ELABORATION

LIKELIHOOD MODEL
Of Richard Petty and John
Cacioppo
TWO ROUTES TO PERSUASION
Central: message elaboration – the extent to which a
person carefully thinks about issue-relevant
arguments contained in a persuasive communication
The more listeners work to attend to the message the
less influenced they are by content-irrelevant factors

Peripheral: shorthand method to accept or reject a

message without any active thinking about the
attributes of the issue or the object of consideration
The more listeners attend to content-irrelevant factors,
the less the impact of the message
 Note: Two Dimensions
Messages can be constructed with a
view either to elaborated or peripheral
processing, or some mixture of the two
Messages can be interpreted through
attention either mainly to elaborated or to
peripheral features, or some mixture of the
two
 CUES

Reciprocation – “ you owe me”

Consistency – “we’ve always done it that
way”
Social proof – “everybody’s doing it”
Liking – “ love me, love my ideas”,
Authority – “just because I say so”
Scarcity – “Quick, before they’re all gone”
 Motivation
Message elaboration requires motivation
Motivation enhanced by personal
relevance
Motivation enhanced by need for cognitive
clarity
Message elaboration requires ability
Ability may be impeded by distraction
Repetition may increase prospect for
elaboration
 Types of elaboration
Objective: considers facts on their own
merit. Listeners who objectively elaborate
will need to be impressed by the argument
Biased: predetermined conclusions color
the supporting data
So elaboration is not always desirable
from the point of view of the persuader. It
has to generate favorable thoughts.
 Arguments
Strong arguments likely to lead to change
that is:
persistent over time
resists counter persuasion
predict future behavior
Weak arguments may have boomerang
effect leading to enduring rejection of
argument.
 Peripheral Cues
Most messages processed peripherally
Tangible rewards, others’ reactions, and source
credibility (likeability, character, expertise),
emotionally engaging, are important. Some
cues inhere in the listener (e.g. mood).
More likely to be short-lived
However, peripheral cues may sometimes
stimulate elaboration, as do some in slide 4: e.g.
“social proof” may involve argument by appeal to
precedent. In other words, peripheral cues are
not necessarily illogical
 Critique
Should it pay more attention to emotional
appeal?
Not always straight forward to determine a
“strong argument”
Theory grown unwieldy, less predictive
Might be better to have an “elaboration
continuum” rather than a binary opposition
between “elaboration” and “peripheral”
appeals