|
== Criticisms ==
A major criticism of HSM is that the model closely relates to [[Elaboration likelihood model|ELM]], which is also a dual-processing model discussing two main paths to [[persuasion]]. The ELM discusses the two routes as "central" route processing and "peripheral" route processing. ELM's central processing has been likened to systematic processing in HSM, while peripheral processing is similar to HSM's heuristic processing. These two routes of processing define related theories behind attitude change.
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.<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. 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. 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. 327).<ref name="Eagly" /> 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 counter-propaganda, and less predictive of behavior" in comparison to attitudes and opinions formed through detailed information within systematic processing (p. 327).<ref name=Eagly />
HSM postulates that heuristic and systematic processing can each influence both "independent" and "interdependent" effects on decision making by occurring simultaneously (p. 328).<ref name=Eagly /> 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.<ref name=Eagly /> 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).<ref name=Eagly />
== See also ==
|
