:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:涉入程度,立場共識性和論點品質對說服的影響
書刊名:中華心理學刊
作者:許功餘 引用關係吳正桓
作者(外文):Hsu, Kung-yuWu, Chenghuan
出版日期:1994
卷期:36:1
頁次:頁21-32
主題關鍵詞:說服共識性訊息涉入程度論點品質思考可能性模式PersuasionConsensus informationInvolvementArgument qualityElaboration likelihood modelELM
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(1) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:4
  • 點閱點閱:18
     本研究主要探討於高低涉入情況下,接受不同共識性訊息的受試,在閱讀不同品 質之言論後,在態度上所產生的差異效果。本研究採2(高╱低涉入)×2(高╱低共識性 )×2(強╱弱論點)之多因子設計( factorial design )。以受試者對論點的同意程度 、及語意區別測量做為受試者態度之指標。本研究預測會得到顯著的三因子交互作用。亦即 ,在高涉入的情況下,強論點的說服效果會大於弱論點,而共識性高低則不會有顯著的影響 。在低涉入情況下,論點品質與共識性會產生交互作用;亦即,論點品質在說服上的不同效 果,只有在高共識性時才會出現,在低共識時則無此效果。大致而言,研究結果與此預測十 分一致。 然而,認知反應與態度指標之迴歸分析顯示,造成此結果的內在歷程與 Petty 及 Cacioppo ( 1986 )的思考可能性模式,及 Chaiken ( 1987 )的啟發性處理的推測並不 完全一致。本研究就此討論情感反應( affective response )在說服歷程中,可能扮演的 功能,以說明本研究所發現的矛盾現象。
     An experiment was conducted to examine the effects of involvement, consensus information and argument quality on subjects' attitudes. A 2(high vs. low involvement) × 2 (high vs. low consensus information) × 2 (strong vs. weak argument) factorial design was employed. It was hypothesized that under the high involvement condition the strong-argument message would be more persuasive than weak-argument one, and the consensus information would have no impact on subjects' attitudes. However, under the low involvement condition an interaction effect between argument quality and degree of consensus would be expected. These predictions were fully supported by various attitude measures. These findings suggest that the high consensus information (majority influence) may enhance subjects' motivation to process the message, but this effect dissipates when subjects were highly motivated to process the message by the high involvement manipulation. However, the relationships between their attitudes and cognitive responses within each experimental conditions have revealed that under the low consensus information condition (minority influence) subjects' attitude changes may be mediated by their elaboration of the messages, but this is not the case under the high involvement condition. This is inconsistent with the prediction derived from Petty and Cacioppo's (1986) ELM. The authors suggest that to reconcile this conflict findings the role of subject's affective responses while processing the message, besides their cognitive responses, should be included in future research.
期刊論文
1.Asch, S. E.(1955)。Opinion and social pressure。Scientific American,193,31-35。  new window
2.Chaiken, S.(1980)。Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cue in persuasion。Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,39,752-766。  new window
3.Deutch, M.、Gerard, H. B.(1955)。A study of normative and informational social influence upon individual judgement。Journal Abnormal and Social Psychology,51,629-636。  new window
4.Johnson, B. T.、Eagly, A. H.(1989)。Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis。Psychological Bulletin,106,290-314。  new window
5.Kelly, H. H.(1967)。Attribution in social psychology。Nebraska Symposium on Motivation,15,192-238。  new window
6.Latane, B.、Wolf, S.(1981)。The social impact of majorities and minorities。Psychological Review,88,438-453。  new window
7.Doms, M.、Avermaet, Z. V.(1980)。Majority influence, minority influence and conversion behavior : A replication。Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,16,283-292。  new window
8.Maass, A.、Clark, R. D. III(1983)。Internalization versus compliance: Differential processes underlying minority influence and compliance。European Journal of social psychology,13,197-215。  new window
9.Maass, A.、Clark, R. D. III(1984)。Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research。Psychological Bulletin,95,428-450。  new window
10.Mackie, D. M.(1987)。Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communication。Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,53,41-53。  new window
11.Moscovici, S.、Personnaz, B.(1980)。Studies in social influence V. Minority influence and conversion behavior in perceptual task。Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,16,270-282。  new window
12.Nemeth, C. J.、Wachtler, J.(1983)。Creative problem solving as a result of majority vs. minority influence。European Journal of Social Psychology,13,45-55。  new window
13.Tanford, S.、Penrod, S.(1984)。Social influence model: A formal integration of research on majority and minority influence processes。Psychological Bulletin,95,189-225。  new window
14.Wu, C.、Shaffer, D. R.(1987)。Susceptibility to persuasion appeals as a function of source credibility and prior experience with the attitude object。Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,52,677-688。  new window
15.吳正桓(19890600)。態度形成方式與論點數量對說服的影響。中華心理學刊,31(1),7-18。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.Festinger, L.(1954)。A theory of social comparison process。Human Relations,7(2),117-140。  new window
圖書
1.Petty, R. E.、Cacioppo, J. T.(1981)。Attitudes and persuasion: Classical and contemporary approaches。Dubuque, IA:Wm. C. Brown。  new window
2.Petty, R. E.、Cacioppo, J. T.(1986)。Communication and persuasion: central and peripheral routes to attitude change。NY:Spring-Verlag。  new window
圖書論文
1.Chaiken, S.(1987)。The heuristic model of persuasion。Social influence: The Ontario Symposium。Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum。  new window
2.Moscovici, S.(1980)。Toward a theory of conversion behavior。Advances in experimental social psychology。New York:Academic Press。  new window
3.Moscovici, S.(1985)。Innovation and minority influence。Perspectives on minority influence。Cambridge:Cambridge University Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top