All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Easy elaboration: The subjective experience of message processing and persuasion
Unformatted Document Text:  Subjective Experience 15 did not (M = 4.20, SD = 1.14), t(14) = .42, ns, r = -.11. From the earlier analysis, those who completed the difficult task rated the task as more difficult than did those who did not complete the task. With these perceptions in mind, the topic evaluations are in the direction we hypothesized, but not strongly different from each other. For those evaluating the con message, we predicted that participants who completed the easy subjective task should evaluate photo enforcement more negatively than those who completed the difficult subjective task; however, participants evaluated the con messages in the reverse direction to our hypothesis. Participants who came up with more evidence (the difficult subjective task) evaluated photo enforcement less favorably (M = 2.08, SD = 1.21) than those who came up with less evidence (the easy subjective task, M = 2.71, SD = 1.38), t(31) = -1.39, ns, r = -.24. Participants who were asked to recruit more evidence provided an evaluation (M = 2.08) very close to the position advocated in the con message (M = 2.11). Those who completed the difficult task rated photo enforcement more unfavorably (M = 1.61, SD = 2.44) than those who did not complete the difficult task (M = 2.44, SD = 1.46), t(14) = 1.42, ns, r = .36. Recall that those who completed the difficult task, for the con message, rated the difficult task as easier than if they did not. With this in mind, the means are in the direction of our hypothesis: the more difficult subjective experience made a message less persuasive than the easier subjective experience. With the con message, it is interesting to note that those who completed the difficult task evaluated photo enforcement more negatively than the message (M = 2.11). In this context, the message’s position and the easy recruitment of a lot of outside evidence from the message may push attitude change beyond the position of the message. The majority of students did not intend to seek more information (M = .13, SD = .34, summary results may be found in Table 2). No significant main effect for the message advocacy

Authors: Smith, Rachel., Goei, Ryan. and Lindsey, Lisa.
first   previous   Page 15 of 23   next   last



background image
Subjective Experience 15
did not (M = 4.20, SD = 1.14), t(14) = .42, ns, r = -.11. From the earlier analysis, those who
completed the difficult task rated the task as more difficult than did those who did not complete
the task. With these perceptions in mind, the topic evaluations are in the direction we
hypothesized, but not strongly different from each other.
For those evaluating the con message, we predicted that participants who completed the
easy subjective task should evaluate photo enforcement more negatively than those who
completed the difficult subjective task; however, participants evaluated the con messages in the
reverse direction to our hypothesis. Participants who came up with more evidence (the difficult
subjective task) evaluated photo enforcement less favorably (M = 2.08, SD = 1.21) than those
who came up with less evidence (the easy subjective task, M = 2.71, SD = 1.38), t(31) = -1.39,
ns, r = -.24. Participants who were asked to recruit more evidence provided an evaluation (M =
2.08) very close to the position advocated in the con message (M = 2.11). Those who completed
the difficult task rated photo enforcement more unfavorably (M = 1.61, SD = 2.44) than those
who did not complete the difficult task (M = 2.44, SD = 1.46), t(14) = 1.42, ns, r = .36. Recall
that those who completed the difficult task, for the con message, rated the difficult task as easier
than if they did not. With this in mind, the means are in the direction of our hypothesis: the more
difficult subjective experience made a message less persuasive than the easier subjective
experience. With the con message, it is interesting to note that those who completed the difficult
task evaluated photo enforcement more negatively than the message (M = 2.11). In this context,
the message’s position and the easy recruitment of a lot of outside evidence from the message
may push attitude change beyond the position of the message.
The majority of students did not intend to seek more information (M = .13, SD = .34,
summary results may be found in Table 2). No significant main effect for the message advocacy


Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 15 of 23   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.