First 414 words of the document:
Evidence for the elaboration likelihood model
Petty et al
Students read a message that strongly supported the introduction of a large scale
exam that they would need to pass to graduate. Some were told this will be
introduced the following year, providing them with strong motivation leading to the
central route. Others were told it won't affect them as it will be introduced in a
few years time, providing them with low motivation leading to the peripheral route.
There were also several versions of the message of high expertise or low expertise
and strong or weak arguments.
Found that those who experienced the central route, the quality of arguments was
the main factor of persuasion, whereas those on the peripheral route the source of
the message was the main factor for persuasion. This supports the model as it
proves that high motivation leads to the central route and low motivation leads to
the peripheral route.
Lin et al
Involved a study of 263 Taiwanese students and were asked to choose a phone of
Amazon based on the reviews of the phones. They also completed a questionnaire
about their need for cognition (how much they want to think and evaluate things)
Found that those with a high need for cognition placed more importance on the
quality of reviews. This supports the idea that a high need for cognition leads to
the central route.
Vedrne et al
Showed that the need for cognition is linked to anti smoking campaigns. Students
were exposed to ether the central route (fact based arguments) or peripheral
route (emotion based arguments). The students on the central route had a high
need for cognition and those on the peripheral route had a low need for cognition.
Also those who had high knowledge of smoking used the central route and those
with low knowledge used the peripheral route. This supports the idea that those
with high knowledge and need for cognition use the central route.
Gave participants Chinese symbols and told them they were about emotions or
feelings some which were positive and some which were negative. The frequency of
amounts of times participants saw these symbols varied. The symbols that were
seen regularly were associated with positive emotions and those that were seen