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 6 to use daily (.10). If that person only holds a modest belief in that running would be a good daily exercise given the reported health benefits (.30), the potential of the datum to influence belief in the claim would be small (.30 - .10) (.50) = .10. Morley (1987) found data consistent with his theory. His study is one of a few to examine the effect of subjective experience on persuasive message processing. One critique of Morley’s model of attitude change is that it is a tautology. If we see messages as a source of new datum, then this model predicts that change in one’s evaluation of a claim is a function of a post message evaluation subtracting a pre-message evaluation, multiplied by the message’s plausibility. In other words, change is as change does (“Forrest Gump,” 1994). Another concern is that Morley’s model focuses on receiver’s perceptions of key variables. His model, as he points out, does not address what variables affect receiver’s perceptions of data and warrants of a message. This point is made by other scholars for assessing subjective truth value of assertions (Gilson & Abelson, 1965) and subjective logic (Kanouse & Abelson, 1967). The current study tests if findings from message recall, relating subjective experience of memory recall to memory assessments, generalize to persuasive message processing. We hope to understand how people’s subjective experience of processing a message may influence 1) their perceptions of the message and, ultimately, 2) the message’s persuasability. Instead of asking people to recall a different amount of information, they wrote down different amounts of evidence for a single-sided, persuasive message. We expect to find a new instantiation of a paradoxical scenario: participants who list larger amounts of supportive evidence (difficult message processing) in support of a message should be less persuaded by the message than those who list fewer pieces of supportive evidence (easy message processing).

Authors: Smith, Rachel., Goei, Ryan. and Lindsey, Lisa.
first   previous   Page 6 of 23   next   last



background image
Subjective Experience 6
to use daily (.10). If that person only holds a modest belief in that running would be a good daily
exercise given the reported health benefits (.30), the potential of the datum to influence belief in
the claim would be small (.30 - .10) (.50) = .10.
Morley (1987) found data consistent with his theory. His study is one of a few to
examine the effect of subjective experience on persuasive message processing. One critique of
Morley’s model of attitude change is that it is a tautology. If we see messages as a source of new
datum, then this model predicts that change in one’s evaluation of a claim is a function of a post
message evaluation subtracting a pre-message evaluation, multiplied by the message’s
plausibility. In other words, change is as change does (“Forrest Gump,” 1994). Another concern
is that Morley’s model focuses on receiver’s perceptions of key variables. His model, as he
points out, does not address what variables affect receiver’s perceptions of data and warrants of a
message. This point is made by other scholars for assessing subjective truth value of assertions
(Gilson & Abelson, 1965) and subjective logic (Kanouse & Abelson, 1967).
The current study tests if findings from message recall, relating subjective experience of
memory recall to memory assessments, generalize to persuasive message processing. We hope
to understand how people’s subjective experience of processing a message may influence 1) their
perceptions of the message and, ultimately, 2) the message’s persuasability. Instead of asking
people to recall a different amount of information, they wrote down different amounts of
evidence for a single-sided, persuasive message. We expect to find a new instantiation of a
paradoxical scenario: participants who list larger amounts of supportive evidence (difficult
message processing) in support of a message should be less persuaded by the message than those
who list fewer pieces of supportive evidence (easy message processing).


Convention
Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
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 6 of 23   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.