The elaboration likelihood model: review, critique and research agenda

– The purpose of this paper is to review, critique and develop a research agenda for the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). The model was introduced by Petty and Cacioppo over three decades ago and has been modified, revised and extended. Given modern communication contexts, it is appropriate to question the model’s validity and relevance. , – The authors develop a conceptual approach, based on a fully comprehensive and extensive review and critique of ELM and its development since its inception. , – This paper focuses on major issues concerning the ELM. These include model assumptions and its descriptive nature; continuum questions, multi-channel processing and mediating variables before turning to the need to replicate the ELM and to offer recommendations for its future development. , – This paper offers a series of questions in terms of research implications. These include whether ELM could or should be replicated, its extension, a greater conceptualization of argument quality, an explanation of movement along the continuum and between central and peripheral routes to persuasion, or to use new methodologies and technologies to help better understanding consume thinking and behaviour? All these relate to the current need to explore the relevance of ELM in a more modern context. , – It is time to question the validity and relevance of the ELM. The diversity of on- and off-line media options and the variants of consumer choice raise significant issues. , – While the ELM model continues to be widely cited and taught as one of the major cornerstones of persuasion, questions are raised concerning its relevance and validity in 21st century communication contexts.

[1]  Leonidas A. Zampetakis,et al.  Using short films for the effective promotion of entrepreneurship , 2015, Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research.

[2]  Michael R. Kotowski,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model: A 30-Year Review , 2012 .

[3]  Jelte M. Wicherts,et al.  Publish (your data) or (let the data) perish! Why not publish your data too? , 2012 .

[4]  James Reardon,et al.  Need for cognition as a moderator of affective and cognitive elements in online attitude toward the brand formation , 2011 .

[5]  Jollean K. Sinclaire,et al.  A Prediction Model for Initial Trust Formation in Electronic Commerce , 2010 .

[6]  Yann Truong,et al.  Practitioners’ perceptions of advertising strategies for digital media , 2010 .

[7]  Gayle Kerr,et al.  Maintenance person or architect? , 2010 .

[8]  Debra Trampe,et al.  Beauty as a Tool: The Effect of Model Attractiveness, Product Relevance, and Elaboration Likelihood on Advertising Effectiveness , 2010 .

[9]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  TOwaRd a RElaTiviTy ThEORy Of RaTiONaliTy , 2009 .

[10]  R. Petty,et al.  The impact of perceived message complexity and need for cognition on information processing and attitudes , 2009 .

[11]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach , 2009 .

[12]  Yuping Liu,et al.  A Dual-Process Model of Interactivity Effects , 2009 .

[13]  Rebeca San José-Cabezudo,et al.  The Combined Influence of Central and Peripheral Routes in the Online Persuasion Process , 2009, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[14]  J. Phelps,et al.  Searching for Our “Own Theory” in Advertising: An Update of Research Networks , 2008 .

[15]  Richard E Petty,et al.  The mere perception of elaboration creates attitude certainty: exploring the thoughtfulness heuristic. , 2008, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[16]  Gayle Kerr,et al.  Filling in The Gaps or Plugging The Holes?: Why the Academic Advertising Research Model Needs Maintenance , 2008 .

[17]  Shlomo I. Lampert,et al.  Information Processing of Advertising among Young People: The Elaboration Likelihood Model as Applied to Youth , 2007, Journal of Advertising Research.

[18]  Prashant Malaviya,et al.  The Moderating Influence of Advertising Context on Ad Repetition Effects: The Role of Amount and Type of Elaboration , 2007 .

[19]  J. Scott Armstrong,et al.  Replication research's disturbing trend , 2007 .

[20]  D. Borsboom,et al.  The poor availability of psychological research data for reanalysis. , 2006, The American psychologist.

[21]  Yong-Soon Kang,et al.  Beauty and the Beholder: Toward an Integrative Model of Communication Source Effects , 2006 .

[22]  R. Petty A Metacognitive Model of Attitudes , 2006 .

[23]  C. Farn,et al.  Investigating Initial Trust Toward E-tailers from the Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective , 2006 .

[24]  Christopher Michael Szczepanski General and special interest magazine advertising and the Elaboration Likelihood Model: A comparative content analysis and investigation of the effects of differential route processing execution strategies , 2006 .

[25]  W. Crano,et al.  Attitudes and persuasion. , 2006, Annual review of psychology.

[26]  Bobby J. Calder,et al.  Managing Media and Advertising Change with Integrated Marketing , 2005, Journal of Advertising Research.

[27]  Jon D. Morris,et al.  Elaboration likelihood model: A missing intrinsic emotional implication , 2005 .

[28]  Shuk Ying Ho,et al.  Web Personalization as a Persuasion Strategy: An Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective , 2005, Inf. Syst. Res..

[29]  Keith S. Coulter An examination of qualitative vs. quantitative elaboration likelihood effects , 2005 .

[30]  Andrew J. Cook,et al.  The Taking of a Position: A Reinterpretation of the Elaboration Likelihood Model , 2004 .

[31]  Keith S. Coulter,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF COGNITIVE RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS, AVAILABILITY, AND ARGUMENT QUALITY ON BRAND ATTITUDES : A Melding of Elaboration Likelihood and Cognitive Resource Matching Theories , 2004 .

[32]  Charles S. Areni,et al.  The effects of structural and grammatical variables on persuasion: An elaboration likelihood model perspective , 2003 .

[33]  The Future of Marketing: Critical 21st Century Perspectives , 2003 .

[34]  Leandre R. Fabrigar,et al.  Emotional factors in attitudes and persuasion. , 2003 .

[35]  Naveen Donthu,et al.  Eelm: a replication and enhancement of the elaboration likelihood model for computer-mediated environments , 2003 .

[36]  R. Petty,et al.  Mass Media Attitude Change: Implications of the Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion , 2002 .

[37]  William L. Benoit,et al.  Testing the mediating role of cognitive responses in the elaboration likelihood model , 2001 .

[38]  Eric J. Karson,et al.  An Experimental Investigation of Internet Advertising and the Elaboration Likelihood Model , 2001 .

[39]  W. Jones,et al.  Just Say No to Traditional Student Samples , 2001, Journal of Advertising Research.

[40]  Derek D. Rucker,et al.  The Role of Affect in Attitude Change , 2000 .

[41]  M. Dunn,et al.  Conducting Marketing Science: The Role of Replication in the Research Process , 2000 .

[42]  A. Kruglanski,et al.  Persuasion by a Single Route: A View From the Unimodel , 1999 .

[43]  I. Ajzen Dual-Mode Processing in the Pursuit of Insight Is No Vice , 1999 .

[44]  Chang-Hoan Cho How Advertising Works on the WWW: Modified Elaboration Likelihood Model , 1999 .

[45]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. , 1999 .

[46]  James A. Eckert,et al.  Using the elaboration likelihood model to guide customer service‐based segmentation , 1997 .

[47]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Attitudes and attitude change. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[48]  Charles S. Madden,et al.  How Journal Editors View Replication Research , 1995 .

[49]  Paul L. Sauer,et al.  The combined influence hypothesis: Central and peripheral antecedents of attitude toward the ad , 1995 .

[50]  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.

[51]  E.,et al.  To Think or Not to Think: Exploring Two Routes to Persuasion. , 1994 .

[52]  Paul A. Mongeau,et al.  Specifying Causal Relationships in the Elaboration Likelihood Model , 1993 .

[53]  R. Perloff The Dynamics of Persuasion: Communication and Attitudes in the 21st Century , 1993 .

[54]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1993 .

[55]  M. Zanna,et al.  Attitudes and Attitude Change , 1993 .

[56]  I. Ajzen,et al.  A Comparison of the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Theory of Reasoned Action , 1992 .

[57]  David W. Schumann,et al.  Predicting the Effectiveness of Different Strategies of Advertising Variation: A Test of the Repetition-Variation Hypotheses , 1990 .

[58]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  Involvement and Persuasion: Tradition Versus Integration , 1990 .

[59]  D. O’Keefe Persuasion , 1990, The Handbook of Communication Skills.

[60]  The Elaboration Likelihood Model (Elm: Replications, Extensions and Some Conflicting Findings , 1990 .

[61]  Blair T. Johnson,et al.  Effects of involvement on persuasion: a meta-analysis , 1989 .

[62]  Curtis P. Haugtvedt,et al.  Need For Cognition and Attitude Persistence , 1989 .

[63]  Franziska Marquart,et al.  Communication and persuasion : central and peripheral routes to attitude change , 1988 .

[64]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Affect and Persuasion , 1988 .

[65]  Richard J. Lutz,et al.  The Role of Argument Quality in the Elaboration Likelihood Model , 1988 .

[66]  Franklin J. Boster,et al.  Cognitive processing: Additional thoughts and a reply to Petty, Kasmer, Haugtvedt, and Cacioppo , 1987 .

[67]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  Source and message factors in persuasion: A reply to stiff's critique of the elaboration likelihood model , 1987 .

[68]  M. R. Leippe,et al.  When motives clash: Issue involvement and response involvement as determinants of persuasion. , 1987 .

[69]  C. F. Kao,et al.  Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. , 1986 .

[70]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  The Role of Attitude toward the Ad as a Mediator of Advertising Effectiveness: A Test of Competing Explanations: , 1986 .

[71]  James B. Stiff Cognitive processing of persuasive message cues: A meta‐analytic review of the effects of supporting information on attitudes , 1986 .

[72]  James M. Munch,et al.  Examining the Target of Receiver Elaborations: Rhetorical Question Effects on Source Processing and Persuasion , 1985 .

[73]  Mary Jo Bitner,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model: Limitations and Extensions in Marketing , 1985 .

[74]  Chezy Ofir,et al.  Context Effects on Judgment under Uncertainty , 1984 .

[75]  A. Greenwald,et al.  Audience Involvement in Advertising: Four Levels , 1984 .

[76]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Source factors and the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion , 1984 .

[77]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement , 1983 .

[78]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Issue Involvement As a Moderator of the Effects on Attitude of Advertising Content and Context , 1981 .

[79]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Attitude and Attitude Change , 1981 .

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

[81]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

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

[83]  John D. Bransford,et al.  Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing , 1977 .

[84]  F. K. Shuptrine,et al.  On the Validity of Using Students as Subjects in Consumer Behavior Investigations , 1975 .

[85]  Ben M. Enis,et al.  Students as Subjects in Consumer Behavior Experiments , 1972 .

[86]  H. Triandis Attitude and attitude change , 1971 .