Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Friedrich, J.
Right arrow Articles by Gallagher, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Friedrich, J.
Right arrow Articles by Gallagher, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 22, No. 2, 179-191 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167296222007
© 1996 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Argument Integration and Attitude Change: Suppression Effects in the Integration of One-Sided Arguments that Vary in Persuasiveness

James Friedrich

Willamette University

David Fetherstonhaugh

Willamette University

Sean Casey

Hobart and William Smith Colleges

Dennis Gallagher

Hobart and William Smith Colleges

Petty and Cacioppo's elaboration likelihood model of persuasion and Chaiken, Liberman, and Eagly `s heuristic-systematic model suggest that for highly involved message recipients, adding weaker arguments to strong arguments could suppress or dilute the overall persuasiveness of a message. The few previous studies addressing this prediction, however, have provided conflicting evidence. In the present study, involvement level, number of weak arguments, and number of strong arguments were varied factorially in a message advocating the institution of senior comprehensive exams. Results provided clear support for the predicted weak-argument suppression of attitude change. Analyses of thought-listing data supported the notion that suppression results from the integration of favorable and unfavorable cognitive responses to the communication. Further research questions regarding the processes by which mixed-quality messages exert theirpersuasive impact are discussed.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 DiogenesHome page
R. E. Petty and P. Brinol
Psychological Processes Underlying Persuasion: A Social Psychological Approach
Diogenes, February 1, 2008; 55(1): 52 - 67.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
R. E. Petty, Z. L. Tormala, C. Hawkins, and D. T. Wegener
Motivation to Think and Order Effects in Persuasion: The Moderating Role of Chunking
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, March 1, 2001; 27(3): 332 - 344.
[Abstract] [PDF]