Heuristic-systematic model of information processing: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:30, 16 June 2024

Latest revision as of 02:13, 9 August 2025

(14 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{short description|A dual process theory of persuasion}}

The '''heuristic-systematic model of information processing''' ('''HSM''') is a widely recognized{{Citation needed|date=June 2024|reason=the source at the end of the sentence is a book written by the creator of the model - not a reliable source when it comes to others' perceptions of the model}} model by [[Shelly Chaiken]] that attempts to explain how people receive and process [[Persuasion|persuasive]] messages.<ref name="Chaiken" />

Line 7 ⟶ 8:

== History ==

Early research investigating how people process persuasive messaging focused mainly on cognitive theories and the way the [[mind]] processed each element of a message. One of the early guiding principles of underlying motivations of persuasive communications came from [[Leon Festinger]]’s's (1950) statement that incorrect or improper attitudes are generally maladaptive and can have deleterious behavioral and affective consequences.

In 1953, [[Carl Hovland|Hovland]], [[Irving Janis|Janis]], and Kelley noted that a sense of "rightness" accompanies holding opinions similar to the opinions of others. In 1987, Holtz and Miller reaffirmed this line of thought by noting, "When other people are perceived to hold similar attitudes, one's confidence in the validity of one's own attitude is increased."<ref name =Petty>Petty, R.E. & Cacioppo, J.T. (1986), Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. New York; Springer-Verlag</ref>

Line 21 ⟶ 22:

Heuristic processing is governed by availability, accessibility, and applicability. Availability refers to the knowledge structure, or heuristic, being stored in memory for future use. Accessibility of the heuristic applies to the ability to retrieve the memory for use. Applicability of the heuristic refers to the relevancy of the memory to the judgmental task.<ref name="Chen">Chen, S., Duckworth, K., & Chaiken, S. (1999). Motivated Heuristic and Systematic Processing. Psychological Inquiry, 10(1), 44. Retrieved from SocINDEX database</ref> Due to the use of knowledge structures, a person using heuristic information processing is likely to agree with messages delivered by experts, or messages that are endorsed by others, without fully processing the semantic content of the message.<ref name="Eagly">Eagly, A.H. & Chaiken, S. (1993). Process theories of attitude formation and change: The elaboration likelihood and heuristic-systematic models. In A.H. Eagly & S. Chaiken, (Eds.), The psychology of attitudes. Orlando: Harcourt Brace: pp. 303-350.</ref> In comparison to systematic processing, heuristic processing entails judging the [[Validity (logic)|validity]] of messages by relying more on accessible context information, such as the identity of the source or other non-content cues. Thus, heuristic views de-emphasize detailed information evaluation and focus on the role of simple rules or cognitive heuristics in mediating persuasion.<ref name="Chaiken" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Gigerenzer|first1=Gerd|last2=Gaissmaier|first2=Wolfgang|date=2011-01-10|title=Heuristic Decision Making|journal=Annual Review of Psychology|language=en|volume=62|issue=1|pages=451–482|doi=10.1146/annurev-psych-120709-145346|pmid=21126183|issn=0066-4308|url=http://edoc.mpg.de/564971|hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-0024-F16D-5|hdl-access=free}}</ref>

Individuals may be more likely to use heuristic processing when an issue is less personally important to them (they have low “issue"issue involvement”involvement") or when they believe their judgment will not have significant impacts on themselves (low “response"response involvement”involvement").<ref name="Chaiken" />

== Systematic processing ==

Systematic processing involves comprehensive and analytic, cognitive processing of judgment-relevant information.<ref name=Chen /> The systematic approach values source [[Reliability (statistics)|reliability]] and message content, which may exert stronger impact on persuasion, when determining message validity.<ref name=Chaiken /> Judgments developed from systematic processing rely heavily on in-depth treatment of judgment-relevant information and respond accordingly to the [[Semantics|semantic]] content of the message.<ref name=Chen /> Recipients developing attitudes from a systematic basis exert considerable cognitive effort and actively attempt to comprehend and evaluate the message's arguments. When processing systematically, recipients also attempt to assess their validity as it relates to the message's conclusion. Systematic views of persuasion emphasize detailed processing of message content and the role of message-based cognitions in mediating opinion change. While recipients utilizing systematic processing rely heavily on message content, source characteristics and other non-content may supplement the recipients’recipients' assessment of validity in the persuasive message.<ref name=Chaiken />

== Choosing systematic or heuristic processing ==

Line 41 ⟶ 42:

Research into information processing, especially in persuasive messaging, can be applied in [[advertising]]. For instance, HSM has been used in Internet [[Web page|webpage]] considerations.

In a 2002 study by Wathen & Burkell,<ref name="wathen" /> they proposed a theory that separated the evaluation process into distinct segments. In the theory, the process began with low-effort examinations of peripheral cues (e.g., appearance, [[design]], organization, and source reputation) then continued to a more high-effort analysis of the content of the information source. The proposed research also drew on social psychological theories of [[Dual process theory (moral psychology)|dual-processing]], which stated that information processing outcomes were the result of interaction between a fast, associative information-processing mode based on low-effort heuristics, and a slow, rule-based information processing mode based on high-effort systematic reasoning. Wathen and Burkell proposed (but did not test) that if an individual determines that an online source does not meet an appropriate level of credibility at any one stage, then he or she will leave the site without further evaluation. They theorized that this “easy"easy to discard”discard" behavior was indicative of information-rich environments, where the assumption is that many other potential sources of information exist, and spending too much time on any one source is potentially wasteful.<ref name="wathen">Wathen, C. N., & Burkell, J. (2002). Believe it or not: Factors influencing credibility on the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(2), 134–144</ref>

The HSM has also been applied in medical decision-making contexts. A 2004 study by [[Suzanne Chambers|Suzanne K. Steginga]], PhD, and Stefano Occhipinti, PhD, [[Queensland Cancer Fund]] and the School of Applied Psychology at [[Griffith University]] investigated the utility of the heuristic-systematic processing model as a framework for the investigation of patient decision making. A total of 111 men diagnosed with localized [[prostate cancer]] were assessed using [[verbal protocol analysis]] and self-report measures. The results showed: "Most men (68%) preferred that [[Shared decision-making in medicine|decision making be shared equally between them and their doctor.]] Men's use of the expert opinion heuristic was related to men's verbal reports of decisional uncertainty and having a positive orientation to their doctor and medical care; a desire for greater involvement in decision making was predicted by a high internal [[Locus of control|locus]] of health control. Trends were observed for systematic information processing to increase when the heuristic strategy used was negatively [[affect (psychology)|affect]]-laden and when men were uncertain about the probabilities for cure and side effects. There was a trend for decreased systematic processing when the expert opinion heuristic was used. Findings were consistent with the heuristic-systematic processing model and suggest that this model has utility for future research in applied decision making about health issues.<ref name="app">{{cite journal|author1=Steginga, Suzanne K. |author2=Occhipinti, Stefano |title=The Application of the Heuristic-Systematic Processing Model to Treatment Decision Making about Prostate Cancer|journal=Med Decis Making|year= 2004|volume=24|number=6|pages=573–583|doi=10.1177/0272989X04271044|pmid=15534339|s2cid=36170137}}</ref>

Line 62 ⟶ 63:

HSM specifically examines validity seeking persuasion settings concerning people's motivations within the social environment.<ref name="Eagly" /> The limitation of HSM exists in the inability to define the specific motivations of persuasion, which is why Chaiken expanded HSM to illustrate that heuristic and systematic processing can "serve defense-motivation, the desire to form or defend particular attitudinal positions, and impression- motivation, the desire to form or hold socially acceptable attitudinal positions" (p.&nbsp;326).<ref name="Eagly" />

Major assumptions exist with both HSM and ELM, which is why both models have generated debate and are often misconstrued. Systematic processing assumes that persuasion has occurred via the recipient's understanding and cognitive elaboration of the persuasive argument.<ref name="Eagly" /> In addition, researchers hypothesize that systematic processing requires and uses cognitive capacity, while heuristic processing makes low cognitive demands.<ref name="Eagly" /> Furthermore, both HSM and ELM assume that "capacity and motivation are important determinants of systematic process" which results in biased modes of processing (p.&nbsp;327).<ref name="Eagly" /> With heuristic processing, there is less need to process information and cognitively in comparison to systematic processing. Heuristic processing occurs when people simply form immediate decisions and conclusions based on the information available versus analytical processing of information given that obviously requires more cognition. Heuristic processing as defined by HSM, illustrates that people can formulate decisions utilizing basic rules such as "experts' statements can be trusted" and "consensus implies correctness" to establish validity within messages (p.&nbsp;327).<ref name="Eagly" /> Therefore, individuals who process messages through heuristic processing routes of persuasion, likely formulate decisions based on experts’experts' opinion and what the consensus believes opposed to fully processing the message in its entirety.

This leads to another similarity between HSM and ELM, as attitudes and opinions developed through heuristic processing will tend to be "less stable, less resistant to counter-propaganda, and less predictive of behavior" in comparison to attitudes and opinions formed through detailed information within systematic processing (p.&nbsp;327).<ref name=Eagly />

Line 69 ⟶ 70:

== See also ==

* {{annotated link|Attitude change}}

*[[ {{annotated link|Bounded rationality]]}}

*[[Elaboration likelihood model]]

* {{annotated link|Cognitive-experiential self-theory|Cognitive-experiential self-theory ('''CEST''')}}

*[[Extended parallel process model]]

* {{annotated link|Dual process theory}}

*[[Transportation theory (psychology)|Extended transportation-imagery model]]

* {{annotated link|Dual process theory (moral psychology)}}

*[[ {{annotated link|Elaboration likelihood model]]}}

*[[ {{annotated link|Extended parallel process model]]}}

*[[ {{annotated link|Transportation theory (psychology)|Extended transportation-imagery model]]}}

* {{annotated link|Heuristic (psychology)}}

* {{annotated link|Information processing (psychology)}}

* {{annotated link|Need for cognition}}

* {{annotated link|Persuasion}}

== References ==