Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
On the other hand, under the peripheral route, persuasion results from a person's association with positive or negative cues in the stimulus or making a simple inference about the merits of the advocated position. The cues received by the individual under the peripheral route are generally unrelated to the logical quality of the stimulus.
In ELM, the central route is reflective and requires a willingness to process and think about the message. The peripheral route occurs when attitudes are formed without extensive thought, but more from mental shortcuts, credibility, and appearance cues. The route of persuasion processing depends on the level of involvement in the topic or issue.
Developed by Petty and Cacioppo during the late 1980s, the model describes two ways in which persuasive communications can cause attitude change: centrally and peripherally. The central route to persuasion occurs when people have the ability and motivation to listen to a message, think about its arguments and internalize the information.
Persuasion has traditionally been associated with two routes: [25] Central route: Whereby an individual evaluates information presented to them based on the pros and cons of it and how well it supports their values; Peripheral route: Change is mediated by how attractive the source of communication is and by bypassing the deliberation process. [25]
In their theory, there are two different routes to persuasion in making decisions. The first route is known as the central route and this takes place when a person is thinking carefully about a situation, elaborating on the information they are given, and creating an argument. This route occurs when an individual's motivation and ability are high.
Elaboration likelihood model – emphasizes the two routes of persuasion – central (cognitive arguments) and peripheral (emotional influence). Social impact theory - emphasizes the number, strength, and immediacy of the people trying to influence a person to change their mind.
peripheral meal items (e.g. chips and candy) (Herbert L. Meiselman et al. 1994), but it is unknown whether this approach could affect more mindful choices about a primary meal. We introduce a convenience manipulation that plays on two biases that ordinarily promote high calorie intake, and use them instead to reduce intake.
People high in the need for cognition are more likely to form their attitudes by paying close attention to relevant arguments (i.e., via the central route to persuasion), whereas people low in the need for cognition are more likely to rely on peripheral cues, such as how attractive or credible a speaker is. People low in need for cognition are ...