Elaboration Likelihood model of persuasion Group Members Hammad Abbas Husnaina Rasheed Fizza Kaukab Saba Yousaf Course Code: 5763/5764 What is ELM Elaboration likelihood model The elaboration likelihood model (ELM) of persuasion is a dual process theory describing the change of attitudes form. The ELM was developed by Richard E. Petty and John Cacioppo in 1986. The model aims to explain different ways of processing stimuli, why they are used, and their outcomes on attitude change. When you take the time to think about something, whether you should do something or not Persuasion the action or process of persuading someone or of being persuaded to do or believe something Persuasion is communication Persuasion is an attempt to influence Persuasion involves more than words Persuasion can reinforce attitudes Persuasion ELM Model of Persuasion The Elaboration Likelihood Model attempts to explain how attitudes are shaped, formed, and reinforced by persuasive arguments. The basic idea is that when someone is presented with information, some level of “elaboration” occurs. People express either high or low elaboration when they encounter a persuasive message. The level of elaboration then determines which processing route the message takes: central or peripheral. Central Route Central Route It uses reasons and evaluations (Why this product is better than others) Why you should prefer this. Audience cares about the message They pay more attention and scrutinize the quality and strength of the argument Resistant to counter-arguments. Attitude change lasts longer. Message is straight forward Peripheral Route Processing happens on a superficial level Audience pay less attention to the message itself while being influenced by secondary factors, such as source credibility, visual appeal, presentation etc It can be changed through counter-arguments Attitude might change or be reinforced based on the effectiveness of factors other than the message Less enduring and subject to change through future persuasive messages Receiver focus on practically everything except the message itself Catchy tunes, colors, and celebrity endorsements may be used Strong argument’s change is persistent over time Critique Should it pay more attention to emotional appeal? Not always straight forward to determine a “strong argument” Theory grown unwieldy, less predictive Might be better to have an “elaboration continuum” rather than a binary opposition between “elaboration” and “peripheral” appeals
