Matching Versus Mismatching Attitude Functions: Implications for Scrutiny of Persuasive Messages

Two studies were conducted to examine the hypothesis that matching the content of a persuasive message to the functional basis of people's attitudes enhances message scrutiny. In Study 1, high and low self-monitors were exposed to a message that matched or mismatched the functional basis of their attitudes (i.e., image appealfor high self-monitors and quality appealfor low self-monitors) and that -contained either strong or weak arguments. Attitudes were more strongly affected by message strength when the message arguments matched rather than mismatched thefunctional basis of the attitude. In Study 2, this outcome was especially characteristic of individuals who typically do not enjoy thinking (those low in need for cognition). These studies show that matching arguments to the functional basis of an attitude is not invariably beneficialfor persuasion but can enhance or reduce attitude change (compared to mismatched arguments) depending on the cogency of the matched information.

[1]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  The need for cognition. , 1982 .

[2]  E. Borgida,et al.  The Causes and Consequences of Personal Involvement , 1995 .

[3]  Richard E. Petty,et al.  Majority and minority influence : source-position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny , 1994 .

[4]  K. Edwards,et al.  The Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Attitude Formation and Change , 1990 .

[5]  Kenneth G. DeBono,et al.  Country of origin and perceptions of product quality: an individual difference perspective , 1995 .

[6]  Mark Snyder,et al.  Appeals to image and claims about quality: Understanding the psychology of advertising. , 1985 .

[7]  Mark Snyder,et al.  "To Carve Nature at Its Joints": On the Existence of Discrete Classes in Personality , 1985 .

[8]  Kenneth G. DeBono,et al.  Source expertise, source attractiveness, and the processing of persuasive information: A functional approach. , 1988 .

[9]  Sharon Shavitt,et al.  Operationalizing functional theories of attitude. , 1989 .

[10]  R. Petty,et al.  Message Framing and Persuasion: A Message Processing Analysis , 1996 .

[11]  Sharon Shavitt,et al.  The role of attitude objects in attitude functions , 1990 .

[12]  G. Herek.  Can functions be measured? A new perspective on the functional approach to attitudes. , 1987 .

[13]  Kenneth G. DeBono,et al.  The influence of source physical attractiveness on advertising effectiveness: a functional perspective , 1990 .

[14]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[15]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Attitude structure and function. , 1998 .

[16]  Richard E. Petty,et al.  Multiple Roles for Affect in Persuasion , 1991 .

[17]  R. Petty,et al.  Positive Mood and Persuasion: Different Roles for Affect Under High- and Low-Elaboration Conditions , 1993 .

[18]  Deborah A. Prentice,et al.  Psychological Correspondence of Possessions, Attitudes, and Values , 1987 .

[19]  E. Clary,et al.  Matching messages to motives in persuasion: A functional approach to promoting volunteerism. , 1994 .

[20]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Promoting systematic processing in low-motivation settings: effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  Robert P. Abelson,et al.  Beliefs as possessions: A functional perspective. , 1989 .

[22]  Murray G. Millar,et al.  Attitude change as a function of attitude type and argument type. , 1990 .

[23]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Introspection, Attitude Change, and Attitude-Behavior Consistency: the Disruptive Effects of Explaining Why we Feel the Way we Do , 1989 .

[24]  R. Lennox,et al.  Revision of the self-monitoring scale. , 1984, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[25]  S. Chaiken.  The heuristic model of persuasion. , 1987 .

[26]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. , 1979 .

[27]  Curtis P. Haugtvedt,et al.  Ego-Involvement and Persuasion: An Appreciative Look at the Sherif’s Contribution to the Study of Self-Relevance and Attitude Change , 1992 .

[28]  Jerome S. Bruner,et al.  Opinions and personality , 1957 .

[29]  J. Tolson,et al.  Group Members' Self-Monitoring as a Possible Neutralizer of Leadership , 1989 .

[30]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion , 1986, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.

[31]  R. Petty,et al.  Source Attributions and Persuasion: Perceived Honesty as a Determinant of Message Scrutiny , 1995 .

[32]  C. F. Kao,et al.  The efficient assessment of need for cognition. , 1984, Journal of personality assessment.

[33]  D. Katz,et al.  The measurement of ego defense as related to attitude change. , 1957, Journal of personality.

[34]  F. Craik,et al.  Levels of Pro-cessing: A Framework for Memory Research , 1975 .

[35]  D. Katz.  THE FUNCTIONAL APPROACH TO THE STUDY OF ATTITUDES , 1960 .

[36]  Kenneth G. DeBono.  Investigating the social-adjustive and value-expressive functions of attitudes: Implications for persuasion processes. , 1987 .

[37]  R. Hastie.  Causes and effects of causal attribution , 1984 .

[38]  Jerome S. Bruner,et al.  Opinions and Personality. , 1956 .

[39]  Mark Snyder,et al.  Understanding the functions of attitudes: Lessons from personality and social behavior , 1989 .

[40]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  The effects of a salient self-schema on the evaluation of proattitudinal editorials: Top-down versus bottom-up message processing , 1982 .

[41]  Howard G. Lavine,et al.  Cognitive Processing and the Functional Matching Effect in Persuasion: The Mediating Role of Subjective Perceptions of Message Quality , 1996, Journal of experimental social psychology.

[42]  M. Snyder.  Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. , 1974 .

[43]  Kenneth G. DeBono,et al.  The Effects of Advertising Appeal on Perceptions of Product Quality , 1991 .

[44]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches , 1981 .

[45]  Mark Snyder,et al.  Taxonomic Analysis Redux: Some Statistical Considerations for Testing a Latent Class Model , 1991 .

[46]  A. Tesser,et al.  Effects of affective and cognitive focus on the attitude–behavior relation. , 1986 .