This research deals with the interplay of mood and multiple source characteristics in regard to persuasion processes and attitudes. In a four-factorial experiment, mood (positive vs. negative), source consensus status (majority vs. minority), source trustworthiness (high vs. low), and message strength (strong vs. weak) were manipulated. Results were in line with predictions of a mood-congruent expectancies perspective rather than competing predictions of a mood-as-information perspective. Specifically, individuals in both moods evinced higher message scrutiny given mood-incongruent (vs. mood-congruent) source characteristics. That is, across source trustworthiness, positive (negative) mood led to higher message scrutiny given a minority (majority) versus a majority (minority) source. Furthermore, across source consensus, positive (negative) mood led to higher message scrutiny given an untrustworthy (trustworthy) versus a trustworthy (untrustworthy) source. Additional analyses revealed that processing effort increased from doubly mood-congruent source combinations (low effort) over mixed-source combinations (intermediate effort) to doubly mood-incongruent combinations (high effort). Implications are discussed.
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.
2.
Bless, H. ( 2001). Mood and the use of general knowledge structures. In L. L. Martin & G. L. Clore (Eds.), Theories of mood and cognition: A user’s guidebook (pp. 9-26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3.
Bless, H., Bohner, G., Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. ( 1990). Mood and persuasion: A cognitive response analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 332-346.
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 behavior . European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 511-530.
5.
Bower, G.H. ( 1981). Emotional mood and memory. American Psychologist , 36, 129-148.
6.
Cacioppo, J.T., & Petty, R.E. ( 1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
7.
Chaiken, S. ( 1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social Influence: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3-39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
Clore, G.L., Wyer, R.S., Jr., Dienes, B., Gasper, K., Gohm, C., & Isbell, L. ( 2001). Affective feelings as feedback: Some cognitive consequences . In G. L. Clore & L. L. Martin (Eds.), Theories of mood and cognition: A user’s guidebook (pp. 27-62). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. ( 1983). Applied multiple regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
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.
11.
Eagly, A.H., Wood, W., & Chaiken, S. ( 1978). Causal inferences about communicators and their effect on opinion change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 36, 424-435.
12.
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.
13.
Handley, I.M., & Lassiter, G.D. (2002). Mood and information processing: When happy and sad look the same. Motivation and Emotion, 26, 223-255.
14.
Heider, F. ( 1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, NY: John Wiley.
15.
Higgins, E.T. ( 1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133-168). New York, NY: Guilford.
16.
Kelley, H.H. ( 1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 192-238). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
17.
Kruglanski, A.W., & Thompson, E.P. (1999). Persuasion by a single route: A view from the unimodel. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 83-109.
18.
Mackie, D.M., & Worth, L.T. ( 1989). Processing deficits and the mediation of positive affect in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 57, 27-40.
19.
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.
20.
Martin, R., Hewstone, M., & Martin, P.Y. ( 2007). Systematic and heuristic processing of majority- and minority-endorsed messages: The effects of varying outcome relevance and levels of orientation on attitude and message processing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 43-56.
21.
Mayer, J.D., Gaschke, Y.N., Braverman, D.L., & Evans, T.W. ( 1992). Mood-congruent judgment is a general effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 119-132.
22.
McGinnies, E., & Ward, C.D. ( 1980). Better liked than right: Trustworthiness and expertise as factors in credibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 467-472.
23.
Moskowitz, G.B. ( 1996). The mediational effects of attributions and information processing in minority social influence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 47-66.
24.
Olson, J.M., Roese, N.J., & Zanna, M.P. ( 1996). Expectancies. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 211-238). New York, NY: Guilford.
25.
Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 46, 69-81.
26.
Petty, R.E., & Wegener, D.T. ( 1998). Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables . In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 323-390). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
27.
Ruys, K.I., & Stapel, D.A. ( 2008). How to heat up from the cold: Examining the preconditions for (unconscious) mood effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 777-791.
28.
Schwarz, N. ( 1990). Feelings as information: Informational and motivational functions of affective states. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 527-561). New York, NY: Guilford.
29.
Schwarz, N. ( 2001). Feelings as information: Implications for affective influences on information processing. In L. L. Martin & G. L. Clore (Eds.), Theories of mood and cognition: A user’s guidebook (pp. 159-176). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30.
Schwarz, N., Bless, H., & Bohner, G. ( 1991). Mood and persuasion: Affective states influence processing of persuasive communications. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 161-199). New York, NY : Academic Press.
31.
Sinclair, R.C., Mark, M.M., & Clore, G.L. ( 1994). Mood-related persuasion depends on (mis)attributions . Social Cognition, 12, 309-326.
Wegener, D.T., & Petty, R.E. ( 1994). Mood management across affective states: The hedonic contingency hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1034-1048.
34.
Wegener, D.T., & Petty, R.E. ( 2001). Understanding effects of mood through the elaboration likelihood and flexible correction models. In L. L. Martin & G. L. Clore (Eds.), Theories of mood and cognition: A user’s guidebook (pp. 177-210). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35.
Wegener, D.T., Petty, R.E., & Smith, S.M. ( 1995). Positive mood can increase or decrease message scrutiny: The hedonic contingency view of mood and message processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 5-15.
36.
Ziegler, R. ( 2010). Mood, source characteristics, and message processing: A mood-congruent expectancies approach. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 743-752.
37.
Ziegler, R., & Burger, A.M. ( 2011). Mood and the impact of individuating information on the evaluation of ingroup and outgroup members: The role of mood-based expectancies . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. doi:10.1016/j. jesp.2011.04.002.
38.
Ziegler, R., Diehl, M., & Ruther, A. ( 2002). Multiple source characteristics and persuasion: Source inconsistency as a determinant of message scrutiny. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 496-508.
39.
Ziegler, R., Diehl, M., Zigon, R., & Fett, T. ( 2004). Source consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus: The three dimensions of the Kelley ANOVA model in persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 352-364.
40.
Ziegler, R., Dobre, B., & Diehl, M. ( 2007). Does matching versus mismatching message content to attitude functions lead to biased processing? The role of message ambiguity. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29, 269-278.
