Evaluation of the Elaboration Likelihood Model
- Created by: steph1713
- Created on: 20-02-14 01:45
View mindmap
- Evaluation of the Elaboration Likelihood Model
- Need for cognition is not the whole story
- Appears that central processing may depend on more than NC
- Tesser and Shaffer (90)
- Found that other factors such as personal relevance and direct experience influence
- The ELM is probably the most influential cognitive theory of persuasion
- Baron and Byrne (97)
- Useful as it recognises the way that similar messages can be processed differently by different people using different processes
- Accommodates for some of the individual differences that can be observed in how a message is received
- Application of need for cognition to a real-life problem
- Claim that NC is a key factor in which type of processing takes place is supported by studies
- Can attitude change be temporary?
- Petty and Cacioppo appear to be arguing that peripheral route processing leads to attitude 'formation' rather than attitude 'change'
- Need for cognition
- Haugtvedt et al (92)
- Supports claim that high NC individuals are more influence by central route processes than low NC individuals
- Haugtvedt et al (92)
- The 'two route' metaphor
- A criticism of the ELM is it it involves the use of the 'route' metaphor
- Gives false impression that they don't occur concurrently
- in reality, an individual can go on two 'routes' at the same time
- Suggestion they operate on a continuum and illustrate the amount of mental processing that occurs when evaluating a message
- A criticism of the ELM is it it involves the use of the 'route' metaphor
- Need for cognition is not the whole story
Comments
No comments have yet been made