10/9/07 WEEK 7: COGNITIVE RESPONSES:  ARGUMENTS AND COUNTERARGUMENTS

Discussion Leader: Nicole

Overview of Early Evidence

Petty, R. E., Ostrom, T. M., & Brock, T. C. (1981).  Historical foundations of the cognitive response approach to attitudes and persuasion.  In Petty, R. E., Ostrom, T. M., & Brock, T. C. (Eds.).  Cognitive responses in persuasion.  Hillsdale, NJ:  Erlbaum.

The Crucial Role of Involvement

Cialdini, et al. (1976).  Elastic shifts of opinion:  Determinants of direction and durability.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 663-672.

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979).  Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915-1926.

A Dispositional Mediator

Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Morris, K. J. (1983).  Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 805-818.

UPDATED! If you wanted to read about the Johnson and Eagly vs. Petty and Cacioppo debate about personal relevance, the initial meta-analysis by Johnson and Eagly is here and the rebuttal/reanalysis by Petty and Cacioppo is here.

In reading these papers, consider the following questions and be ready to discuss them in class:

1.  What is the crucial difference between the cognitive response approach and other, more traditional approaches to persuasion?  What are the implications of this crucial difference for the way that one ought to think about structuring a persuasive communication?

2.  Involvement appears to fundamentally affect the way that individuals process a persuasive message.  What, precisely, do you think it is about involvement that generates the effects it produces?

3.  Who are the people in the world with a high need for cognition?  What are their traits?  What are their demographics?

4.  Assuming that you would rather rear a child with high vs. low NFC, what steps would you take to do so?

Back to main page