When expertise backfires: Contrast and assimilation effects in persuasion

British Journal of Social Psychology

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 495-519

  Bohner, Gerd ^a   Ruder, Markus ^b   Erb, Hans Peter ^c  

^a BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ERFURT   (Germany)

^c MARTIN LUTHER UNIVERSITY HALLE WITTENBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTITUDE; AWARENESS; COGNITION; GERMANY; HUMAN; MALE; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; STUDENT;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTITUDE; AWARENESS; COGNITION; CUES; GERMANY; HUMANS; MALE; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; STUDENTS;

EID: 0036981168     PISSN: 01446665     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/014466602321149858     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Abelson, R. P., & Prentice, D. A. (1997). Contrast tests of interaction hypotheses. Psychological Methods, 2, 315-328.
2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
3. Bohner, G., Chaiken, S., & Hunyadi, P. (1994). The role of mood and message ambiguity in the interplay of heuristic and systematic processing. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 207-221.
4. Bohner, G., Crow, K., Erb, H.-P., & Schwarz, N. (1992). Affect and persuasion: Mood effects on the processing of persuasive message content and context cues and on subsequent behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 511-530.
5. Bohner, G., Frank, E., & Erb, H.-P. (1998). Heuristic processing of distinctiveness information in minority and majority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 855-860.
6. Bohner, G., & Keller, J. (1999, July). Expertise, consensus and liking: Self-reported use and judged diagnosticity of persuasion heuristics. Paper presented at the 12th General Meeting of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, Oxford, UK.
7. Bohner, G., Moskowitz, G., & Chaiken, S. (1995). The interplay of heuristic and systematic processing of social information. European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 33-68.
8. Bohner, G., & Siebler, F. (1999). Paradigms, processes, parsimony, and predictive power: Arguments for a generic dual-process model. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 113-118.
9. Chaiken, S., Duckworth, K. L., & Darke, P. (1999). When parsimony fails . . . Psychological Inquiry, 10, 118-123.
10. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-252). New York: Guilford.
11. Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 460-473.
12. Chen, S., & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 73-96). New York: Guilford.
13. Chen, S., Shechter, D., & Chaiken, S. (1996). Getting at the truth or getting along: Accuracy-versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 262-275.
14. Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: Science and practice (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
15. Darke, P. R., Chaiken, S., Bohner, G., Einwiller, S., Erb, H.-P., & Hazlewood, J. D. (1998). Accuracy motivation, consensus information, and the law of large numbers: Effects on attitude judgment in the absence of argumentation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1205-1215.
16. DeBono, K. G., & Harnish, R. J. (1988). Source expertise, source attractiveness, and the processing of persuasive information: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 541-546.
17. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
18. Erb, H.-P., & Bohner, G. (2001). Mere consensus in minority and majority influence. In N. deVries & C. de Dreu (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 40-59). Oxford: Blackwell.
19. Erb, H.-P., Bohner, G., Schmälzle, K., & Rank, S. (1998). Beyond conflict and discrepancy: Cognitive bias in minority and majority influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 396-409.
20. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts (Vol. 3, pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
21. Heesacker, M., Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1983) Field dependence and attitude change: Source credibility can alter persuasion by affecting message-relevant thinking. Journal of Personality, 51, 653-666.
22. Herr, P. M. (1986). Consequences of priming: Judgment and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1106-1115.
23. Herr, P. M., Sherman, S. J., & Fazio, R. H. (1983). On the consequences of priming: Assimilation and contrast effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 323-340.
24. Higgins, E. T. (1989). Knowledge accessibility and activation: Subjectivity and suffering from unconscious sources. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 75-123). New York: Guilford.
25. Keller, J., Bohner, G., & Erb, H.-P. (2000). Intuitive und heuristische Verarbeitung -verschiedene Prozesse? Präsentation einer deutschen Fassung des 'Rational-Experiential Inventory' sowie neuer Selbstberichtskalen zur Heuristiknutzung [Intuitive and heuristic judgment - different processes? Presentation of a German version of the Rational-Experiential Inventory and of new self-report scales of heuristic use]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 31, 87-101.
26. Kruglanski, A. W., & Thompson, E. P. (1999). Persuasion by a single route: A view from the unimodel. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 83-109.
27. Maheswaran, D., & Chaiken, S. (1991). Promoting systematic processing in low motivation settings: The effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 13-25.
28. Moscovici, S. (1980) Toward a theory of conversion behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 209-239). New York: Academic Press.
29. Pallak, S. R., Murroni, E., & Koch, J. (1983). Communicator attractiveness and expertise, emotional versus rational appeals, and persuasion: A heuristic versus systematic processing interpret. Social Cognition, 2, 122-141.
30. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.
31. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847-855.
32. Petty, R. E., Wegener, D. T., & White, P. (1998). Flexible correction processes in social judgment: Implications for persuasion. Social Cognition, 16, 93-113.
33. Petty, R. E., Wheeler, S. C., & Bizer, G. Y. (1999). Is there one persuasion process or more? Lumping versus splitting in attitude change theories. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 156-163.
34. Stangor, C., & McMillan, D. (1992). Memory for expectancy-congruent and expectancy-incongruent information: A review of the social and social-developmental literatures. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 42-61.
35. Stapel, D. A., Koomen, W., & van der Pligt, J. (1996). The referents of trait inferences: The impact of trait concepts versus actor-trait links on subsequent judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 437-450.
36. Stapel, D. A., Koomen, W., & van der Pligt, J. (1997). Categories of category accessibility: The impact of trait concept versus exemplar priming on person judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 47-76.
37. Stapel, D. A., & Schwarz, N. (1998). Similarities and differences between the impact of traits and experiences: What matters is whether the target stimulus is ambiguous or mixed. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34, 227-245.
38. Strack, F. (1992). The different routes to social judgments: Experiential versus informational strategies. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), The construction of social judgments (pp. 249-275). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Tindale, R. S., Bohner, G., Dykema-Engblade, A., & Meisenhelder, J. (2002, June). Priming social identity versus knowledge affects the interplay of consensus cue and message content. Paper to be presented at the 13th General Meeting of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, San Sebastián, Spain.
40. Trope, Y. (1986). Identification and inferential processes in dispositional attribution. Psychological Review, 93, 239-257.
41. Trope, Y., & Alfieri, T. (1997). Effortfulness and flexibility of dispositional judgment processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 662-674.
42. Trope, Y., & Liberman, A. (1993). The use of trait conceptions to identify other people's behavior and to draw inferences about their personalities. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 553-562.
43. Wegener, D. T., & Petty, R. E. (1997). The flexible correction model: The role of naive theories of bias in bias correction. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 141-208.
44. Wyer, R. S., Jr, & Srull, T. K. (1989). Memory and cognition in its social context. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.