Premium
When expertise backfires: Contrast and assimilation effects in persuasion
Author(s) -
Bohner Gerd,
Ruder Markus,
Erb HansPeter
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
british journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.855
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 2044-8309
pISSN - 0144-6665
DOI - 10.1348/014466602321149858
Subject(s) - persuasion , psychology , valence (chemistry) , contrast (vision) , social psychology , persuasive communication , assimilation (phonology) , cognitive psychology , linguistics , physics , quantum mechanics , artificial intelligence , computer science , philosophy
It was proposed that source cues bias message processing in a direction opposite to cue valence if message content violates cue‐based expectancies (contrast hypothesis), but consistent with cue valence if message content is ambiguous (bias hypothesis). In line with these hypotheses, students ( N = 123) reported less favourable thoughts and attitudes after reading weak arguments presented by a high (vs. low) expertise source (Expts 1 and 2), and reported more favourable thoughts after reading strong arguments presented by a low (vs. high) expertise source (Expt 2). Conversely, students' thoughts and attitudes were more (less) favourable when a high (low) expertise source presented ambiguous arguments (Expt 2). Results are discussed in relation to dual‐ vs. single‐process accounts of persuasion and models of assimilation and contrast in social judgment.