and again across cultures and topics of persuasion.

Re-examining dominance of categories in impression formation: A test of dual-process models.

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian M. Monroe ◽  
Bryan L. Koenig ◽  
Kum Seong Wan ◽  
Tei Laine ◽  
Swati Gupta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Impression Formation ◽  
Process Models ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Dual Process Models

scholarly journals A mismatch with dual process models of addiction rooted in psychology

2008 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 460-460
Author(s):  
Reinout W. Wiers ◽  
Remco Havermans ◽  
Roland Deutsch ◽  
Alan W. Stacy
Keyword(s):  
Process Models ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Dual Process Models ◽  
Lack Of Fit ◽  
Psychological Studies

AbstractThe model of addiction proposed by Redish et al. shows a lack of fit with recent data and models in psychological studies of addiction. In these dual process models, relatively automatic appetitive processes are distinguished from explicit goal-directed expectancies and motives, whereas these are all grouped together in the planning system in the Redish et al. model. Implications are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document