Communication/Rhetoric Theory Research
To Think Or Not To Think: Exploring Two Routes to Persuasion
By Richard E. Petty, John T. Cacioppo, Alan J. Strathman, and Joseph R. Priester
"The purpose of this chapter is to describe a theory of persuasion that maintains that not all attitude changes that look the same really are the same. This theory, called the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), states that the amount and nature of the thinking that a person does about a persuasive message (e.g., an advertisement) is a very important determinant of the kind of persuasion that occurs. By the end of this chapter, you should have a better understanding of why not all ratings of 8 on a 9-point scale are alike, and you should also have a framework for appreciating why certain variables (e.g., a person’s mood, the expertise of the message source) have the impacts on attitude change that they do." (Page 82)
"To understand the ELM, it is first important to understand an assumption that the model makes about the nature of humans in general. That assumption is that people have neither the ability nor the motivation to evaluate everything carefully. Think about it. You are a busy person with many things to do. Add to this busyness the fact that you live in a complex world." (Page 82)
"But this causes a potential problem because you, like other people, have hundreds of little decisions to make each day. For example, a trip to the typical supermarket will confront you with at least 30,000 possible items to be selected. Can you read the labels on all of the products in a given category to find the one that has the best price, combination of ingredients, and so forth? Of course not. Instead, you, like most people, will reserve your effortful thought processes and energy for those tasks that you feel are most deserving and those situations that permit time for reflection. In other instances, you will need to rely on a simpler method of making decisions than effortfully scrutinizing all of the available information. In such situations, you can rely on what might feel like your “gut reaction” or “intuition.” Such reactions might stem from the presence of relatively simple “cues” in the situation such as whether your favorite sports hero is pictured on the cereal box or how many reasons to buy a product are listed on an in-store display ... The point is that in any given situation, people can be lined up along a “thinking continuum” where they can devote a certain amount of thinking to the task, ranging from considerable to very little." (Page 82)
"A person or a group of people (i.e., the “recipient” or “audience”) receives a communication (i.e., the “message”) from another individual or group (i.e., the “source”) in a particular setting (i.e., the “context”)." (Page 82-83)
"The ELM describes two rather different ways by which a person might come to hold a reasonable attitude (i.e., one that seems “right” to the person). One procedure, referred to as following the central route to persuasion, involves carefully thinking about and examining information pertinent (or central) to the merits of a topic. The second strategy, referred to as following the peripheral route to persuasion, involves less cognitive effort and occurs when a person relies on a relatively simple and low effort decision strategy such as agreeing solely because the source appears to be an expert or selecting a product based on the person’s first impressions of the attractive packaging. These two routes to persuasion represent the extreme ends of a continuum in which people either engage in a full and complete analysis of evidence before forming an opinion or engage in a simple and cursory evaluation. People are rarely this extreme in their behavior, of course, so they often will exert some moderate amount of effort in forming their evaluations, relying on some combination of central and peripheral persuasion strategies." (Page 83)
"To understand the ELM, it is first important to understand an assumption that the model makes about the nature of humans in general. That assumption is that people have neither the ability nor the motivation to evaluate everything carefully. Think about it. You are a busy person with many things to do. Add to this busyness the fact that you live in a complex world." (Page 82)
"But this causes a potential problem because you, like other people, have hundreds of little decisions to make each day. For example, a trip to the typical supermarket will confront you with at least 30,000 possible items to be selected. Can you read the labels on all of the products in a given category to find the one that has the best price, combination of ingredients, and so forth? Of course not. Instead, you, like most people, will reserve your effortful thought processes and energy for those tasks that you feel are most deserving and those situations that permit time for reflection. In other instances, you will need to rely on a simpler method of making decisions than effortfully scrutinizing all of the available information. In such situations, you can rely on what might feel like your “gut reaction” or “intuition.” Such reactions might stem from the presence of relatively simple “cues” in the situation such as whether your favorite sports hero is pictured on the cereal box or how many reasons to buy a product are listed on an in-store display ... The point is that in any given situation, people can be lined up along a “thinking continuum” where they can devote a certain amount of thinking to the task, ranging from considerable to very little." (Page 82)
"A person or a group of people (i.e., the “recipient” or “audience”) receives a communication (i.e., the “message”) from another individual or group (i.e., the “source”) in a particular setting (i.e., the “context”)." (Page 82-83)
"The ELM describes two rather different ways by which a person might come to hold a reasonable attitude (i.e., one that seems “right” to the person). One procedure, referred to as following the central route to persuasion, involves carefully thinking about and examining information pertinent (or central) to the merits of a topic. The second strategy, referred to as following the peripheral route to persuasion, involves less cognitive effort and occurs when a person relies on a relatively simple and low effort decision strategy such as agreeing solely because the source appears to be an expert or selecting a product based on the person’s first impressions of the attractive packaging. These two routes to persuasion represent the extreme ends of a continuum in which people either engage in a full and complete analysis of evidence before forming an opinion or engage in a simple and cursory evaluation. People are rarely this extreme in their behavior, of course, so they often will exert some moderate amount of effort in forming their evaluations, relying on some combination of central and peripheral persuasion strategies." (Page 83)
 |
| (Page 87) |
"As shown in the Figure, persuasion by way of the central route requires that people have the necessary motivation and ability to evaluate the perceived merits of the attitude object. Persuasion by way of the peripheral route can occur when either motivation or ability to process is low. Thus, the likelihood of elaborating a persuasive communication (or elaboration likelihood ), as determined by a person’s motivation and ability to think about the information in the communication, determines the route to persuasion. When the elaboration likelihood is high (i.e., the person is both motivated and able to process a communication), the central route to persuasion occurs. But as the elaboration likelihood decreases, the person becomes more likely to rely on the peripheral route." (Page 87-88)
" Some of the persuasive messages that people confront have direct personal implications for their lives, whereas others do not. For example, a new proposal to raise the state sales tax affects just about everyone, a proposal to close a state park affects mostly nature lovers, and a proposal to prohibit having alligators as pets affects hardly anybody. People are especially motivated to think about proposals with direct personal implications. After all, if people can process only a limited number of the many communications they receive, it would be most adaptive to devote the most time and energy to those with the most personal consequences." (Page 90)
"That is, as the personal relevance of a message increases, individuals are more likely to decide to think about the message on their own. Some research suggests that simply changing the pronouns in a message from the third person (e.g., “one,” “he and she”) to the second person (e.g., “you”) is sufficient to increase thinking about the message." (Page 92)
The Rhetoric of Visual Arguments
By J. Anthony Blair, within Defining Visual Rhetorics edited by Charles A. Hill and Marguerite Helmers
"Arguments are supposed to be the tools of persuasion and rhetoric is often thought of as including the study and use of the instruments of persuasion." (Page 41)
"The power of things visual to persuade us, to shape our attitudes, and even our beliefs and actions, seems obvious." (Page 42)
"What seems to be a necessary ingredient in persuasion as a kind of cause of behaviour change is that the person persuaded assents to the pressure of the vector of influence." (Page 43)
"The narrative we formulate for ourselves from visual images can easily shape our attitudes." (Page 43)
Theory of Visual Rhetoric
Foss, S. K. (2004). Theory of Visual Rhetoric. In K. L. Smith, S. Moriarty, G. Barbatsis, & K. Kenney (Eds.), Handbook of Visual Communication : Theory, Methods, and Media (1st ed., pp. 141–152). Routledge.
"A rhetorical perspective 'may be applied to any human act, process, product, or artefact' that 'may formulate, sustain or modify attention, perceptions, attitudes, or behaviour'." (Page 141)
"Defined rhetoric as the ways in which humans 'may influence each other's thinking and behaviour through the strategic use of symbols'." (Page 141)
"Visual images provide access to a range of human experience" (Page 143)
"Conceptualised as a communicative artefact, visual rhetoric is the actual image rhetors generate when they use visual symbols for the purpose of communicating." (Page 143)
 |
| (Page 144) |
"Key to a rhetorical perspective on images and what makes the perspective a rhetorical one is its focus on a rhetorical response to an image rather than an aesthetic one. An aesthetic response consists of a viewer's direct perceptual encounter with the sensory aspects of the image. Experience of a work at aesthetic level might mean enjoying its colour, sensing its form, or valuing its texture. There is no purpose governing the experience other than simply having the experience. In a rhetorical response, in contrast, meaning is attributed to the image. Colours, lines, textures, and rhythms in an image provide a basis for the viewer to infer the existence of images, emotions, and ideas." (Page 145)
"A privileging of creators' interpretations over the interpretations of viewers closes off possibilities for new ways of experiencing the image." (Page 147)