Content deleted Content added
Lindsay658 (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (82 intermediate revisions by 44 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" />
HSM predicts that processing type will influence the extent to which a person is persuaded or exhibits lasting [[Attitude (psychology)|attitude]] change. HSM is quite similar to the [[elaboration likelihood model]], or ELM. Both models were predominantly developed in the early- to mid-1980s and share many of the same concepts and ideas.<ref name="alba">Albarracin, D., Johnson, B. T., & Zanna, M. P. (2005). The handbook of attitudes. Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.</ref>
== History ==
Early research investigating how people process persuasive messaging focused mainly on cognitive theories and the way the [[mind]] processed
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,
Another concept that contributed to the HSM was the
The developer and main researcher of the HSM was Shelly Chaiken. Under her direction, the HSM has undergone several major revisions. As she noted in 1980 and 1987, the model specified the two modes of heuristic and systematic processing. Then,
[[Heuristic]] processing uses judgmental rules known as knowledge structures that are learned and stored in [[memory]].<ref name=Chen /> The heuristic approach offers an economic advantage by requiring minimal [[cognitive]] effort on the part of the recipient.<ref name =Chaiken>Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic Versus Systematic Information Processing and the Use of Source Versus Message Cues in Persuasion. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 39(5), 752-766. Retrieved from SocINDEX database.</ref> Heuristic processing is related to the concept of "[[satisficing]]."<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Simon|first=Herbert A.|date=1955|title=A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice|journal=The Quarterly Journal of Economics|volume=69|issue=1|pages=99–118|doi=10.2307/1884852|jstor=1884852}}</ref>
▲Under her direction, the HSM has undergone several major revisions. As she noted in 1980 and 1987, the model specified the two modes of heuristic and systematic processing. Then, Dr. Chaiken (et al) noted in 1989 that the model was extended to specify the psychological conditions for triggering the modes of processing in terms of the discrepancy between actual and desired subjective confidence. In 1986, Dr. Chaiken, and others, updated the model to include underlying motivations. <ref name=dillard>Dillard, James, and Michael Pfau. The persuasion handbook : developments in theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2002. Print.</ref>
▲== Heuristic Processing ==
Individuals may be more likely to use heuristic processing when an issue is less personally important to them (they have low "issue involvement") or when they believe their judgment will not have significant impacts on themselves (low "response involvement").<ref name="Chaiken" />
▲[[Heuristic]] processing uses judgmental rules known as knowledge structures that are learned and stored in memory. <ref name=Chen /> The [[heuristic]] approach offers an economic advantage by requiring minimal [[cognitive]] effort on the part of the recipient.<ref name =Chaiken>Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic Versus Systematic Information Processing and the Use of Source Versus Message Cues in Persuasion. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 39(5), 752-766. Retrieved from SocINDEX database.</ref> [[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. (n.d). Motivated Heuristic and Systematic Processing. Psychological Inquiry, 10(1), 44. Retrieved from SocINDEX database</ref> Due to the use of knowledge structures, heuristic information processors are 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 recipients, in judging the [[validity]] of messages and rely more on accessible information such as the identity of the source or other non-content cues which exert more impact on [[persuasion]] than message characteristics. Heuristic views de-emphasize detailed information processing and focuses on the role of simple rules or [[cognitive]] [[heuristics]] in mediating [[persuasion]].<ref name=Chaiken />
== Systematic
Systematic processing involves comprehensive and analytic,
== Choosing
Both
[[Source credibility]] affects persuasion under conditions of low, but not high, issue-involvement and response-involvement.<ref name="Chaiken" />
When
== Practical
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.
Research into information processing, especially in persuasive messaging, has a natural application in advertising, specifically medical awareness. A 2004 study by Suzanne K. Steginga, PhD, and Stefano Occhipinti, PhD, Queensland Cancer Fund and the School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia, 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 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 health control. Trends were observed for systematic information processing to increase when the heuristic strategy used was negatively 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>The Application of the Heuristic-Systematic Processing Model to Treatment Decision Making about Prostate Cancer Med Decis Making November/December 2004 24: 573-583, http://mdm.sagepub.com/content/24/6/573.short </ref>▼
▲
== Direction of
{{Copy edit|date=June 2024|for=tone}}
Originally the heuristic-systematic model was developed to apply to
▲Originally the heuristic-systematic model was developed to apply to “validity seeking” [[persuasion]] setting in which peoples’ primary motivational concern is to attain accurate attitudes that square with relevant facts. <ref name=Chaiken /><ref name=Eagly /> Chaiken assumes that the primary processing goal of accuracy-motivated recipients is to assess the validity of persuasive messages, and that both heuristic and systematic processing can serve this objective.<ref name=Eagly /> Other motives beyond the validity-seeking persuasion context were identified by Chaiken and colleagues (1989) who proposed an expanded model that posits two additional motives that heuristic and systematic processing can serve; defense–motivation and impression-motivation.
Contrary to previous viewpoints, the
▲ - Defense-motivation is the desire to form or defend particular attitudinal positions.
▲ - Impression-motivation is the desire to form or hold socially acceptable attitudinal positions.
▲Contrary to previous viewpoints, the Heuristic-Systematic Model and the [[Elaboration Likelihood Model]] should be treated as complimentary models to create a dual-processing framework for use in future research for understanding a variety of [[social influence]] phenomena.<ref name=Eagly />
== Criticisms ==
A major criticism of HSM is that the model closely relates to [[Elaboration likelihood model|ELM]], which is also a dual
In ELM, the central route is reflective and requires a willingness to process and think about the message. The peripheral route occurs when attitudes are formed without extensive thought, but more from mental shortcuts, credibility, and appearance cues. The route of persuasion processing depends on the level of involvement in the topic or issue. High involvement or elaboration increases central route processing especially when motivation and ability in the message exists. Therefore, low involvement increases peripheral route processing when motivation and ability conditions of persuasion do not exist. However, if the topic or idea is irrelevant to the individual, then the message takes the peripheral route.<ref name="grif">Griffin, E. A. (2006). A first look at communication theory (6th ed.) Boston, MA; McGraw Hill</ref>
HSM specifically examines “validity seeking” persuasion settings concerning people’s motivations within the social environment (Eagly & Chaiken, p. 326). 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. 326).▼
▲HSM specifically examines
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 been “mediated by the recipients understanding and cognitive elaboration of persuasive argumentation” (p. 327). In addition, researchers hypothesize that systematic processing actually requires and “consumes cognitive capacity, whereas heuristic processing makes few capacity demands” (p. 328). Furthermore, both HSM and ELM assume that “capacity and motivation are important determinants of systematic process” which results in biased modes of processing (p. 327). 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. 327). Therefore, individuals who process messages through heuristic processing routes of persuasion, likely formulate decisions based on 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 counterpropaganda, and less predictive of behavior’ in comparison to attitudes and opinions formed through detailed information within systematic processing (p. 327)▼
▲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
The main assumption is that HSM postulates that heuristic and systematic processing can influence both “independent” and “interdependent” effects on decision making by occurring simultaneously (p. 328). Unlike HSM, ELM does not postulate whether central route processing and peripheral route processing can co-occur or not. Another assumption by Chaiken and her colleagues is that systematic processing does in fact provide people with more “judgment relevant information” in comparison to heuristic processing of information, which does not account for any weaknesses in expert subject matter material, which can exist (p. 328). Therefore, while systematic processing may be prevalent within many social environments, HSM, unlike its model counterpart ELM, does illustrate “the possibility that heuristic processing can exert a significant and independent influence on persuasion” (p 329).▼
▲This leads to another similarity between HSM and ELM, as attitudes and opinions developed through heuristic processing will tend to be
[[Attitude Change]]▼
▲
[[Elaboration likelihood model]]▼
== See also ==
* {{annotated link|Attitude change}}
* {{annotated link|Bounded rationality}}
* {{annotated link|Cognitive-experiential self-theory|Cognitive-experiential self-theory ('''CEST''')}}
* {{annotated link|Dual process theory}}
* {{annotated link|Dual process theory (moral psychology)}}
* {{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 ==
{{Reflist}}
[[Category:Heuristics]]
[[Category:1980s neologisms]]
[[Category:Persuasion]]
[[Category:
[[Category:Mental processes]]
| |||