Elaboration Likelihood Model
                      Hmmm, I'm Thinking, Maybe

Main Point

       Amount and intensity of thinking determines attitude change.

Running Example

     Interviewer (right hire vs assembly line)
     Resume (strong vs weak)
     Dress (sharp dressed vs K-mart shopper)

I.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model

     A.  People want to have correct attitudes (Postulate 1)

     B.  People have limited capacity and interest in thinking (Postulate 2)

     C.  Variables may serve as (Postulate 3):
          
          1.  arguments
          2.  cues
          3.  guides to elaboration

II.  Routes to Persuasion

     A.  Central

     B.  Peripheral

     C.  Route determined by Elaboration Likelihood

III.  Key Concepts

     A.  Attitude change over time (strength and persistance)

     B.  Argument Quality

     C.  Cues

     D.  Measuring Elaboration

IV.  Ability to Elaborate Objectively (Capacity Ability; Postulate 4)

     A.  Distraction
     B.  Message Repetition
     C.  Receiver Posture
     D.  Message Complexity
     E.  Message Channel
     F.  Heart Rate
     G.  Positive Affect (Mackie & Worth, 1989)

V.  Motivation to Elaborate Objectively (Capacity Motivation; Postulate 4)

     A.  Personal Relevance
     B.  Interaction between Relevance and Argument Quality
     C.  Responsibility
     D.  Number of Sources

VI. Biased Elaboration Production (Processing Biased; Postulate 5)

     A.  Ability Bias
          1.  Prior Knowledge
          2.  Bogus Personality Feedback

     B.  Motivation Bias
          1.  Forewarning of Content
          2.  Forewarning of Intent
          3.  Excessive Message Repetition
          4.  Heckling
          5.  Receiver Head Movement 

     C.  Biased Elaboration not Peripheral Cues

          1.  Generate appropriate cognitions
          2.  Arg effects apparent with no Cue effects

VII.  Elaboration Likelihood versus Peripheral Cues (Trade-offs; Postulate 6)

     A.  Cues operate when EL is low

     B.  Examples

         1. Source Credibility
         2. Source Likability
         3. Number of Arguments
         4. Pleasant Music

VIII.  Outcomes of the Different Routes (Postulate 7)

     A.  Central Route Makes Attitudes Last Longer

          1.  Role Playing (Active vs. Passive Participant)
          2.  High and Low Relevance study

     B.  Elaboration increases Attitude-Behavior Consistency

     C.  Elaboration increase Resistance to Counter-Persuasion

     D.  No Magnitude differences

IX. Variable Functions across Elaboration Likelihood (Multiple Capacities, Postulate 8)

     A.  EL varies with situation and person

     B.  Low EL variable effects

          1. Cue effect

          2. no effect

     C.  Mod EL variable effects (Nature abhors a vacuum)

          1. Elaboration moderator

     D.  High EL variable effects

          1. Argument effect

          2. Biased processing effect

          3. no effect

X. Strong Theory in Social Sciences

     A. Capacity and quality of thinking major variable

     B. Other theories function similarly
          1. MODE (Fazio)
          2. Person Perception (Fiske & Neuberg)
          3. Mindful/mindless

XI. Applications of ELM

     A. Pretesting Arguments
          1. pilot legal arguments
          2. advertising campaigns

     B. Designing for Route
          1. are customer's motivated and able to think?
          2. employ Args or Cues as needed

XII. ELM and the Future

     A. Lots of support

     B. Lots to do
          1. measure EL
          2. explore moderate EL
          3. understand how thinking changes