Elaboration Likelihood Model - Assignment Example

Running head: ELABORATION LIKELIHOOD MODEL Elaboration Likelihood Model The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) has already become a reliable persuasion framework. It would be fair to state that the ELM is one of the basic elements of effective persuasion in all spheres of personal and organizational performance. This paper provides a concise discussion of the ELM and its concepts. The meaning of central route processing and peripheral route processing is discussed. The definition and significance of heuristic processing is provided. The paper refers to the usability of the ELM in various contexts of business and individual communication, including marketing, advertising, and anti-AIDS campaigns. Elaboration Likelihood Model The Elaboration Likelihood Model is fairly regarded as an important conceptualization of persuasion in business and personal communication. The ELM was developed, to change the outstanding beliefs about persuasion and to prove that audiences and message recipients are the active participants of persuasive messages. The significance of the ELM is difficult to underestimate. Its concepts and principles are actively utilized in all individual and business communication domains, from advertising and marketing, to the development of anti-AIDS campaigns. Unfortunately, the current state of literature about the ELM is rather scarce. The future research must concentrate on the evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the ELM model when applied in various business and individual communication conditions and circumstances. Elaboration Likelihood Model: The Basic Information The Elaboration Likelihood Model is a popular cognitive response model used to conceptualize and raise the efficiency of persuasive messages in various communication situations (Bordens & Horowitz, 2001). The model was first proposed in 1986, to prove that audiences and message recipients are the active participants of the persuasion process (Bordens & Horowitz, 2001). According to the ELM, the success of persuasive messages and appeals depends on a broad range of the recipients’ subjective characteristics, including their self-esteem and motivation, their involvement and beliefs, values, education, and intelligence (Bordens & Horowitz, 2001). For the most part, the ELM is grounded on the Yale model of persuasive modeling, but it is the only model that emphasizes the centrality of the audience in persuasive appeal, especially their motivations and emotions (Bordens & Horowitz, 2001). The ELM applies to the concepts of central route processing and peripheral route processing – the latter help to explain how the audience and its motivations can work to enhance a message’s persuasive appeal. Central and Peripheral Route Processing According to Bordens and Horowitz (2001), central route processing involves the process of elaborating the message by the listener. Put simply, central route processing implies that the message is personally relevant to the listener and matches his (her) ideals, beliefs, and motivations. Central route processing in the ELM is also called “issue-relevant reasoning”, and is the most influential way to predict the audience’s behavioral reaction to the persuasive message (Stoltenberg, Leach & Bratt, 1989). The level of the elaboration likelihood directly depends on whether the audiences have abilities and motivation to engage in issue-relevant thinking (Stoltenberg, Leach & Bratt, 1989). The changes in the human cognition and attitudes towards persuasive messages are difficult to achieve, but professionals and scholars in communication must be aware of the variety of processes and decisions which central route processing traditionally encompasses. These include being attentive toward the message, drawing associations and recalling memorable experiences relevant to the message, weighing the arguments for and against the persuasive message and, consequentially, developing a positive or negative attitude toward the message and, probably, its sender (Stoltenberg, Leach & Bratt, 1989). More often than not, central route processing is the most reliable predictor of the subsequent audience’s behaviors because it helps individuals to integrate the pre-existing knowledge with the persuasive message and lead individuals to evaluate the relevance of the message (Stoltenberg, Leach & Bratt, 1989). However, central route processing is not the only mechanism involved in the ELM. Peripheral route processing is involved whenever listeners are not motivated to accept and recognize the relevance of the persuasive message. Peripheral route processing works, when listeners either fail to understand the message or are simply unwilling to deal with new information (Bordens & Horowitz, 2001). In case of peripheral route processing, listeners rely on the factors other than the message itself and are being persuaded by the information that is only peripherally related to it (Bordens & Horowitz, 2001). Here, emotions often come to exemplify the most vital factor of successful persuasion – when listeners are unwilling to deal with the new information or are motivated to reject the message, emotions can add value to any kind of persuasive appeal. Obviously, whether the audience accepts and understands the message directly depends on whether the audience’s engagement is cognitive or affective (Oh, 2001). The knowledge of these information processing patterns has already become a valuable contribution to the development of numerous persuasive messages, including those in advertising and marketing. Chen and Lee (2008) explored the relevance of the ELM in online shopping decisions: the authors concluded that central route processing was more efficient for consumers with higher levels of conscientiousness and agreeableness, whereas consumers with higher emotional stability displayed a tendency toward using peripheral route processing of the website contents. Tam and Ho (2005) continued this line of research and evaluated the effectiveness of web personalization strategies when grounded on the principles of the ELM. According to Tam and Ho (2005), web personalization influences consumers in two distinct ways: first, it affects central route processing when offers products and services that match customer preferences; second, web personalization may involve sorting out inappropriate products and services. The latter involves peripheral route processing and invokes heuristic cues in users (Tam & Ho, 2005). Actually, Tam and Ho (2005) were among the few to mention the heuristic principles of information processing. More often than not, this aspect of persuasion remains beyond the scope of the ELM discussion. Heuristic processing is the use of the simple “if-then” rules, which message recipients use to take informed decisions (Albarracin et al, 2005). “When ability or motivation are low, and a source who is obviously an expert presents the message, then this heuristic will likely to be used to determine attitudes toward the message’s recommendation” (Albarracin et al, 2005, p.628). Like with central and peripheral route processing, the credibility of the persuasive message is affected by the individual attitudes toward the message and the reliability of the source. Again, the recipient’s motivation and values matter a lot in how he (she) perceives the message. This information is equally useful in the development of advertising messages and other types of media campaigns. For instance, how individuals process messages regarding the use of condoms depends on their motivation and attitudes toward condoms, protection from AIDS, and their beliefs in the AIDS and HIV risks. Individuals with high protection motivation will be more sensitive to the condoms message, whereas individuals with low protection motivation will remain mostly irresponsive to the pertinent information (Dinoff & Kowalski, 1999). From the standpoint of the ELM, the patterns of peripheral route processing in individuals will be less predictive of the subsequent changes in AIDS protective behaviors than the central route processing, when individuals engage in the conscious analysis of the incoming information. Unfortunately, the current state of research about the ELM does not provide enough information to evaluate its weaknesses and strengths. The future research must concentrate on the discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of the ELM model when applied in various communication conditions and circumstances. Conclusion The Elaboration Likelihood Model is fairly regarded as one of the most important conceptualizations of persuasive communication. The importance of the ELM can’t be undervalued. Its concepts and ideas are actively allied in a great number of areas. The ELM discusses the principles of central, peripheral route, and heuristic processing. That the ELM is actively applied in various spheres of communication and persuasion cannot be denied. Advertising, marketing, and even anti-AIDS campaigns actively utilize the benefits of central route processing to reach their audiences. Unfortunately, the current state of research about the ELM is rather scarce. The future research must concentrate on the evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the model, when applied in various communication conditions and circumstances. References Albarracin, D., Johnson, B.T. & Zanna, M.P. (2005). The handbook of attitudes. Routledge. Borders, K.S. & Horowitz, I.A. (2001). Social psychology. Routledge. Chen, S.H. & Lee, K.P. (2008). The role of personality traits and perceived values in persuasion: an Elaboration Likelihood Model perspective on online shopping. Social Behavior and Personality, 36, 10, 1379-1399. Dinoff, B.L. & Kowalski, R.M. (1999). Reducing AIDS risk behavior: The combined efficacy of protection motivation theory and the Elaboration Likelihood Model. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18, 2, 223-239. Oh, H. (2001). Extension of central processing in the Elaboration Likelihood Model: Consideration of involvement types. American Marketing Association, Conference Proceedings, 12, 291-298. Stoltenberg, C.D., Leach, M.M. & Bratt, A. (1989). The Elaboration Likelihood Model and psychotherapeutic persuasion. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 3, 3, 181-200. Tam, K.Y. & Ho, S.Y. (2005). Web personalization as a persuasion strategy: An Elaboration Likelihood Model perspective. Information Systems Research, 16, 3, 271-293. Read More