,Week 2 Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Conceptual Chapter Elaboration Likelihood Model
The elaboration likelihood model (ELM) is an example of a dual “dual process” approach to
persuasion
- Important variations in the nature of persuasion are a function of the likelihood that
receivers will engage in elaboration of information relevant to the persuasive issue
Two kinds of persuasion processes
- Central route: systematic thinking (elaboration is relatively high → extensive
issue-relevant thinking)
- Peripheral route: cognitive shortcuts (heuristic thinking)
Influences on the degree of elaboration
A number of factors influence the amount of elaboration
Influencing elaboration motivation
A receiver’s motivation for engaging in elaboration can be influenced by
- Relevance of the topic (personal relevance → the motivation to engage in
elaboration)
- The level of “need for cognition” (reflecting the tendency to enjoy en engage in
thinking)
Influencing the ability to engage
A receiver’s ability to engage in elaboration can be influenced by
- Presence of distraction in the persuasive setting
- Amount of relevant background knowledge
Influences on persuasive outcomes
Central-route persuasion and peripheral-route persuasion have different underlying
processes → the factors determining persuasive success correspondingly differ
Influences on persuasive outcomes in central-route persuasion
The outcomes of persuasive efforts will depend on the outcomes of receiver’s thoughtful
consideration of issue-relevant arguments → when elaboration is high, persuasive effects
will depend on the predominant valence (positive or negative) of the receiver’s issue-relevant
thoughts
Two primary factors influence the predominant valence of elaboration
- Whether the message’s advocates position is proattitudinal or counterattitudinal for
the receiver
- The strength of the message’s arguments
,Influences on persuasive outcomes in peripheral-route persuasion
A number of heuristics can be identified
- Credibility heuristic: receivers are guided by the apparent expertise of the
communicator
- Liking for the communicator: liked communicators will be more persuasive than
disliked communicators
- Consensus heuristic: receiver’s views are influenced by the reactions of others to the
message
Complexities and consequences in persuasion processes
Tradeoffs between central and peripheral persuasion processes
The central route and the peripheral route represent idealized extremes of the continuum of
elaboration → tradeoff between elaboration valence and peripheral cues as influences on
persuasion
Multiple roles for variables in persuasion
Any given variable might play multiple roles in persuasion → a variable might influence
persuasion in three ways
- Affect the degree of elaboration
- Serve as a peripheral cue
- Influence the valence of elaboration
Consequences of differing persuasion routes
Differing degrees of elaboration will make for corresponding differences in the nature of the
persuasive outcomes obtained
Central-route processes create persuasion that is more enduring and more integrated with a
person’s belief system
Persuasion accomplished through peripheral-route processes is likely to be more
evanescent (= soon passing out)
Future directions and contributions
Four lines of future developments of ELM ideas can be identified
1. Continuing articulation of the nature of involvement (personal relevance)
Different varieties of involvement can be usefully distinguished as having differing
effects on persuasion processes
2. Clarification of the nature of argument quality
The key ingredient of high-quality arguments may be the relative desirability of the
consequences claimed for a social policy or the desirability of the characteristics of a
consumer product
3. Clarification of the conditions under which a given variable plays one role or another
in persuasion
, 4. The relationship of central-route and peripheral-route processes needs more
attention
The ELM has contributed two key insights about persuasion
- The recognition of the variable character of topic-related thinking (elaboration)
engaged in by message recipients
- The recognition that a given variable may play different roles in persuasion
Conceptual Chapter Elaboration Likelihood Model
The elaboration likelihood model (ELM) is an example of a dual “dual process” approach to
persuasion
- Important variations in the nature of persuasion are a function of the likelihood that
receivers will engage in elaboration of information relevant to the persuasive issue
Two kinds of persuasion processes
- Central route: systematic thinking (elaboration is relatively high → extensive
issue-relevant thinking)
- Peripheral route: cognitive shortcuts (heuristic thinking)
Influences on the degree of elaboration
A number of factors influence the amount of elaboration
Influencing elaboration motivation
A receiver’s motivation for engaging in elaboration can be influenced by
- Relevance of the topic (personal relevance → the motivation to engage in
elaboration)
- The level of “need for cognition” (reflecting the tendency to enjoy en engage in
thinking)
Influencing the ability to engage
A receiver’s ability to engage in elaboration can be influenced by
- Presence of distraction in the persuasive setting
- Amount of relevant background knowledge
Influences on persuasive outcomes
Central-route persuasion and peripheral-route persuasion have different underlying
processes → the factors determining persuasive success correspondingly differ
Influences on persuasive outcomes in central-route persuasion
The outcomes of persuasive efforts will depend on the outcomes of receiver’s thoughtful
consideration of issue-relevant arguments → when elaboration is high, persuasive effects
will depend on the predominant valence (positive or negative) of the receiver’s issue-relevant
thoughts
Two primary factors influence the predominant valence of elaboration
- Whether the message’s advocates position is proattitudinal or counterattitudinal for
the receiver
- The strength of the message’s arguments
,Influences on persuasive outcomes in peripheral-route persuasion
A number of heuristics can be identified
- Credibility heuristic: receivers are guided by the apparent expertise of the
communicator
- Liking for the communicator: liked communicators will be more persuasive than
disliked communicators
- Consensus heuristic: receiver’s views are influenced by the reactions of others to the
message
Complexities and consequences in persuasion processes
Tradeoffs between central and peripheral persuasion processes
The central route and the peripheral route represent idealized extremes of the continuum of
elaboration → tradeoff between elaboration valence and peripheral cues as influences on
persuasion
Multiple roles for variables in persuasion
Any given variable might play multiple roles in persuasion → a variable might influence
persuasion in three ways
- Affect the degree of elaboration
- Serve as a peripheral cue
- Influence the valence of elaboration
Consequences of differing persuasion routes
Differing degrees of elaboration will make for corresponding differences in the nature of the
persuasive outcomes obtained
Central-route processes create persuasion that is more enduring and more integrated with a
person’s belief system
Persuasion accomplished through peripheral-route processes is likely to be more
evanescent (= soon passing out)
Future directions and contributions
Four lines of future developments of ELM ideas can be identified
1. Continuing articulation of the nature of involvement (personal relevance)
Different varieties of involvement can be usefully distinguished as having differing
effects on persuasion processes
2. Clarification of the nature of argument quality
The key ingredient of high-quality arguments may be the relative desirability of the
consequences claimed for a social policy or the desirability of the characteristics of a
consumer product
3. Clarification of the conditions under which a given variable plays one role or another
in persuasion
, 4. The relationship of central-route and peripheral-route processes needs more
attention
The ELM has contributed two key insights about persuasion
- The recognition of the variable character of topic-related thinking (elaboration)
engaged in by message recipients
- The recognition that a given variable may play different roles in persuasion
