Eleboration Likehood Model Theory
Eleboration Likehood Model Theory
Elaboration Likelihood Model (of Richard Petty & John Cacioppo)
Richard Petty found the varied depending on which of two mental routes to attitude change a listener happened to use. He labeled the two cognitive processes the central route (message elaboration; the path of cognitive processing that involves scrutiny of message content) and the peripheral route (a mental shortcut process that accepts or rejects a message based on irrelevant cues as opposed to actively thinking about issue).
The Central and Peripheral Routes
The central route involves messages elaboration. Elaboration is “the extent to which a person carefully thinks about issue-relevant arguments contained in a persuasive communication.” In an attempt to process new information rationally, people using the central routes carefully scrutinize the ideas, try to figure out if they have true merit, and mull over their implications. Similar to Bergers characterization of strategic message plans, elaboration requires high levels of cognitive effort.
The peripheral routes offer a mental shortcut path to accepting or rejecting a message ‘without any active thinking about the attributes of the isssue or the object of consideration”
Robert Cialdini of Arizona States University lists six cues that trigger a “click, whirr” proggramed response. These cues allow us to fly the peripheral route on automatic pilot.
Reciprocation – “You own me”
Consistency – “Weve always done it that way”
Social proof – “Everybodys doing it”
Liking – “Love me, love my ideas”
Authority- “Just because I say so”
Scarity – “Quick, before theyre all gone”
MOTIVATION FOR ELABORATION
Petty and Cacioppo assume that people are motivated to hold correct attitudes. We want to maintain reasonable positions. We are exposed to so many persuasive message that we would experience a tremendous information overload if we tried to interact with every variant idea we heard or read in life.
They maintain that as long as people have a personal stake in accepting or rejecting an idea, they will be much more influenced by what a message says than by the characteristics of the person who says it. But when a topic is no longer relevant, it gets sidetracked to the periphery of the mind, where credibility cues take on greater impotance. Without the motivation of personal relevance, there probably will be little elaboration.
CHOICE OF ROUTE
The two factors that most influence which route an individual will take in a persuasive situation are motivation (strong desire to process the message; e.g., Petty & Cacioppo, 1979) and ability (actually being capable of critical evaluation; e.g., Petty, Wells, & Brock, 1976). Which route is taken is determined by the extent of elaboration. Both motivational and ability factors determine elaboration. Motivational factors include (among others) the personal relevance of the message topic, accountability, and a persons “need for cognition” (their