Previous research has indicated that good arguments are more effective than bad ones under high but not low involvement. However, there has been some question whether subjects were actually highly involved; the present study got subjects (47 male and female undergraduates) highly involved by allowing them to vote on their final examination questions. Good arguments were significantly more effective than bad ones under both high and low involvement on all dependent variables. Introduction of a responsibility factor may eliminate the effect of involvement in an issue.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ApslerR.SearsD. O. (1968) Warning, personal involvement, and attitude change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 162–166.
2.
BurnkrantR. E.HowardD. J. (1984) Statements on information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1218–1230.
3.
ChaikenS. (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.
4.
CialdiniR. B.LevyA.HermanC. P.KozlowskiL. T.PettyR. (1976) Elastic shifts of opinion: Determinants of direction and durability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 663–672.
5.
CooperJ.CroyleR. T. (1984) Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 35, 395–426.
6.
JohnsonH. H.ScileppiJ. A. (1960) Effects of ego-involvement conditions on attitude change to high and low credibility communicators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 31–36.
7.
MillerN.MaruyamaG.BeaberR. J.ValoneK. (1976) Speed of speech and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 615–624.
8.
PallakM. S.MuellerM.DollarK.PallakJ. (1972) Effect of commitment on responsiveness to an extreme consonant communication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 429–436.
9.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1977) Forewarning, cognitive responding, and resistance to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 645–655.
10.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1979a) Effects of forewarning of persuasive intent and involvement on cognitive responses and persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 173–176.
11.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1979b) Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-related cognitive processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915–1926.
12.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1981) Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: Brown.
13.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1984) The effects of involvement on responses to argument quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69–81.
14.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T.GoldmanR. (1981) Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847–855.
15.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T.SchumanD. (1983) Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 135–146.
16.
PettyR. E.HarkinsS. G.WilliamsK. D. (1980) The effects of group diffusion of cognitive effort on attitudes: An information-processing view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 81–92.
17.
RhineR. J.SeveranceL. J. (1970) Ego-involvement, discrepancy, source credibility, and attitude change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 175–190.
18.
SherifC. W.KellyM.RodgersH. L.SarupG.TittlerB. I. (1973) Personal involvement, social judgement, and action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 311–328.
19.
WinerB. J. (1971) Statistical principles in experimental design. (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
20.
WoodW.KallgrenC. A.PreislerR. M. (1985) Access to attitude-relevant information in memory as a determinant of persuasion: The role of message attributes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21, 73–85.
