Three studies tested the hypothesis that when people receive persuasive messages, their perceptions of the information on which they base their attitudes can determine feelings of subjective ambivalence. Across studies, it is shown that when elaboration (e.g., need for cognition, personal relevance) is high, people have more subjective ambivalence when they perceive that they have based their attitudes on the source of a message rather than the arguments contained in that message. When elaboration is low, this effect is reversed. These findings suggest that people can assess the informational basis of their attitudes and that these assessments influence feelings of attitude ambivalence.
Armitage, C.J., & Conner, M. (2000). Attitudinal ambivalence: A test of three key hypotheses . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1421-1432.
2.
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.
3.
Cacioppo, J.T., & Petty, R.E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
4.
Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.E., Feinstein, J., & Jarvis, W.B.G. (1996). Individual differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of people varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin,119, 197-253.
5.
Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.E., & Kao, C.F. (1984). The efficient assessment of “need for cognition .” Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307.
6.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S.G., & Aiken, L.S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
Edwards, K. (1990). The interplay of affect and cognition in attitude formation and change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 59, 202-216.
8.
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 , UK: Basil Blackwell.
9.
Fabrigar, L.R., & Petty, R.E. (1999). The role of the affective and cognitive bases of attitudes in susceptibility to affectively and cognitively based persuasion . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 363-381.
10.
Fazio, R.H. (1995). Attitudes as object-evaluation associations: Determinants, consequences, and correlates of attitude accessibility. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 247-282). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
Gross, S., Holtz, R., & Miller, N. (1995). Attitude certainty. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 215-245). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
Jacks, J.Z., & Cameron, K.A. (2003). Strategies for resisting persuasion. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25, 145-161.
13.
Jonas, K., Diehl, M., & Broemer, P. (1997). Effects of attitudinal ambivalence on information processing and attitude-intention consistency. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 190-210.
14.
Maio, G.R., Bell, D.W., & Esses, V.M. (1996). Ambivalence and persuasion: The processing of messages about immigrant groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 513-536.
15.
Maio, G.R., & Esses, V.M. (2001). The need for affect: Individual differences in the motivation to approach or avoid emotions. Journal of Personality , 69, 583-615.
16.
Mazursky, D., & Schul, Y. (2000). In the aftermath of invalidation: Shaping judgment rules on learning that previous information was invalid. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9, 213-222.
17.
Muller, D., Judd, C.M., & Yzerbyt, V.Y. (2005). When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 852-863.
18.
Petrocelli, J.V., Tormala, Z.L., & Rucker, D.D. (2007). Unpacking attitude certainty: Attitude clarity and attitude correctness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 30-41.
19.
Petty, R.E., Briñol, P., Tormala, Z.L., & Wegener, D.T. (2007). The role of metacognition in social judgment. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 254-284). New York: Guilford.
20.
Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1979). Issue-involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915-1926.
21.
Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1984). The effects of involvement on response to argument quantity and quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69-81.
22.
Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). New York: Academic Press.
23.
Petty, R.E., Haugtvedt, C.P., & Smith, S.M. (1995). Elaboration as a determinant of attitude strength . In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 93-130). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
Petty, R. E., & Krosnick, J. (Eds.). (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25.
Petty, R.E., Tormala, Z.L., Briñol, P., & Jarvis, W.B.G. (2006). Implicit ambivalence from attitude change: An exploration of the PAST model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 21-41.
26.
Priester, J.R., & Petty, R.E. (1996). The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: Relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 71, 431-449.
27.
Priester, J.R., Petty. R.E., & Park, K. (2007). Whence univalent ambivalence: From the anticipation of conflicting reactions. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 11-21.
28.
Sparks, P., Hedderly, D., & Shephard, R. (1992). An investigation into the relationship between perceived control, attitude variability and the consumption of two common foods. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 55-71.
29.
Thompson, M.M., Zanna, M.P., & Griffin, D.W. (1995). Let's not be indifferent about (attitudinal) ambivalence . In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 361-386). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
Tormala, Z.L. (in press). A new framework for resistance to persuasion: The resistance appraisals hypothesis. In W. D. Crano & R. Prislin (Eds.), Attitudes and persuasion. New York: Psychology Press.
31.
Tormala, Z.L., Clarkson, J.J., & Petty, R.E. (2006). Resisting persuasion by the skin of one's teeth: The hidden success of resisted persuasive messages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 423-435.
32.
Tormala, Z.L., DeSensi, V.L., & Petty, R.E. (2007). Resisting persuasion by illegitimate means: A metacognitive perspective on minority influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 354-367.
33.
Tormala, Z.L., & Petty, R.E. (2004). Resistance to persuasion and attitude certainty: The moderating role of elaboration. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1446-1457.
34.
Tormala, Z.L., Petty, R.E., & Briñol, P. (2002). Ease of retrieval effects in persuasion: A self-validation analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1700-1712.
35.
Tormala, Z.L., Petty, R.E., & DeSensi, V.L. (in press). Multiple roles for minority sources in persuasion and resistance . In R. Martin & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Minority influence and innovation: Antecedents, processes, and consequences. London: Psychology Press.
36.
Tormala, Z.L., & Rucker, D.D. (in press). Attitude certainty: A review of past findings and emerging perspectives. Social and Personality Psychology Compass.
37.
Visser, P.S., & Mirabile, R.R. (2004). Attitudes in the social context: The impact of social network composition on individual-level attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 779-795.
38.
Wheeler, S.C., Petty, R.E., & Bizer, G.Y. (2005). Self-schema matching and attitude change: Situational and dispositional determinants of message elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 787-797.
39.
Yzerbyt, V.Y., Schadron, G., Leyens, J., & Rocher, S. (1994). Social judgeability: The impact of meta-informational cues on the use of stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 48-55.
