Page 186 - Media Effects Advances in Theory and Research

7. MASS MEDIA ATTITUDE CHANGE 175

simple cues across repeated exposures enhanced the effectiveness of the
campaign, but variation in arguments did not.

Objective Versus Biased Thinking. In addition to influencing a per-
son’s general motivation or ability to think about a message, Fig. 7.2 indi-
cates that variables can also have an impact on persuasion by influencing
the nature of the thoughts that come to mind. That is, some features of the
persuasion situation increase the likelihood of favorable thoughts being
elicited, but others increase the likelihood of unfavorable thoughts com-
ing to mind. Although the subjective cogency of the arguments used in a
message is a prime determinant of whether favorable or unfavorable
thoughts are elicited when message thinking is high, other variables can
also be influential in determining whether favorable or unfavorable
thoughts predominate (Petty & Cacioppo, 1990). For example, instilling
“reactance” in message recipients by telling them that they have no choice
but to be persuaded on an important issue motivates counterarguing, even
when the arguments used are strong (Brehm, 1966; Petty & Cacioppo,
1979a). Thus, biased thinking often reduces the impact of message quality
on persuasion (Manstead et al., 2001; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986a). Similarly,
people who possess accessible attitudes bolstered by considerable attitude-
congruent knowledge are better able to defend their attitudes than those
who have inaccessible attitudes or attitudes with a minimal underlying
foundation (Fazio & Williams, 1986; Wood 1982).
Sometimes variables bias people’s thinking and influence their
responses to a persuasive message without any awareness of the effect. At
other times, however, people can become aware of some potentially cont-
aminating influence on their thoughts and judgments. To the extent that
people become aware of a possible bias and want to correct for it, they can
take steps to debias their judgments. According to the Flexible Correction
Model (FCM) of debiasing (Petty & Wegener, 1993; Wegener & Petty,
1997), to the extent that people become aware of a potential contaminat-
ing factor and are motivated and able to correct for it, they consult their
intuitive theory of the direction and magnitude of the bias and adjust
their judgment accordingly (see also Wilson & Brekke, 1994). Because peo-
ple are not always aware of a biasing factor, as we noted previously, a
high elaboration attitude is not necessarily bias free. Even attempts to cor-
rect for bias do not necessarily produce bias free judgments because peo-
ple can be unaware of the actual magnitude or direction of bias and there-
fore make an inaccurate correction.

Arguments Versus Peripheral Cues. As we noted before, when people
have the motivation and ability to think about an issue, they scrutinize the
issue-relevant information presented, such as the arguments provided in the