Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Communication Elaboration Likelihood Model
by
H. Allen White

Introduction

The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), developed by Richard E. Petty and John T. Cacioppo in the early 1980s, is a twofold, or dual-process, model that describes how people choose to manage, either systematically or heuristically, information they encounter. Specifically focused on persuasion, the ELM argues that there are two routes to persuasion: the central route and the peripheral route. Central route processing is systematic and involves message receivers’ scrutinizing the central, logical merits of a persuasive message. The peripheral route is heuristic; it is the means by which message receivers evaluate persuasive messages when they are unmotivated and/or unable to elaborate on its logical merits. Although the ELM’s central and peripheral routes naturally cause one to focus on its dual processes, Petty and Cacioppo point out that it also incorporates the notion of elaboration likelihood, meaning that message receivers move along a continuum of probability to engage in effortful thought. At one end of this continuum, receivers have a virtual 100 percent probability of expending considerable cognitive effort to evaluate the central merits of a persuasive message. At the other end, receivers hold a nonexistent probability of effortful elaboration. Petty and Cacioppo frame their description of this elaboration continuum in terms of the importance of heuristic devices (peripheral cues) in the persuasion process. They argue that as the combination of motivation and ability to engage in effortful elaboration decreases, these peripheral cues become more important determinants of persuasion. Conversely, as receiver’s motivation and ability increase, peripheral cues become less important. Hence, a defining element of the ELM is motivation. Assuming that receivers have the ability to scrutinize the arguments of a persuasive message, their level of motivation determines the extent to which they actually engage in this cognitive activity. Further, the ELM argues that the variables in a persuasive context can serve three purposes. They can take on the role of persuasive arguments that are evaluated via the central route. They can serve as either positive or negative peripheral cues that allow message receivers to reach conclusions absent elaboration. Finally, they can function as motivators affecting the amount and direction of issue-relevant elaboration. Finally, the ELM argues that changes in attitude that result from central route processing will be more persistent, will be better predictors of behavior, and will be more resistant to counter-persuasion than are attitude changes that result from exposure to peripheral cues.

General Overviews

Overviews of theories generally take on three dimensions, and this is true of the scholarship tracking the development of the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). First, original articulations of the ELM, Petty and Cacioppo 1981 and Petty and Cacioppo 1986, describe the model, identify its theoretical forebears, and report research findings that lend it support. Second-generation overviews, such as Choi and Salmon 2003, emerged after a period during which scholars evaluated it as well as the research it has generated. A third type of overview places the model into the broader context of persuasion as a field of study. For example, Perloff 2003, Petty, et al. 1997, and Petty, et al. 1999 examine the ELM in the context of a number of multiprocess models.

  • Choi, Sejung Marina, and Charles T. Salmon. 2003. The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion after two decades: A review of criticisms and contributions. Kentucky Journal of Communication 22:47–77.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This twenty-year review of the ELM argues that, while the model has made contributions to persuasion theory, it is limited by weakly constructed postulates, ambiguity, and the constraints of dichotomous persuasion routes.

    Find this resource:

  • Perloff, Richard M. 2003. Processing persuasive communications. In The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st century, 2d ed. By Richard M. Perloff, 119–148. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This is an excellent and readable overview of dual-process persuasion models, focusing on the ELM. In addition to examining the model’s basic concepts, variables, and processes, the chapter explores applications of the model and reviews criticisms. It also traces the history of dual-process models to ancient Greece.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., and John T. Cacioppo. 1981. Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: W. C. Brown.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This book presents antecedents to the Elaboration Likelihood Model. It provides insight into the model’s development and covers a number of classic approaches to attitude change and persuasion including motivational approaches. The book’s Epilog includes what the authors at the time called the “Elaboration Likelihood Model of Attitude Change.” Reprinted in 1996 (Boulder, CO: Westview).

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., and John T. Cacioppo. 1986. Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This is a contemporaneous overview of the Elaboration Likelihood Model from the concept’s creators. An obvious source to consult.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., Duane T. Wegener, and Leandre R. Fabrigar. 1997. Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology 48:609–647.

    DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.609Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This review article examines attitude change, structure, and consequences. The review also examines research on central route processing, defined as a high-effort process, and on peripheral route processes, which are defined as low-effort processing.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., S. Christian Wheeler, and George Y. Bizer. 1999. Is there one persuasion process or more? Lumping versus splitting in attitude change theories. Psychological Inquiry 10:156–163.

    DOI: 10.1207/S15327965PL100211Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This commentary article contrasts single-process and multiprocess theories of persuasion.

    Find this resource:

Motivation to Process

A key component of the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), motivation has been a primary focus of research. Among ELM scholars, issue involvement and the construct need for cognition have received a great deal of attention, while in a related field, uses and gratification research offers a view of these notions from a different perspective.

Issue Involvement

Issue involvement has been found to have a strong main-effect influence on dependent variables, as well as to participate in interactions with a number of other persuasion variables. Among the variables on which issue involvement has been found to have a moderating effect are behavioral incentives, temporal distance, memory-based judgments, and argument strength. Before there was an Elaboration Likelihood Model, Petty and Cacioppo 1979 reported findings that issue involvement influences the acceptability of persuasive messages. Petty, et al. 1981 laid the foundation for issue involvement as a factor affecting message elaboration. Petty, et al. 1983 examined issue involvement as a moderator which affects the influence of message variables. Petty and Cacioppo 1984 found that the level of issue involvement affects the role message variables play for message receivers. Heslin and Johnson 1992, examining the role of prior involvement, did a good job of integrating a number of theoretical perspectives. Meyers-Levy and Maheswaran 1992 integrate related factors, finding that the passage of time has a moderating effect on the impact of issue involvement. Park and Hastak 1994 helped expand the understanding of issue involvement by examining its influence on human memory.

  • Heslin, Richard, and Blair T. Johnson. 1992. Prior involvement and incentives to pay attention to information. Psychology and Marketing 9:209–219.

    DOI: 10.1002/mar.4220090304Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    Using their threshold model, the notion that inducements have less effect on individuals high in issue involvement than on those low in the same attribute, the authors investigate the relationship between prior involvement and behavioral incentives. The threshold model was supported.

    Find this resource:

  • Meyers-Levy, Joan, and Duriaraj Maheswaran. 1992. When timing matters: The influence of temporal distance on consumers’ affective and persuasive responses. Journal of Consumer Research 19:424–433.

    DOI: 10.1086/209312Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This study is an examination of the interaction between issue involvement and temporal distance. The researchers report that temporal distance has an inverse effect on people’s motivation to scrutinize a persuasive situation. This was found to occur only under conditions of low issue involvement.

    Find this resource:

  • Park, Jong-Won, and Manoj Hastak. 1994. Memory-based product judgments: Effects of involvement at encoding and retrieval. Journal of Consumer Research 21:534–547.

    DOI: 10.1086/209416Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    Employing the cognitive economy principle, these researchers conducted a pair of experiments that examine the interaction between issue involvement and memory-based judgments on memory retrieval.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., and John T. Cacioppo. 1979. Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37:1915–1926.

    DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1915Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    A foundational article reviewing the results of two experiments, its conclusions argue that high levels of issue involvement increase message acceptance.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., and John T. Cacioppo. 1984. The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46:69–81.

    DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.1.69Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This is an important article demonstrating the interaction between receiver and message variables and the potential for message characteristics to serve as central route information as well as to serve as peripheral cues.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo, and R. Goldman. 1981. Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 41:847–855.

    DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.41.5.847Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This is another foundational study leading to the development of the Elaboration Likelihood Model. The article demonstrates a number of relationships among the central route, the peripheral route, and receiver motivation to elaborate.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo, and David Schumann. 1983. Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research 10:135–144.

    DOI: 10.1086/208954Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This study examines and reports an interaction between issue involvement and argument strength. Argument strength had its greatest impact on individuals high in issue involvement.

    Find this resource:

Need for Cognition

Conceived by Cacioppo and Petty 1982 and then measured in a streamlined fashion by Cacioppo, et al. 1984, need for cognition is a construct that describes people’s liking of effortful thought and proclivity to engage in it. As such, individuals high in need for cognition are believed to be motivated to engage in central route processing across subject areas. As a motivation to process central route information, need for cognition transcends individuals’ level of issue involvement and other motivations. For example, Sicilia, et al. 2005 found that need for cognition affects information processing.

  • Cacioppo, John T., and Richard E. Petty. 1982. The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42:116–131.

    DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article describes the creation and psychometric properties of the need for cognition scale.

    Find this resource:

  • Cacioppo, John T., Richard E. Petty, and Chuan F. Kao. 1984. The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment 48:306.

    DOI: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This is an eighteen-item version of the need for cognition scale. The authors report Chronbach’s Alpha for this iteration of the scale to be 0.90 compared with 0.91 for the original thirty-four-item version.

    Find this resource:

  • Sicilia, Maria, Salvador Ruiz, and Jose L. Munuera. 2005. Effects of interactivity in a web site. Journal of Advertising 34:31–45.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This study examines the interaction between level of need for cognition and type of website (interactive vs. noninteractive) on information processing. As hypothesized by the researchers, need for cognition served as a moderating influence; individuals high in need for cognition were more likely to process noninteractive sites, and those low in need for cognition were more likely to process interactive sites.

    Find this resource:

Media Uses and Gratifications as Motivation

As argued in Katz, et al. 1973, media uses and gratifications research helps define people’s satisfaction of cognitive needs through exposure to the mass media. Palmgreen and Rayburn 1985 provides evidence that people’s expectations of what they will derive from exposure to media content influence their level of involvement with that media content.

  • Katz, Elihu, Michael Gurevitch, and Hadassah Hass. 1973. On the use of mass media for important things. American Sociological Review 38:164–181.

    DOI: 10.2307/2094393Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article discusses cognitive needs in the context of uses and gratifications research. These cognitive needs become motivations for message receivers to attend to mass-mediated messages, including persuasive messages.

    Find this resource:

  • Palmgreen, Philip and Jay D. Rayburn. 1985. An expectancy-value approach to media gratification. In Media gratifications research: Current perspectives. Edited by Karl E. Rosengren, Lawrence A. Wenner, and Philip Palmgreen, 61–72. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This is an explication of the expectancy-value approach to media uses and gratifications. As its label suggests, this approach argues that people’s media use is predicated on an interaction between what they have learned to expect from the media and what they value.

    Find this resource:

Ability to Process

The articles and chapters listed here examine what people do when their ability to engage in systematic message processing is limited. For example, Tversky and Kahneman 1982 and Bar-Hillel 1982 report research describing people’s proclivity to make judgments using biases and subgroup representativeness when they have little else upon which to base their evaluations. In Miller 1956, George Miller’s seminal magical number seven, plus or minus two, describes human limitations associated with information overload. MacInnis, et al. 1991 looks at message processing through the prism of motivation, opportunity, and ability, while Misicampo and Baumeister 2008 introduces physiological limitations as moderating influences on message processing.

  • Bar-Hillel, Maya. 1982. Studies of representativeness. In Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Edited by Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky, 69–83. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This book chapter outlines the human proclivity to make decisions based on the appearance of subgroup representativeness when the ability to engage in more systematic processes is limited.

    Find this resource:

  • MacInnis, Deborah J., Christine Moorman, and Bernard J. Jaworski. 1991. Enhancing and measuring consumers’ motivation, opportunity, and ability to process brand information from ads. Journal of Marketing 55:32–53.

    DOI: 10.2307/1251955Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    Research reported in this article investigates the relationship between executional cues and message receivers’ motivation, opportunity, and ability (MOA) to process information. MOA is presented as a moderating influence between executional cues and behavioral outcomes.

    Find this resource:

  • Masicampo, E. J., and Roy F. Baumeister. 2008. Toward a physiology of dual-process reasoning and judgment: Lemonade, willpower, and expensive rule-based analysis. Psychological Science 19:255–260.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02077.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article reports interesting research that explores the relationship between heuristic-based reasoning and blood glucose levels. The research also examines the relationship among using heuristic strategies, exertions of self-control, and glucose levels.

    Find this resource:

  • Miller, George A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity to processing information. Psychological Review 63:81–95.

    DOI: 10.1037/h0043158Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This classic article defines limits on human capacity to process information. In Elaboration Likelihood Model terms, this limited capacity affects message receivers’ ability to engage in central route processing.

    Find this resource:

  • Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. 1982. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Edited by Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic, and Amos Tversky, 3–20. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This book chapter outlines the human proclivity to make heuristic judgments and decisions based on biases when the ability to engage in more systematic processes is limited.

    Find this resource:

Applications

One of the appealing aspects of the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) is its applicability to real-life advertising, marketing, and other situations. For example, Baker, et al. 1991 applies the model to drug prevention programs. Bizer and Petty 2005 examines political candidate preferences. Briñol, et al. 2004, Priester and Petty 2003, and Schumann, et al. 1990 explore the model’s applicability to advertising. Briñol and Petty 2006 uses the model to improve health communication. Briñol, et al. 2009 argues that body postures are associated with the model. Tormala and Petty 2004 uses the model to help understand consumer psychology. Wegener, et al. 1994 examines the impact of mood changes on persuasion. Petty and Cacioppo 1996 argues for melding applied and basic research efforts.

  • Baker, Sara M., Richard E. Petty, and Faith Gleicher. 1991. Persuasion theory and drug abuse prevention. Health Communication 3:193–203.

    DOI: 10.1207/s15327027hc0304_2Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article reviews research applying the concepts of elaboration likelihood and attitude change to the effectiveness of programs designed to prevent drug abuse.

    Find this resource:

  • Bizer, George Y., and Richard E. Petty. 2005. How we conceptualize our attitudes matters: The effects of valence framing on the resistance of political attitudes. Political Psychology 4:553–568.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00431.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This interesting article applies ELM theory to research finding that people who frame their political attitudes negatively against an opposition candidate are more resistant to counter-persuasion efforts than are people who frame their electoral preference in terms of supporting a favored candidate.

    Find this resource:

  • Briñol, Pablo, Richard E. Petty, and Zakary L. Tormala. 2004. Self-validation of cognitive responses to advertisements. Journal of Consumer Research 30:559–573.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article applies the notions of the ELM to the field of advertising. Thought confidence, in addition to the extent of elaboration, valence of elaboration, and issue involvement, was found to affect advertising effectiveness.

    Find this resource:

  • Briñol, Pablo, and Richard E. Petty. 2006. Fundamental processes leading to attitude change: Implications for cancer prevention communications. Journal of Communication 56:S81–S104.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article applies elements of the ELM to communication programs designed to enhance the effectiveness of cancer communication.

    Find this resource:

  • Briñol, Pablo, Richard E. Petty, and Benjamin Wagner. 2009. Body posture effects on self-evaluation: A self-validation approach. European Journal of Social Psychology 39:1053–1064.

    DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.607Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    An article that examines the influence of confident and less confident body postures on thought confidence in situations of high elaboration.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., and John T. Cacioppo. 1996. Addressing disturbing and disturbed consumer behavior: Is it necessary to change the way we conduct behavioral science? Journal of Marketing Research 33:1–8.

    DOI: 10.2307/3152008Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This thought-provoking guest editorial makes the point that basic and applied researchers have a symbiotic relationship, whether they realize it or not. The authors encourage basic researchers to make their work more accessible, while encouraging applied researchers to become more aware of the value inherent in theory-driven research findings.

    Find this resource:

  • Priester, Joseph R., and Richard E. Petty. 2003. The influence of spokesperson trustworthiness on message elaboration, attitude strength, and advertising effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Psychology 13:408–421.

    DOI: 10.1207/S15327663JCP1304_08Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article reviews research that lends understanding to the use of advertising spokespersons who serve as product endorsers. At issue in the research reported here is spokesperson trustworthiness and its impact on message scrutiny. The researchers add depth to the general finding that relatively untrustworthy product endorsers tend to be subjected to greater scrutiny by message receivers.

    Find this resource:

  • Schumann, David W., Richard E. Petty, and D. Scott Clemons. 1990. Predicting the effectiveness of different strategies of advertising variation: A test of the repetition-variation hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research 17:192–202.

    DOI: 10.1086/208549Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article reports research that found that variations in nonsubstantive features of advertising affect relatively unmotivated message receivers, while variations in the substantive features of advertising affect more highly motivated receivers.

    Find this resource:

  • Tormala, Zakary L., and Richard E. Petty 2004. Source credibility and attitude certainty: A metacognitive analysis of resistance to persuasion. Journal of Consumer Psychology 14:427–442.

    DOI: 10.1207/s15327663jcp1404_11Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article reports findings from two experiments that examine the interaction between source credibility and resistance to persuasion, and its effect on the confidence of the initial attitudes held by the receiver.

    Find this resource:

  • Wegener, Duane T., Richard E. Petty, and David J Klein. 1994. Effects of mood on high elaboration attitude change: The mediating role of likelihood judgments. European Journal of Social Psychology 24:25–43.

    DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.2420240103Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article incorporates a number of concepts from ELM theory, including need for cognition and message elaboration, to examine the impact of message receiver’s mood on changes in attitude.

    Find this resource:

Critiques

Critiques of the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) have generally argued that other models and theories better explain human behavior, and that the ELM is underdeveloped and therefore difficult to test. Defenders of the model counter that its critics either misrepresent the ELM in their attacks or simply misunderstand what it represents. For example, a group of three critiques published under the rubric of “Specifying the ELM” argue that the ELM lacks specificity. Other critiques argue that previously existing theories and models better explain the phenomena and interacting variables that the ELM describes. One such model offered by critics is the Elastic Capacity Model.

Specifying the Elm

The journal Communication Theory dedicated a forum section in two issues to “Specifying the ELM.” One issue published critiques of the ELM in Allen and Reynolds 1993, Hamilton, et al. 1993, and Mongeau and Stiff 1993. The second issue published a response by Petty, et al. 1993.

  • Allen, Mike and Rodney Reynolds. 1993. The Elaboration Likelihood Model and the sleeper effect: An assessment of attitude change over time. Communication Theory 3:73–82.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.1993.tb00058.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This critique of the ELM offers an interpretation of the authors’ understanding of the model and also presents arguments that previous research on the sleeper effect is inconsistent with the ELM.

    Find this resource:

  • Hamilton, Mark A., John E. Hunter, and Franklin J. Booster. 1993. The Elaboration Likelihood Model as a theory of attitude formation: A mathematical analysis. Communication Theory 3:50–65.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.1993.tb00056_3_1.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This critique of the ELM argues that insufficient theoretical development makes the model challenging to test. These authors attempt to remedy the situation by specifying the model using mathematical analysis.

    Find this resource:

  • Mongeau, Paul A., and James B. Stiff. 1993. Specifying causal relationships in the Elaboration Likelihood Model. Communication Theory 3: 65–72.

    DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.1993.tb00057.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This critique of the ELM challenges the model on two fronts. First, it argues that causal relationships are not sufficiently established. Second, it argues that manipulations of argument quality in previous tests of the ELM suffer from questionable validity. These authors use causal modeling techniques to support their positions.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., Duane T. Wegner, Leandre R. Fabrigar, Joseph R. Priester, and John T. Cacioppo. 1993. Conceptual and methodological issues in the Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion: A reply to the Michigan State critics. Communication Theory 3:65–72.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    One by one, the originators of the ELM and three of their doctoral students reply to the model’s critics who maintain the theory is insufficiently specific in its rigor.

    Find this resource:

Elastic Capacity Model

With Kahneman 1973, Kahneman’s Elastic Capacity Model has been put forward as a better articulation of what the ELM describes as its elaboration continuum. As the term suggests, elastic capacity describes people’s use of cognitive faculties until an upper level of capacity is reached. Stiff 1986 argues that the Elastic Capacity Model is a more comprehensive alternative. Petty, et al. 1987 responds to Stiff’s critique.

  • Kahneman, Daniel. 1973. Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This book-length articulation of capacity theory argues that human capacity for elaboration is a function of the difficulty of the task at hand, with more difficult cognitive tasks resulting in higher levels of capacity than do cognitive tasks that are less difficult.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E. Jeff A. Kasmer, Curt P. Haugtvedt, and John T. Cacioppo. 1987. Source and message factors in persuasion: A reply to Stiff’s critique of the Elaboration Likelihood Model. Communication Monographs 54:233–249.

    DOI: 10.1080/03637758709390229Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This response to Stiff 1986 argues that the critique misrepresents the model. Addressed in the response are issue involvement, the ability of variables to serve in multiple roles, and the observation that the ELM does not reject theories such as the Elastic Capacity Model.

    Find this resource:

  • Stiff, James B. 1986. Cognitive processing of persuasive message cues: A meta-analytic review of the effects of supporting information on attitudes. Communication Monographs 53:75–89.

    DOI: 10.1080/03637758609376128Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This meta-analytic critique of the ELM argues that the model is not comprehensive and offers Kahneman’s Elastic Capacity Model as a more complete alternative.

    Find this resource:

Related Theories and Models

The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) emphasizes dual routes to persuasion. It also posits interacting message and receiver characteristics that lead to attitude change, which, in turn, leads to changes in behavioral intentions and finally behavior. A number of other theories and models explore these concepts from differing perspectives. Among these differing perspectives is the sleeper effect.

Attitudes

Fishbein and Ajzen 1980 and Ajzen 1985 track social behavior from attitudes through beliefs and intentions to taking overt action. McGuire 1969 helps to define source, message, channel, and receiver variables. Sherif, et al. 1965 argues for the likelihood of attitude change to fall along continua.

  • Ajzen, Icek. 1985. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action control: From cognition to behavior. Edited by Julius Kuhl and Jürgen Beckmann, 11–39. New York: Springer.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This book chapter outlines the Theory of Planned Behavior. It explicates causal links among four variables beginning with beliefs which lead to attitudes. Attitudes, in turn, lead to behavioral intentions, and behavioral intentions lead to actual behavior.

    Find this resource:

  • Fishbein, Martin, and Icek Ajzen. 1980. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    A precursor to the Theory of Planned Behavior, this book describes the Theory of Reasoned Action, which posits social behavior is predicated on behavioral intentions that depend on attitudes that result from the accumulation of beliefs an individual has about the issue at hand.

    Find this resource:

  • McGuire, William J. 1969. The nature of attitudes and attitude change. In The handbook of social psychology. 2d ed. Edited by Gardner Lindzey and Elliot Aronson, 136–314. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This classic book chapter provides in-depth analysis of source, message, channel, receiver, and destination factors as they apply to the persuasion process. Depending on context, these factors become ELM variables that influence attitude change, that act as peripheral cues, or that shape the extent or direction of elaboration.

    Find this resource:

  • Sherif, Carolyn W., Muzafer Sherif, and Roger E. Nebergall. 1965. Attitude and attitude change: The social judgment-involvement approach. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This is an examination of attitude change using continua described as latitudes of acceptance, rejection, and noncommitment. These continua define the context in which individuals become more or less likely to be influenced by persuasive communication.

    Find this resource:

Dual-Process Models

As a dual-process model, the ELM shares attributes with a number of other such models. Among them are the Heuristic Model of Persuasion, (Chaiken 1980 and Chaiken 1987), the Dual-Mediation Model (Coulter and Girish 2004), Attribution Theory (Eagly, et al. 1981), and the Meta-Cognitive Model (Petty, et al. 2007).

  • Chaiken, Shelly. 1980. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source verses message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39:752–766.

    DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.752Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    The article reports results from two experiments that examine interactions among source cues, level of involvement, and number of arguments presented in a persuasive message. These are all antecedents to the Heuristic/Systematic Processing Model.

    Find this resource:

  • Chaiken, Shelly. 1987. The heuristic model of persuasion. In Social influence: The Ontario symposium. Edited by Mark P. Zanna, James M. Olson, and C. Peter Herman, 3–39. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This book chapter outlines the precepts of the Heuristic/Systematic Processing Model, which argues that people tend to use learned decision rules or heuristics rather than to engage in effortful cognition to evaluate the merits of persuasion messages they encounter.

    Find this resource:

  • Coulter, Keith S., and Girish N. Punj. 2004. The effects of cognitive resource requirements, availability, and argument quality on brand attitudes: A melding of elaboration likelihood and cognitive resource matching theories. Journal of Advertising 33:53–64.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    The authors argue that Dual-Mediation Model constructions and their links are moderated by the requirements for cognitive resources, their availability, and argument quality.

    Find this resource:

  • Eagly, Alice H., Wendy Wood, and Shelly Chaiken. 1981. An attribution analysis of persuasion. In New directions in attribution research. Vol. 3. Edited by John H. Harvey, William Ickes, and Robert F. Kidd, 37–62. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This book chapter examines persuasion in the context of attribution theory, making the case that message receivers engage in a causal analysis as they consider the variables inherent in persuasive communication.

    Find this resource:

  • Petty, Richard E., Pablo Briñol, and Kenneth G. DeMarree. 2007. The meta-cognitive model (MCM) of attitudes: Implications for attitude measurement, change, and strength. Social Cognition 25:657–686.

    DOI: 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.657Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    An articulation of the Meta-Cognitive Model which contends that objects of attitudes can be associated with variable evaluations that are both negative and positive in nature. This model shares concepts with single-attitude models and dual-attitude models, and can be understood as explaining the impact of people’s not only elaborating but also thinking about the process of their elaboration.

    Find this resource:

Sleeper Effect

The sleeper effect is the increasing of persuasion impact with the passage of time. For example, research reported in Priester, et al. 1999 has found that prior elaboration is necessary for the sleeper effect to occur.

  • Priester, Joseph, Duane Wegener, Richard E. Petty, and Leandre Fabrigar. 1999. Examining the psychological process underlying the sleeper effect: The Elaboration Likelihood Model explanation. Media Psychology 1:27–48.

    DOI: 10.1207/s1532785xmep0101_3Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    This article presents evidence that the sleeper effect emerges only when a persuasive message is first elaborated upon. The authors also argue that the Elaboration Likelihood Model explanation subsumes and explains a number of conditions previous researchers had identified as necessary antecedents to the sleeper effect.

    Find this resource:

LAST MODIFIED: 02/23/2011

DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199756841-0053

back to top

Article

Up

Down