Multiple Source Characteristics and Persuasion: Source Inconsistency as a Determinant of Message Scrutiny

Abstract

It is argued that previous persuasion research has been concerned predominantly with the role of single source characteristics (e.g., expertise) for attitude change and thus has failed to consider the role of multiple source characteristics. This was done in two experiments that tested the hypothesis that recipients would scrutinize a message more effortfully when the combination of two source characteristics is unexpected (source inconsistency) than when the combination is less surprising (source consistency). In Experiment 1, source likability, source expertise, and argument quality were manipulated. In Experiment 2, honesty instead of likability was manipulated. Results from both experiments provide evidence supporting the predicted effects of source (in)consistency on message scrutiny; that is, argument quality affected attitudes and favorability of message-related thoughts in the case of inconsistent source characteristics but not in the case of consistent source characteristics.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baker, S. M. , & Petty, R. E. (1994). Majority and minority influence: Source-position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 5-19.

Bless, H. , Wänke, M. , Bohner, G. , Fellhauer, R. , & Schwarz, N. (1994). Need for Cognition: Eine Skala zur Erfassung von Engagement und Freude bei Denkaufgaben [Need for Cognition: A scale for the assessment of involvement and happiness in cognitive tasks]. Zeitschrift fuer Sozialpsychologie, 25, 147-154.

Cacioppo, J. T. , & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.

Cacioppo, J. T. , Petty, R. E. , Feinstein, J. A. , & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197-253.

Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.

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.

Eagly, A. H. , & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.

Heesacker, M. H. , 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.

Horai, J. , Naccari, N. , & Fatoullah, E. (1974). The effects of expertise and physical attractiveness upon opinion agreement and liking. Sociometry, 37, 601-606.

10.

Maddux, J. E. , & Rogers, R. W. (1980). Effects of source expertness, physical attractiveness, and supporting arguments on persuasion: A case of brains over beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 235-244.

11.

Maheswaran, D. , & Chaiken, S. (1991). Promoting systematic processing in low-motivation settings: Effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 13-25.

12.

Moskowitz, G. B. (1996). The mediational effects of attributions and information processing in minority social influence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 47-66.

13.

Petty, R. E. , & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.

14.

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.

15.

Petty, R. E. , & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. In D. T. Gilbert , S. T. Fiske , & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 323-390). New York: Oxford University Press.

16.

Priester, J. R. , & Petty, R. E. (1995). Source attributions and persuasion: Perceived honesty as a determinant of message scrutiny. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 637-654.

17.

Puckett, J. M. , Petty, R. E. , Cacioppo, J. T. , & Fisher, D. L. (1983). The relative impact of age and attractiveness stereotypes on persuasion. Journal of Gerontology, 38, 340-343.

18.

Pyszcynski, T. , & Greenberg, J. (1981). Role of disconfirmed expectancies in the instigation of attributional processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 31-38.

19.

Smith, S. M. , & Petty, R. E. (1996). Message framing and persuasion: A message processing analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 257-268.

20.

Wood, W. , & Kallgren, C. A. (1988). Communicator attributes and persuasion: Recipient’s access to attitude-relevant information in memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 172-182.