Social Influence in Groups: A Comparative Application of Relational Framing Theory and the Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion

Communication Monographs

Volumn 70, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 175-197

  Henningsen, Mary Lynn Miller ^a   Henningsen, David Dryden ^a   Cruz, Michael G ^b   Morrill, Joshua ^c  

^a NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Gartner Consulting Group

^c UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0742306226     PISSN: 03637751     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0363775032000167398     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure on the modification and distortion of judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership, and men (pp. 177-190). Pittsburg, PA: Carnegie Institute of Technology Press.
2. Bauserman, R. (1998). Egalitarian, sexist, and aggressive sexual materials: Attitude effects and viewer responses. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 244-254.
3. Booth-Butterfield, S., & Welbourne, J. (2002). The elaboration likelihood model: Its impact on persuasion theory and research. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook (pp. 155-174). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
4. Bond, R., & Smith, P. B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch's (1952b, 1956) line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 111-137.
5. Burnstein, E., & Vinokur, A. (1977). Persuasive argumentation and social comparison as determinants of attitude polarization. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 315-332.
6. Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, & J. M. Olson, (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3-39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
7. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-16.
8. Cruz, M. G., Boster. F. J., & Rodriguez, J. I. (1997). The impact of group size and proportion of shared information on the exchange and integration of information in groups. Communication Research, 24, 291-313.
9. Cruz, M. G., Henningsen, D. D., & Williams, M. L. M. (2000). The presence of norms in the absence of groups? The impact of normative influence under hidden profile conditions. Human Communication Research, 26, 104-124.
10. Dennis, A. R. (1996). Information exchange and use in small group decision making. Small Group Research, 27, 532-550.
11. Deutsch, M. (1949). An experimental study of the effects of cooperation and competition upon group process. Human Relations, 2, 199-231.
12. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon social judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.
13. Dillard, J. P., Solomon, D. H., & Palmer, M. T. (1999). Structuring the concept of relational communication. Communication Monographs, 66, 49-65.
14. Dillard, J. P., Solomon, D. H., & Samp, J. A. (1996). Framing social reality: The relevance of relational judgments. Communication Research, 23, 703-723.
15. Gigone, D., & Hastie, R. (1993). The common knowledge effect: Information sampling and group judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 959-974.
16. Guetzkow, H. (1950). Unitizing and categorizing problems in coding qualitative data. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 6, 47-58.
17. Harris, M. M. (1989). Reconsidering the employment interview: A review of recent literature and suggestions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 42, 691-726.
18. Heesacker, M. (1986). Counseling pretreatment and the elaboration likelihood model of attitude change. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33, 107-114.
19. Henningsen, D. D., & Henningsen, M. L. M. (2003). Examining social influence in information-sharing contexts. Small Group Research, 34, 391-412.
20. Hoekstra, V.J., & Segal, J. A. (1996). The shepherding of local public opinion: The Supreme Court and Lamb's Chapel. Journal of Politics, 58, 1079-1102.
21. Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1141-1151.
22. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
23. Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Effect of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychology Bulletin, 160, 290-314.
24. Kaplan, M. F. (1989). Task, situational, and personal determinants of influence processes in group decision making. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 6, pp. 87-105). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
25. Kaplan, M. F., & Miller, C. E. (1987). Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 306-313.
26. Kaplan, M. F., Schaefer, E. G., & Zinkiewicz, L. (1994). Member preferences for discussion content in anticipated group discussions: Effects of type of issue and group interactive goal. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 15, 489-508.
27. Kelly, J. R., Jackson, J. W., & Hutson-Comeaux, S. L. (1997). The effects of time pressure and task differences on influence modes and accuracy in decision-making groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 10-22.
28. Kruglanski, A. W., & Thompson, E. P. (1999). Persuasion by a single route: A view from the unimodel. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 83-109.
29. Lannutti, P. J., & Monahan, J. L. (2002). When the frame paints the picture: Alcohol consumption, relational framing, and sexual communication. Communication Research, 29, 390-421.
30. Laughlin, P. R. (1980). Social combination processes of cooperative, problem-solving groups on verbal intellective tasks. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 127-155). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
31. Mongeau, P. A., Hale, J. L., & Smith, M. (1993). An involvement moderated model of choice shift. Communication Reports, 6, 34-40.
32. Penner, L. A., & Fritzsche, B. A. (1993) Magic Johnson and reactions to people with AIDS: A natural experiment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1035-1050.
33. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, LA: W. C. Brown.
34. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion; Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
35. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 432-440.
36. Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Matching versus mismatching attitude functions: Implications for scrutiny of persuasive messages. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 227-240.
37. Poole, M. S. (1990). Do we have any theories of group communication? Communication Studies, 41, 237-247.
38. Reid, F. J. M., Ball, L. J., & Morley, A. M. (1997). Styles of group discussion in computer-mediated decision making. British Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 241-262.
39. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1985). Contrast analysis: Focused comparisons in the analysis of variance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
40. Rugs, D., & Kaplan, M. F. (1993). Effectiveness of informational and normative influences in group decision making depends an the group interactive goal. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 147-158.
41. Sanders, G. S., & Baron, R. S. (1977). Is social comparison irrelevant for producing choice shifts? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 303-314.
42. Slater, M. D. (2002). Involvement as goal-directed strategic processing: Extending the elaboration likelihood model. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook (pp. 175-194). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
43. Solomon, D. H., Dillard, J. P., & Anderson, J. W. (2002). Episode type, attachment orientation, and frame salience: Evidence for a theory of relationship framing. Human Communication Research, 28, 136-152.
44. Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478.
45. Thompson, E. P., Kruglanski, A. W., & Spiegel, S. (2000). Attitudes as knowledge structures and persuasion as a specific case of subjective knowledge acquisidon. In G. R. Maio & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Why we evaluate: Functions of attitudes (pp. 59-96). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
46. Wittenbaum, G. M., Hubbell, A. P., & Zuckerman, C. (1999). Mutual enhancement: Toward an understanding of the collective preference for shared information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychokgy, 77, 967-978.