The effects of structural and grammatical variables on persuasion: An elaboration likelihood model perspective

In research examining the elaboration likelihood model (ELM), argument quality has generally been treated as an expedient methodological tool rather than a conceptually meaningful construct. Differences between strong and weak arguments have typically been cast in terms of pretest results and/or the ad hoc interpretations of researchers. Given the importance of creating effective verbal arguments in marketing communications, a stronger theoretical rationale is needed to establish why, exactly, some verbal arguments are more persuasive than others. Drawing on the literature in logic, social psychology, jurisprudence, and sociolinguistics, this research examines various structural and grammatical elements of verbal arguments in order to develop conceptually meaningful definitions of argument quality and more rigorous theoretical accounts of argument-driven persuasion within the ELM. Several research propositions are derived in order to suggest directions for future research on argument-driven persuasion. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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

[2]  J. Bradac,et al.  Powerful Versus Powerless Language: Consequences for Persuasion, Impression Formation, and Cognitive Response , 1991 .

[3]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[4]  C. Areni The Proposition-Probability Model of Argument Structure and Message Acceptance , 2002 .

[5]  James M. Munch,et al.  The Effects of Argument Structure and Affective Tagging on Product Attitude Formation , 1993 .

[6]  The relation between sentence order and comprehension , 1963 .

[7]  P. Pollard,et al.  On the conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning , 1983, Memory & cognition.

[8]  R. Revlin,et al.  The effect of personal biases on syllogistic reasoning: Rational decisions from personalized representations , 1978 .

[9]  Charles S. Areni,et al.  The effects of sales presentation quality and initial perceptions on persuasion: a multiple role perspective , 2002 .

[10]  Michael R. Hyman,et al.  Evaluating and Improving Argument-Centered Works in Marketing , 1987 .

[11]  Joseph O. Rentz Generalizability Theory: A Comprehensive Method for Assessing and Improving the Dependability of Marketing Measures , 1987 .

[12]  Dolf Zillmann,et al.  Rhetorical Elicitation of Agreement in Persuasion. , 1972 .

[13]  Chester A. Insko,et al.  Theories of attitude change , 1967 .

[14]  David W. Stewart,et al.  The Effects of Comparative Advertising on Attention, Memory, and Purchase Intentions , 1990 .

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

[16]  J. Kline Interaction of evidence and readers’ intelligence on the effects of short messages , 1969 .

[17]  Effects of “satisfactory” and “unsatisfactory” evidence in a speech of advocacy , 1963 .

[18]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Thought systems, argument quality, and persuasion. , 1991 .

[19]  James C. McCroskey,et al.  The effects of evidence as an inhibitor of counter‐persuasion , 1970 .

[20]  J. S. Evans,et al.  Linguistic Determinants of Bias in Conditional Reasoning , 1983 .

[21]  Robert J. Sternberg,et al.  Components of syllogistic reasoning , 1981 .

[22]  R. E. Burnkrant,et al.  Effects of Self-Referencing on Persuasion , 1995 .

[23]  R. Wyer Further test of a subjective probability model of social inference , 1973 .

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

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

[26]  M. Mendelson Business Prose and The Nature of The Plain Style , 1987 .

[27]  J. Mccroskey,et al.  The effect of quality of evidence on attitude change and source credibility , 1978 .

[28]  R. Heslin,et al.  Resistance to Persuasion: Inoculation Theory in a Marketing Context , 1973 .

[29]  W. Mcguire,et al.  The content, structure, and operation of thought systems , 1991 .

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

[31]  C. David Mortensen,et al.  Communication : the study of human interaction , 1972 .

[32]  Bernard J. Jaworski,et al.  Enhancing and Measuring Consumers’ Motivation, Opportunity, and Ability to Process Brand Information from Ads , 1991 .

[33]  James J. Bradac,et al.  Male/female language differences and attributional consequences in a public speaking situation: Toward an explanation of the gender‐linked language effect , 1986 .

[34]  R. Batra,et al.  Situational Effects of Advertising Repetition: The Moderating Influence of Motivation, Ability, and Opportunity to Respond , 1986 .

[35]  Jonathan Evans Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning , 1984 .

[36]  J. Mccroskey,et al.  The effects of message sidedness and evidence on inoculation against counterpersuasion in small group communication , 1972 .

[37]  Charles S. Areni,et al.  An investigation of the effects of language style and communication modality on persuasion , 1998 .

[38]  Kenneth R. Lord,et al.  Picture-Based Persuasion Processes and the Moderating Role of Involvement , 1991 .

[39]  Edward P. J. Corbett Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student , 1966 .

[40]  John L. Swasy,et al.  Consumer Skepticism of Advertising Claims: Testing Hypotheses from Economics of Information , 1990 .

[41]  G. Miller Some factors influencing judgments of the logical validity of arguments: A research review , 1969 .

[42]  James J. Bradac,et al.  A Molecular View of Powerful and Powerless Speech Styles. , 1984 .

[43]  A. Mulac,et al.  Attributional Consequences of Powerful and Powerless Speech Styles in a Crisis-Intervention Context , 1984 .

[44]  Thomas Joseph Richards The language of reason , 1978 .

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

[46]  A. Mulac,et al.  MALE/FEMALE LANGUAGE DIFFERENCES AND ATTRIBUTIONAL CONSEQUENCES IN CHILDREN'S TELEVISION , 1985 .

[47]  Joanne Cantor,et al.  Rhetorical Elicitation of Concession in Persuasion , 1974 .

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

[49]  Alan G. Sawyer,et al.  Effects of Omitting Conclusions in Advertisements to Involved and Uninvolved Audiences , 1991 .

[50]  James M. Munch,et al.  Rhetorical Question, Summarization Frequency, and Argument Strength Effects on Recall , 1988 .

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

[52]  J. Alba,et al.  The Effects of Frequency Knowledge On Consumer Decision Making , 1987 .

[53]  R. Cathcart An experimental study of the relative effectiveness of four methods of presenting evidence , 1955 .

[54]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Cognitive processes in attitude change , 1994 .

[55]  Sunil Erevelles,et al.  Effects of Presentation Order and Communication Modality on Recall and Attitude , 1994 .

[56]  M. Braine On the Relation Between the Natural Logic of Reasoning and Standard Logic. , 1978 .

[57]  Wayne D. Hoyer,et al.  An Integrative Framework for Understanding Two-sided Persuasion , 1994 .

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

[59]  J. W. Hutchinson,et al.  Dimensions of Consumer Expertise , 1987 .

[60]  Robert S. Wyer,et al.  A probabilistic analysis of the relationships among belief and attitudes , 1970 .

[61]  Cornelia Dröge,et al.  Shaping the Route to Attitude Change: Central versus Peripheral Processing through Comparative versus Noncomparative Advertising , 1989 .

[62]  J. Whitehead Effects of authority‐based assertion on attitude and credibility , 1971 .

[63]  F. Kardes,et al.  Spontaneous Inference Processes in Advertising: The Effects of Conclusion Omission and Involvement on Persuasion , 1988 .

[64]  W. O'barr Linguistic Evidence: Language, Power, and Strategy in the Courtroom , 1982 .

[65]  Timothy C. Brock,et al.  Distraction Can Enhance or Reduce Yielding to Propaganda: Thought Disruption Versus Effort Justification , 1976 .