DOCUMENT RESUME ED 316 820 CG 022 371 AUTHOR Harnish, Richard J. TITLE Effects of Self-Monitoring, Likability and A:gumer.t Strength on Persuasion. PUB DATE Mar 90 NOTE 16p.; Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Eastern Psychological Association (61st, Philadelphia, PA, March 29-April 1, 1990). PUB TYPE Reports - Research/Technical (143) -- Speeches /Conference Papers (150) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plu4 Postage. DESCRIPTORS Attitudes; College Students; Higher Education; *PersuasivE Discourse IDENTIFIERS *Likability; *Self Monitoring ABSTRACT Recently, there has been a renewed interest in the functional theories of attitudes. These theories assume that there are certain individualistic needs that are being met by one's attitudes, and that these attitudes allow the individual to implement certain plans to attain certain goals. This study examined whether source characteristics (i.e., likability) and argument quality (i.e., strength) might serve different functions for high and low self-monitors. Subjects (N=103), undergraduates who were classified as high or low self-monitors, were assigned to experimental conditions of a 2 (source of message; likable or dislikable) x 2 (argument strength; strong or weak) factorial design. Overall, the results of this study generally supported the hypotheses that peripheral cues and message quality have different effects as a function of self-monitoring and, thus, perhaps as a consequence of different functions of attitudes for these two types of individuals. These findings have several implications especially for researchers investigating attitudes and persuasion processes. It appears that source characteristics and argument strength have f"nctionally different effects on high and low self-monitoring individuals in the amount of attitude change experienced and in the mode of cognitive processing performed on a persuasive message. (ABL) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EARS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** a Effects of Self-monitoring, Likability and Argument Strength on Persuasion Richard J. Harnish Michigan State University Presented at the 61st Annual Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association at Philadelphia, PA, March 29 - April 1, 1990 Running Head: PERSUASION C\I C\1 Author's Note:Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Richard J, Harnish, 0 Department of Psychology, Psychology Research Building, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI ca 48824-11171 (517) 335-9561. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS Office of Educational Research and Improvement MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY EDUC TIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it fl Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality Points of vow or opinions slated in this docu TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES rnent do not necessarily represent official Or RI position or policy INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)," BEST COPYAVAILABLE Persuasion 2 Abstract The research findings of De Bono (1986, 1987) suggest that high self-monitors should be more persuaded by a message presented by a likable source because the likable source serves a social- Adjustive, function for high self-monitors. Low self-monitors should be more persuaded by strong rather than weak arguments, because argument strength would be serving a value-expressive function for low self-monitors. To test these hypotheses, high and low self-monitors heard a strong or weak message presented by a likable or dislikable source.Results are discussed in terms of the functional cues that likability and argument quality appear to serve for high and low self-monitoring individuals. Persuasion 3 Effects of Self-monitoring, Likability and Argument Strength on Persuasion Recently, there has been a renewed interest in functional the functional theories of attitudes (Katz, 1960; Smith, Bruner, & White, 1956). These theories assume that there are certain individualistic needs that are being met by ore's attitudes, and that these attitudes allow the individual to implement certain plans to attain certain goals.Four functions, in particular, have been proposed: ego-defensive, attitudes formed to protect oneself from undesirable truths; knowledge (object appraisal), attitudes that are formed to give meaning to objects; value-expressive, attitudes that permit the individual to express his or her own beliefs or dispositior 3; and social-adjustive, attitudes that are formed on the basis of how well they permit the individual to fit into certain situations and permit him or her to behave in a socially appropriate manner in regard to various reference groups (Katz, 1960; Smith et al. 1956). Past research conducted by De Bono and his colleagues (e.g., De Bono, 1986, 1987; De Bono & Harnish, 1988; Snyder & De Bono, 1985) has examined individual differences in the functional bases of attitudes and their impact on persuasion.Specifically, they examined the role that self-monitoring (Snyder, 1974) plays in the persuasion process.High self-monitors are individuals who regulate their expressive self-presentations for the sake of public appearance. These persons are highly responsive to social and interpersonal cues concerning situationally appropriate behavior.High self-monitors are concerned with impression management issues and, therefore, strive to be the "right person in the right place at the right time." In contrast, individuals low In the personality construct of self-monitoring lack the ability or the motivation to regulate their expressive selves.Instead, their behaviors are thought to reflect their own 4 Persuasion 4 enduring or momentary inner states--their own attitudes, values or beliefs.Of prime concern to these individuals is that their behaviors reflect their internal states, regardless oi their social environment (Snyder & Gangestad, 1987). De Bono's research has been concerned with the content of persuasive messages and the functions that these attitudes could serve individuals differing in their self-monitoring propensities. As such, his findings are consistent with the speculation that high self-monitors might be especially responsive to the attractiveness that a source possesses, whereas low self-monitors might be especially responsive to the expertise a source possesses. That is, high self-monitors could be especially responsive to a source that permits their attitudes to serve a social-adjustive function and, thus, such persons would be likely to perceive positions advocated by an attractive source as helpful in achieving their goal to fit into important social and interpersonal situations.In contrast, low self- monitors could be especially responsive to an expert source because the source might permit their attitudes to serve a value-expressive function.That is, the attitudes presented by an expert source might help low self-monitors express their true self--in other words, their underlying values, beliefs, and dispositions if the low self-monitor holds the same attitude.By agreeing with the expert source, low self-monitors could reaffirm their own values and remain true to self. The purpose of the present research was to examine if source characteristics (i.e., likability), and argument quality (i.e., strength) might serve different functions for high and low self- monitors, Because the high self-monitor regulates his or her expressive self for the sake of public appearance, a likable source could be useful to the high self-monitoring individual as a means for achieving the goal of presenting him or her self as behaving in a so( appropriate manner and thus being socially desirable. Under such conditions, high self-moniturs should be motivated to expend cognitive Persuasion 5 energy to process messages presented by likable source and thus should only be persuaded when the likable source pr gents cogent arguments. In contrast, because low self-monitors strive to have their behaviors and internal states remain consistent across social situations, message quality could be useful for the low self-monitoring individual in that strong compelling arguments might permit low self-monitors to validate their own beliefs.Thus, low self-monitors would be more attentive to the quality of a persuasive message in general and be motivated to expend cognitive energy to process messages arguments. Method Subjects and Design One hundred and three undergraduates (24 males, 79 females) participated in this study to earn extra credit towards their grade in their introductory psychology course. Based on their responses to pretest materials (i.e., the Self-Monitoring Scale, Snyder & Gangestad, 1986, and a celebrity likability questionnaire), high or low self-monitoring subjects were randomly assigned to the experimental conditions of a 2 (source of message; likable or dislikable) x 2 (argument strength; strong or weak) factorial design. Procedure:Independent Variables Self-monitoring As part of a larger questionnaire study administered earlier in the term, individuals completed the Self-Monitoring Scale (Snyder & Gangestad, 1986). On the basis of a median split of their responses to the Self-Monitoring Scale, half the participant were classified as high self-monitors (scores > 10) and half as low self-monitors (scores < 9). Sources E Persuasion 6 Individuals also completed a questionnaire which examined