Lecture 6: Reading Flashcards
READING: PRINCIPLE 1: Howard & Kerin 2011: what did exp. 1 show?
- demonstrate that name similarity results in attentive and heightened processing of related material - perceived as self-relevant + attempted to relate it to their knowledge about themselves
examined whether similar (versus dissimilar) names can increase the thoughtful consideration of information on a student resume. Attentive processing of resume information is measured through the use of reaction time measures. Reaction time to a secondary task has been used to indicate the level of cognitive capacity devoted to a complex or easy primary task. The greater the attention and cognitive capacity devoted to a primary task, the fewer the resources available for responding to a secondary task requiring attention; hence, the slower the reaction time in responding to that secondary task.
◦ Those exposed to similar names responded more slowly than those exposed to dissimilar names, a significant effect on information recall was also obtained ◦ Respondents who reviewed resumes with similar names had more favourable impressions of the student than those who reviewed resumes with dissimilar names
READING: PRINCIPLE 1: Howard & Kerin 2011: what did exp. 2 show?
A main effect of argument quality was found on the item that asked respondents about the strength of the resume information
Those exposed to the strong arguments version judged the resume information to be stronger than those exposed to the weak version
shows name similarity induces self-referencing with corresponding effects on increased message processing
READING: PRINCIPLE 1: Howard & Kerin 2011: what did exp. 3 show?
The target product was a brand of cranberry juice
◦ Name similarity was operationalized in this experiment by matching the first name initial and the complete last name of participants
◦ the dissimilar name condition, neither the first name initial nor the last name matched those of respondent
- shows that moderate rather than very high levels of elaboration lead to more favourable evaluations - when processing reaches very high levels, a reversal of persuasion can occur.
READING: PRINCIPLE 1: Howard & Kerin 2011: what did exp. 4 show?
name similarity heightens the careful consideration of information associated with that name
◦ brand attitudes for name similar (dissimilar) respondents were more (less) predictive of brand consumption
◦ time 1 attitudes were more predictive of time 2 attitudes for name similar than name dissimilar respondents
◦ findings are compatible with the position that attitudes formed in the name similar condition were stronger than those formed in the name dissimilar condition
What happens if someone feels confident about their own self-concept to be open minded about ideas that challenge their views?: PRINCIPLE 2
Important caveat is that the motivation to be correct can, by itself, also cause the use of irrelevant information on occasion
o Peoples use of more relevant information might also be enhanced when they feel sufficiently confident about their own self-concept to be open minded about ideas that challenge their views
o People can be defensive when they receive information that challenges their views - Kunda 1987
Self-affirmation theory - Steele 1988: PRINCIPLE 2
Self-affirmation theory is a psychological theory that focuses on how individuals adapt to information or experiences that are threatening to their self-concept.
May help to predict when this defensiveness can be reduced – theory states self-affirmation may convey a sense of self-integrity which enables people to be more open minded about possible threats without feeling that their self-integrity will suffer from being wrong
o Sherman et al. 2000 supported this
Promotion vs. Prevention orientation: PRINCIPLE 3
- Promotion orientation is a motivation to achieve positive outcomes or desirable states + makes a person focus on such things as ideals, accomplishments, hopes aspirations etc. which can be captured by the term ‘eagerness’
o A promotion focus thus regulates an orientation toward gains and rewards - Contrasting, a prevention orientation is a motivation to avoid negative outcomes and undesirable states. Summarised by term ‘vigilance’
o A prevention orientation thus regulates an orientation toward loss and punishment - Although many goals may be approached by both strategies some are more compatible with either a promotion or prevention strategy
o Lee + Aaker 2004: results supported the hypothesis – when there was a match between goal + frame (promotion orientation + gain frame OR a prevention orientation + loss frame)< attitudes were more positive than when there was no fit
o Also found match conditions were accompanied by enhanced fluency of processing the ‘feeling right’ about the message
READING: Haddock, Maio, et al. (2008): What did exp. 1 show?
FOUND the affect-based message produced more positive attitudes among individuals with an affect preference than a cognition preference (NFA) whereas the cognition-based message produced more positive attitudes among individuals with a cognition preference than an affect preference (NFC)
READING: Haddock, Maio, et al. (2008): What did exp. 2 show?
- NFA was positively correlated with attitude favourability when participants received the affect-based message, but not when they received the cognition-based message
- NFC was positively correlated with attitude favourability when participants received the cognition- based message but not when they received the affect-based message
READING: Haddock, Maio, et al. (2008): What did exp. 3 show?
considered whether ID in NFA + NFC are associated with mount of information individuals recognise from affect-based or cognition-based messages
What are other potential principles?
- Logic connections between beliefs
- attitude strength - Strong attitudes are more resistant to change and more predictive of behaviour
- information sequence - e., meta-cognitive model producing that item affects meta-cognitive responses to a message - a variable is more likely to affect meta-cognitions about validity of reactions to a message when the variable follows the message than when it precedes the message
