In what ways are the elaboration likelihood model and the heuristic systematic model similar?

In what ways are the elaboration likelihood model and the heuristic systematic model similar?

Attached.

Running Head: DUAL-PROCESS MODELS

1

Dual-process models: Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) and Heuristic-Systematic Model
(HSM)
Name
Institution
Course
Date

DUAL-PROCESS MODELS

2

Elaboration-Likelihood and the Heuristic-Systematic Models
Introduction
The dual process model is a theory of persuasion that explains the large factors which
influence the change of attitude through a series of information processing. During persuasion,
an individual seeks to guide the other party to embrace an idea and practice change in attitude
and behavior. The dual process model thus explains the criteria of processing information so that
the recipient of the message understand the context of the message clearly. Whichever route of
persuasions selected, the ability of the recipient of the message to practice the messages will
depend on the quality of the message and the importance that the recipient attaches to the
message. However, the recipient must take into consideration certain logic and evidence relevant
to the attitude change anticipated.
The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) and Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) are
the dual process models used to help the recipient of a message to have a clear understanding of
how a persuasive message will initiate an attitude change. Consequently, this paper will examine
the tow dual-process models and analyze the features and assumptions of the ELM and HSM.
Next, the paper will provide an analysis of two research studies on the application of ELM and
HSM to the examine attitude change. The paper will detail I each case, how the models were
tested, the results of each study, and then propose a model that stands out
2. Analysis of the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) and the Heuristic-Systematic
Model (HSM)
The ELM and the HSM are a dual process of cognitive models used to have a clear
understanding of the manner in which people process and perceive information. The two
processing models form dual-process models since they make use of two distinct cognitive

DUAL-PROCESS MODELS

3

routes of persuasion to convince the audience to embrace attitude change. Each model is used
under different circumstances, scenarios' and conditions because of the different strengths and
weakness exhibited by the two processing models (Albarracín & Vargas, 2010). Despite the fact
that the HSM and ELM have a certain level of similarities, they tend to manifest differences
which are used as the basis of selecting the most appropriate process model to use with a given
audience, specific motive, and nature of information to be used in the persuasion.
Elaboration-Likelihood Model
The elaboration-likelihood model refers to a dual process persuasion theory that outlines
attitude change paths. The model holds that two avenues lead to decision making and
subsequently persuasion. The first step suggests that individuals have a high propensity to resort
to logical, conscious thinking as the principal decision -making path when they are motivated
and are attentive (Petty & Cacioppo, 1984). On the other hand, the second course, referred to as
the peripheral route, maintains that decision making is motivated not by the arguments of the
speaker, but by an individual’s perception of the speaker. Thus, the first route to decision making
is recommended.
Strengths
The central route is important because it enables the individual to make considerations of
a speaker's arguments and choose whether to agree or disagree with them. This route applies
effectively to issues that have personal relevance to an individual and applies easily to
individuals who have a higher need for cognition (Petty & Cacioppo, 1984).
Weaknesses
Whereas the peripheral route is an easier route, it does not result in permanent change.
Also, the effectiveness of decisions arising from the principal route depends on the speaker's

DUAL-PROCESS MODELS

4

argument. This may be counterproductive in the event that the speaker misinforms the individual
and they are ignorant of the subject themselves.
The Heuristic-Systematic Model
This persuasion model to decision-making holds that individuals employ heuristics and
shortcut while making decisions. Alternatively, individuals systematically process an argument
for its ...

In what ways are the elaboration likelihood model and the heuristic systematic model similar?

15 Million Students Helped!

Sign up to view the full answer

The elaboration likelihood model is a theory of persuasion that suggests that there are two different ways people can be persuaded of something, depending on how invested they are in a topic. When people are strongly motivated and have time to think over a decision, persuasion occurs through the central route, in which they carefully weigh the pros and cons of a choice. However, when people are rushed or the decision is less important to them, they tend to be more easily persuaded by the peripheral route, that is, by features that are more tangential to the decision at hand.

Key Takeaways: Elaboration Likelihood Model

  • The elaboration likelihood model explains how people can be persuaded to change their attitudes.
  • When people are invested in a topic and have the time and energy to think over an issue, they’re more likely to be persuaded through the central route.
  • When people are less invested in a topic, they’re more likely to be persuaded by the peripheral route and are more easily influenced by superficial aspects of the situation.

Overview of the Elaboration Likelihood Model

The elaboration likelihood model is a theory developed by Richard Petty and John Cacioppo in the 1970s and 1980s. Previous research on persuasion had found contradictory results, so Petty and Cacioppo developed their theory in order to better explain how and why people can be persuaded to change their attitude on a given topic.

According to Petty and Cacioppo, a key concept to understand is the idea of elaboration. At higher levels of elaboration, people are more likely to think over an issue carefully, but, at lower levels, they may make decisions that are less carefully thought out.

What factors affect elaboration? One major factor is whether the issue is personally relevant to us. For example, imagine you’re reading about a proposed soda tax in your city. If you’re a soda drinker, the elaboration likelihood model would predict that elaboration would be higher (since you would be potentially paying this tax). On the other hand, people who don't drink soda (or soda drinkers who live in a city that wasn’t considering adding a soda tax) would have lower levels of elaboration. Other factors can also affect our motivation to elaborate on an issue, such as how soon a potential issue will affect us (elaboration is higher for things that affect us more immediately), how much we already know about a topic (more preexisting knowledge is linked to more elaboration) and whether the issue relates to a core aspect of our identity (if it does, elaboration is higher).

Another factor affecting elaboration is whether or not we have the time and ability to pay attention. Sometimes, we’re too rushed or distracted to pay attention to an issue, and elaboration is lower in this case. For example, imagine that you’re approached at the supermarket and asked to sign a political petition. If you have plenty of time, you might read over the petition carefully and ask the petitioner questions on the issue. But if you’re rushing to work or trying to load heavy groceries into your car, you’re less likely to carefully form an opinion on the petition topic.

Essentially, elaboration is a spectrum from low to high. Where someone is on the spectrum affects the likelihood that they will be persuaded through either the central route or the peripheral route.

The Central Route to Persuasion

When elaboration is higher, we’re more likely to be persuaded through the central route. In the central route, we pay attention to the merits of an argument, and we carefully weigh the pros and cons of an issue. Essentially, the central route involves using critical thinking and trying to make the best decision possible. (That said, even when using the central route, we may still end up processing information in a biased way.)

Importantly, attitudes formed through the central route seem to be especially strong. When persuaded through the central route, we’re less susceptible to others' attempts to change our mind later and we’re more likely to act in ways that match our new attitude.

The Peripheral Route to Persuasion

When elaboration is lower, we’re more likely to be persuaded through the peripheral route. In the peripheral route, we’re susceptible to being influenced by cues that don’t actually relate to the issue at hand. For example, we might be persuaded to buy a product because a famous or attractive spokesperson is shown using the product. In the peripheral route, we might also be persuaded to support something because we see that there are a lot of arguments in favor of it—but we might not carefully consider whether these arguments are actually any good.

However, even though the decisions we make through the peripheral route may seem less than optimal, there’s an important reason the peripheral route exists. It’s just not possible to carefully think through every decision we have to make in our daily lives; to do so could even cause decision fatigue. Not every decision is equally important, and using the peripheral route for some of the issues that don’t actually matter as much (such as choosing between two very similar consumer products) can free up mental space to weigh the pros and cons more carefully when we face a bigger decision.

Example

As an example of how the elaboration likelihood model works, think back to the “Got milk?” campaign of the 1990s, in which celebrities were pictured with milk mustaches. Someone who has less time to pay attention to an ad would have a lower level of elaboration, so they might be persuaded by seeing a favorite celebrity with a milk mustache (i.e. they would be persuaded through the peripheral route). However, someone who is especially health-conscious might have a higher level of elaboration on this issue, so they might not find this ad especially convincing. Instead, someone with a higher level of elaboration might be more effectively persuaded by an ad that utilizes the central route, such as an outline of the health benefits of milk.

Comparison to Other Theories

The elaboration likelihood model is similar to another theory of persuasion suggested by researchers, the heuristic-systematic model developed by Shelly Chaiken. In this theory, there are also two routes to persuasion, which are called the systematic route and the heuristic route. The systematic route is similar to the elaboration likelihood model’s central route, while the heuristic route is similar to the peripheral route.

However, not all researchers agree that there are two routes to persuasion: some researchers have proposed a unimodel of persuasion in which there is just one route to persuasion, rather than a central and peripheral route.

Conclusion

The elaboration likelihood model has been an influential and widely-cited theory in psychology, and its key contribution is the idea that people can be persuaded of things in one of two different ways depending on their level of elaboration for a particular topic.

Sources and Additional Reading:

  • Darke, Peter. “Heuristic-Systematic Model of Persuasion.” Encyclopedia of Social Psychology. Edited by Roy F. Baumeister and Kathleen D. Vohs, SAGE Publications, 2007, 428-430.
  • Gilovich, Thomas, Dacher Keltner, and Richard E. Nisbett. Social Psychology. 1st edition, W.W. Norton & Company, 2006. https://books.google.com/books?id=GxXEtwEACAAJ
  • Petty, Richard E., and John T. Cacioppo. "The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion." Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 1986, 123-205. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270271600_The_Elaboration_Likelihood_Model_of_Persuasion
  • Wagner, Benjamin C., and Richard E. Petty. "The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion: Thoughtful and Non-Thoughtful Social Influence." Theories in Social Psychology, edited by Derek Chadee, John Wiley & Sons, 2011, 96-116. https://books.google.com/books/about/Theories_in_Social_Psychology.html?id=DnVBDPEFFCQC

Cite this Article

Format

Your Citation

Hopper, Elizabeth. "What Is the Elaboration Likelihood Model in Psychology?" ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/elaboration-likelihood-model-4686036 (accessed December 11, 2022).

In what ways are the elaboration likelihood model and the heuristic systematic model different?

The ELM focuses on the motivation to attain correct attitudes, while the HSM predicts that people can be motivated to attain a correct attitude, an attitude that is socially desirable, or an attitude that expresses personal identity and values.

What is the difference between heuristics and systematic processing?

Systematic processing is defined by effortful scrutiny and comparison of information, whereas heuristic processing is defined by the use of cues to arrive more easily at a judgment. Antecedents to the two processing modes include information sufficiency, motivation, and self-efficacy.

What is heuristic systematic model of persuasion?

The heuristic-systematic model is a theory of persuasion that suggests attitudes can change in two fundamentally different ways. One way is through systematic processing, whereby people think carefully about any available information when forming an opinion to determine whether the information is accurate or valid.

What is the elaboration likelihood model and how is it relevant?

The elaboration likelihood model (ELM) of persuasion is a dual process theory describing the change of attitudes. The ELM was developed by Richard E. Petty and John Cacioppo in 1980. The model aims to explain different ways of processing stimuli, why they are used, and their outcomes on attitude change.