Computer Simulation as a Method of Further Developing a Theory: Simulating the Elaboration Likelihood Model

Implemented specifically as a method of theory development, computer simulation allows clarification of a theory and investigation of its implications. Using Petty and Cacioppo's (1986a, 1986b) Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), the use of simulation in formalizing a theory, testing the simulation model, and conducting simulation experiments is demonstrated. With formalization of the theory in the form of a block diagram, the entire pattern of causal effects in the ELM core statements becomes visible at a glance. The simulation model was tested through comparing simulated individuals' reactions to stimuli with the experimental and statistical observed reactions of real participants in experiments. The simulation experiments revealed a dynamic attitude shift in dependency on the development of processing intensity.

[1]  Andrzej Nowak,et al.  Measuring emergent social phenomena: Dynamism, polarization, and clustering as order parameters of social systems , 1994 .

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

[3]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  The Effects of Involvement on Responses to Argument Quantity and Quality: Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion , 1984 .

[4]  C. Badcock,et al.  Simulating Societies: The Computer Simulation of Social Phenomena , 1995 .

[5]  Lee Sigelman,et al.  Computer Simulation Applications: An Introduction , 1991 .

[6]  Garold Stasser,et al.  Computer simulation as a research tool: The DISCUSS model of group decision making , 1988 .

[7]  Harold Stanislaw,et al.  Tests of Computer Simulation Validity , 1986 .

[8]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Effects of message repetition and position on cognitive response, recall, and persuasion. , 1979 .

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

[10]  S. Chaiken.  Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. , 1980 .

[11]  T. Ostrom.  Computer simulation: the third symbol system , 1988 .

[12]  A Parducci,et al.  The category effect in social judgment: experimental ratings of happiness. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  B. Latané,et al.  From private attitude to public opinion: A dynamic theory of social impact. , 1990 .

[14]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Positive mood can increase or decrease message scrutiny: the hedonic contingency view of mood and message processing. , 1995, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[15]  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.

[16]  L. Festinger.  Informal social communication. , 1950, Psychological review.

[17]  L. Ross,et al.  Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence , 1979 .

[18]  Shelly Chaiken,et al.  Working Knowledge, Cognitive Processing, and Attitudes: On the Determinants of Bias , 1996 .

[19]  B. Cohen.  Conflict And Conformity: A Probability Model And Its Application , 1963 .

[20]  Daryl J. Bem,et al.  Template matching: A proposal for probing the ecological validity of experimental settings in social psychology. , 1979 .

[21]  A. Bernstein,et al.  A COMPUTER SIMULATION MODEL OF COMMUNITY REFERENDUM CONTROVERSIES , 1963 .

[22]  B H Kantowitz,et al.  Selecting Measures for Human Factors Research , 1992, Human factors.

[23]  C. I. Hovland,et al.  Social Judgment: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change , 1981 .

[24]  The category effect in social judgment: experimental ratings of happiness. , 1988 .

[25]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Personal involvement as a determinant of argument based persuasion , 1981 .

[26]  A Agresti,et al.  Tutorial on modeling ordered categorical response data. , 1989, Psychological bulletin.

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

[28]  C. Nemeth,et al.  The Midpoint as an Anchor: Another Look at Discrepancy of Position and Attitude Change. , 1976 .

[29]  Torsten Hägerstrand,et al.  A Monte Carlo Approach to Diffusion , 1965, European Journal of Sociology.

[30]  J. D. Johannes,et al.  Systems Simulation: The Art and Science , 1975, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[31]  Wendy Wood,et al.  Access to attitude-relevant information in memory as a determinant of persuasion: The role of message attributes , 1985 .

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

[33]  The Use of Electronic Computers in the Study of Social Organisation , 1965, European Journal of Sociology.

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