Extremity of a Persuasive Message Position Interacts with Argument Quality to Predict
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Extremity of a Persuasive Message Position Interacts with Argument Quality to Predict Attitude Change Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Lucas Daniel Hinsenkamp, M.A. Graduate Program in Psychology The Ohio State University 2018 Dissertation Committee Richard E Petty, Advisor Duane T Wegener Russell H Fazio Copyrighted by Lucas Daniel Hinsenkamp 2018 Abstract When crafting a persuasive message, what is the effect of the extremity of the message’s position? Past work has demonstrated that, with greater extremity comes greater movement in recipients’ positions. However, there is also evidence that the reverse can occur: Greater extremity can lead to greater counter-arguing and reduced persuasion. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion provides a framework to understand the range of demonstrated and possible effects, postulating that any variable in a persuasion context can function in multiple ways: serving as central arguments to be scrutinized, peripheral cues of positivity or negativity when not carefully scrutinized, or determining the extent or direction of message-related processing. Whether position extremity can determine the amount of message-related processing has not been rigorously investigated. Across two sets of two studies each, we demonstrate that, indeed, the extremity of a message can determine the amount of message-related processing. Through this process, we demonstrate that, although an extreme position may not be accepted, it can create positive attitude change if supported by strong arguments, as it increases processing of the strong supporting reasons. If supported by weak, easy-to-counterargue arguments, however, an extreme position has a negative effect on persuasion. Finally, we demonstrate that this moderating effect of argument quality is weakened at absurdly extreme positions: As a message position becomes too extreme, it loses its attention- grabbing power, and message recipients begin paying less attention to the message. ii Acknowledgments First and foremost, I would like to thank my advisor, Richard Petty, for his guidance and feedback throughout this project and all of my work leading up to this. I would also like to thank the members of the Attitudes and Persuasion Lab for their support and feedback, as well as the Group for Attitudes and Persuasion for their feedback on this and past work. Finally, I would like to thank my late father, who, despite not having a college degree himself, instilled in me, from a young age, a deep-seated love of knowledge. iii Vita Personal Information 2005-2009 | University of Wisconsin – Bachelor of Science; Major: Psychology; Minor: Integrated Liberal Studies 2007-2009 | University of Wisconsin; Lab for Stereotyping and Prejudice, Madison, WI – Undergraduate Research Assistant 2007-2009 | Waisman Lab for Brain Imaging and Behavior; Lab for Affective Neuroscience, Madison, WI – Undergraduate Student Hourly 2009-2012 | Waisman Lab for Brain Imaging and Behavior; Lab for Affective Neuroscience, Madison, WI – Associate Research Specialist 2012-2013 | Waisman Lab for Brain Imaging and Behavior; Lab for Affective Neuroscience, Madison, WI – Research Specialist 2013-2015 | The Ohio State University – Master of Arts; Major: Social Psychology; Minor: Quantitative Psychology Publications Hinsenkamp, L.D., & Petty, R. E. (2017). Routes to persuasion, central and peripheral. In F. Moghaddam (Ed.), The Sage Encyclopedia of Political Behavior. (pp. 718-720). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Briñol, P., Petty, R.E., & Hinsenkamp, L.D. (2018). Embodied persuasion in a sports context. In J. Dimmock & B. Jackson (Eds.) Persuasion and Communication in Sport, Exercise, and Physical Activity (pp. 201-216). Abington, UK: Routledge. Field of Study Major Field: Psychology iv Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. iii Vita ..................................................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ v List of Tables ................................................................................................................... viii List of Figures .................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1 - Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 Early Models: Distance Proportional. ............................................................................. 5 Subsequent Work: Curvilinear Hypothesis. .................................................................... 7 Information Processing & Cognitive Response Approach ........................................... 11 Elaboration Likelihood Model’s multiple roles postulate ............................................ 17 Chapter 2 - Studies 1a and 1b ........................................................................................... 21 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 21 Method .......................................................................................................................... 21 Participants ................................................................................................................ 21 Pre-manipulation attitude measure. .......................................................................... 22 Independent Variables. ............................................................................................. 22 Dependent measures. ................................................................................................ 24 Results ........................................................................................................................... 25 Manipulation checks ................................................................................................. 26 Attitude change ......................................................................................................... 28 Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 31 Chapter 3 - Studies 2a and 2b ........................................................................................... 33 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 33 Method .......................................................................................................................... 34 Participants ................................................................................................................ 34 Pre-manipulation attitude measure. .......................................................................... 34 v Independent Variables. ............................................................................................. 34 Dependent measures. ................................................................................................ 37 Results ........................................................................................................................... 38 Manipulation checks ................................................................................................. 38 Attitude Change ........................................................................................................ 41 Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 44 Chapter 4 - Study 1b and 2b ............................................................................................. 45 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 45 Method .......................................................................................................................... 45 Participants ................................................................................................................ 45 Pre-manipulation attitude measure. .......................................................................... 46 Independent Variables .............................................................................................. 46 Dependent Measures ................................................................................................. 47 Results ........................................................................................................................... 49 Manipulation Checks ................................................................................................ 49 Attitude Change ........................................................................................................ 51 Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 54 Chapter 5 - General Discussion ........................................................................................ 56 References ........................................................................................................................