Anderson, M.H.Integration theory and attitude change. Psychological Review , 1971, 78, 171-206.
3.
Anderson, N.H.Cognitive algebra: Integration theory applied to social attribution . In L. Berkowitz ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 1974.
4.
Anderson, N.H., Sawyers, B.K., & Farkas, A.J.President paragraphs. Behavioral Research Methods and Instrumentation , 1972, 4, 177-192.
5.
Griffin, K.The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication process. Psychological Bulletin,1967, 68, 104-120.
6.
Johnson, H.H. & Watkins, T.Source weights in one and two message attitude changesparadigmstRead at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association , Detroit,1971.
7.
Jones, E.E., & Dave, K.E.From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception . H. L. Berkowitz(ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 1965.
8.
Kanouse, D.E. & Hanson, L.H.Negativity in evaluation. Morristown, N. J.: General Learning Pres., 1972.
9.
Kelley, M.H.Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (ed.), Nebraska symposiun on met. vation, 1967.
10.
Koeske, G.F., & Crano, W.D., The effect of congrous and incongruous source-statement combinations upon judged credibility of the communicator. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1968, 4, 384-399.
11.
Oden, G.C. & Anderson, N.H.Differential weighting in integration theory . Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971 , 89, 152-161.
12.
Tannenbaum, R.H.The congruity principle revisited: Studies in the reduction, induction, and generalization of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz , (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 1966.
13.
Winer, B.J.Statistical principles in experimental design. New York : McGraw-Hill, 1971.
