1. Persuasion and Advertising
Psychology of Media – Fall 2011

2. Persuasion
• The process by which a person’s attitudes or
behavior are influenced by communication
with other people (Encyclopedia Britannica)

3. A new perspective in subliminal perception -
Cuperflain& Clarke
• Semantically active context;
• Visual primacy over verbal content;
• Familiarity;

4. Recent Perspective on Unconscious Processing
Pratkanis& Greenwald
• Accessibility Priming: Subliminal stimuli can
increase accessibility and speed of recognition
of semantically related stimuli that are
presented afterwards (Marcel, 1983, Doctor-
Bread > Doctor-Nurse)
• Mood Priming: Repeated presentation of
negative subliminal primes increased disliking
of a stimulus presented afterwards (and
viceversa, Barghand Pietromonaco, 1982).

5. Review of Literature on subliminal perception
• Our mind constantly builds associations
between element of our perception (inside
and outside of our awareness).
• The existence and importance of
unconscious learning,that is learning that
happens outside of our awareness and
attention;

6. What kind of learning?
• Is it a form of learning that we can use to prepare
a test for school?
- Not really: Recognition and Memory of the
subliminally presented stimuli are generally pretty
poor or absent.
• Is it a form of learning that we can use to sell new
products?
- Not even: Subliminally priming for obscure product
didn’t produce any result as compared with
priming for products that were already
recognized;

7. What kind of learning?
• So what’s the most popular for of subliminal
stimuli used in advertisement?
- Masked Stimuli?
- Not really;
- Sub threshold stimuli?
- Not even, they are actually either disturbing or of
difficult recognition…
- Peripheral Attention Stimuli?
- Actually yes! That’s what Movie Product
Placement is all about: It may not be great to
actually sell product but is fundamental for Brand
Image Building…

9. Elaboration Likelihood Model
(ELM)
Petty &Cacioppo1981

10. Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Petty &Cacioppo1981
• It’s a model that summarizes decades of
apparently inconsistent research on persuasion,
by identifying two routes to persuasion:
• A Central Route;
• A Peripheral Route;

11. Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Petty &Cacioppo1981

12. Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Petty &Cacioppo1981
• Central route:
- Generates issue-relevant cognitive responses
(comprehension, retention, self generation of
issue relevant content) to a message in an
attempt to assess the true merits of the
position taken;
- Requires Motivation and Cognitive Resources;
- Produces lasting, robust changes in attitudes
and possibly behavior;

13. Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Petty &Cacioppo1981
• Peripheral Route:
- Attitudes change because they have been
associated with either positive or negative
“cues” (such as attractiveness of the
source/context, credibility of the source,
number of arguments produced);
- It is usually the preferred route in the absence
of either Resources or Motivation;
- Produces changes in attitudes that are
shallow and short lived;

14. ELM - Petty &Cacioppo1981
• Study 1, JPSP, 1981:
• Method:
- 144 UMass undergraduates;
- IVs:2(involvement)X2(argument)X2(source);
- Material: tape recorded voice arguing about the
introduction of COMPs;
- Personal involvement: COMPs in 1year Vs in 10yrs;
- Argument quality: Data, Stats Vs Anecdotal;
- Source Expertise: High School Vs Princeton Prof.;
- No Message condition: w/18 participants;

15. ELM - Petty &Cacioppo1981
Interaction of Strength of Arguments
with Level of Personal Involvement

16. ELM - Petty &Cacioppo1981
Interaction of Perceived Expertise of the Source
with Level of Personal Involvement

17. ELM - Petty &Cacioppo1981
• When a message concerns an issue of high
personal relevance the effectiveness of its appeal
is function of the content;
• When a message concerns an issue oflow
personal relevance the effectiveness of its appeal
is function of the form;

18. ELM - Petty &Cacioppo1981
• The No Message condition outlined the
possibility of a “boomerang” effect in
persuasion which was at its strongest when
weak arguments were delivered by a source
that was also perceived to be low in expertise.

19. ELM - Petty &Cacioppo1984
• Study 2, JPSP, 1984:
A study to test the characteristics of the peripheral
route: Could just the number of argument presented,
even if all weak, be a clue for peripheral persuasion?
- 168 UMass undergraduates;
- IVs:2(involvement)X2(argument)X2(number of arg);
- Material, Personal Involvement and Quality of
arguments were kept the same as the previous study;
- Number of Arguments: 3 Vs 9 arguments, either all
strong or all weak;

20. ELM - Petty &Cacioppo1984
• In Absence of a Relevant personal involvement,
the mere number of argument presented,
independently from their quality, acted as an
effective clue for peripheral persuasion.

21. ELM – Petty, Wells & Brock 1976
• A study to test the role of available cognitive
resources in determining the route of persuasion:
- Ivs: 2 (argument) X2 (distraction);
- Material: Listening to arguments for cutting in half
tuitions;
- Arguments: Strong Vs Weak;
- Level of distraction: Following an X on the screen
whose position was changed either frequently or
very rarely.

22. ELM – Petty, Wells & Brock 1976
- Distractiondisrupts the normal effect of
persuasion: weak arguments would have less
negative effect and strong arguments less
positive;

23. ELM – Petty &Cacioppo 1979
• A study to test the role of awareness of
persuasive intent in determining the route of
persuasion:
- Ivs: 2 (Personal Relevance) X2 (Warning);
- Material: Listening to (all strong) arguments
introducing COMPs;
- Relevance: Now Vs In 10 yrs;
• Awareness of persuasive intent: pps received or
not the communication that the message “was
designed specifically to try to persuade college
students of the desirability of changing certain
college regulations”

24. ELM – Petty &Cacioppo 1979
• Awareness of the persuasive intent of the
message reduced its persuasive potential,
even though the arguments presented were all
strong.

25. ELM – Petty &Cacioppo 1986
• A study on the consequences of route of
persuasion:
- Material: Listening to (all strong) arguments
about introducing COMPs;
- Relevance: Now Vs In 10 yrs;
- DV: attitudes checked immediately after and
then again in 2 weeks;

26. ELM – Petty &Cacioppo 1986
• Attitudes change in Participants for whom
personal relevance was high, and that were
therefore assumed to have used Central Routes,
lasted much longer than the peripheral route.