The dynamics of persuasion can be described using the Elaboration Likelihood Model. The model offers two paths to attitude change or formation. These are central and peripheral processing routes. The central route processing is based on a logical presentation of the persuasive message while auxiliary features of the message influence the peripheral processing. The central route is driven by a reasonable argument that is informed by data and facts presented by the persuader (Crano, & Prislin, 2006). The perceiver scrutinizes the data and integrates useful information to reach a decision (Zuckerman, & Chaiken, 1998). The peripheral route, on the other hand, is informed by cognitive heuristics, such as "experts are trustworthy," which lead to attitude change. Several factors influence which processing route an individual might take to form or change their attitude.
On a persuasive scale of 1-5, I would give a rating of 4 to the first message and a 3 to the second and third messages presented in the media titled Attitudes. The first message was more convincing since it gave images that stimulated the central route processing. For instance, the message contained facts and data that supported the argument presented in the message. The contents of the message led to a systematic analysis of the persuasive message. The other messages were less convincing since they gave images that stimulated peripheral processing. For instance, experts in the respective fields presented the messages. This triggered the "experts are trustworthy" heuristic, which led to attitude formation (Zuckerman, & Chaiken, 1998). A minimal cognitive effort was required in this case since the heuristic provided a cognitive 'shortcut' in attitude formation.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Several factors can influence the occurrence of central route processing or peripheral route processing. The central route processing can be influenced by reliability concerns and the cognitive capacity of individuals. Reliability concerns come into play when an individual perceives a message as personally essential and that their decisions have a crucial impact on them (Chaiken, 1980). The individuals, therefore, systematically analyze the persuasive message. Similarly, the cognitive capacity of an individual influences the use or lack thereof of central route processing (Zuckerman, & Chaiken, 1998). Analyzing a persuasive message based on its contents requires much cognitive effort—the ability to devote cognitive resources to a systematic analysis of a persuasive message influences which route to take.
The peripheral route processing, on the other hand, can be influenced by economic concerns and limited knowledge in a given area. The use of heuristics is likely to happen if there is insufficient time to analyze a persuasive message systematically. The peripheral route processing has an economic advantage of requiring minimal cognitive effort (Chaiken, 1980). Also, having limited knowledge about the subject matter may lead to reliance on heuristics. For instance, limited knowledge about a beauty product may lead an individual to rely on the “experts are trustworthy” heuristic. In this case, an individual relies on this heuristic to make a decision.
References
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of personality and social psychology , 39 (5), 752.
Crano, W. D., & Prislin, R. (2006). Attitudes and persuasion. Annu. Rev. Psychol. , 57 , 345-374.
Zuckerman, A., & Chaiken, S. (1998). A heuristic ‐ systematic processing analysis of the effectiveness of product warning labels. Psychology & Marketing , 15 (7), 621-642.
