Revision as of 00:42, 30 April 2019 edit Chelsearatcliff (talk \| contribs) 20 edits Replaced technical language with plain language or added explanations, simplified complex or wordy sentences, reduced excessive quotes by paraphrasing some material, rearranged and reworded sentences to reduce redundancy, removed sentences that were unnecessary, redundant, or did not make sense, reorganized for better flow, added citations. Tag: Visual edit ← Previous edit		Revision as of 00:45, 30 April 2019 edit undo Chelsearatcliff (talk \| contribs) 20 edits →Direction of future research: Deleted a paragraph that was 95% plagiarized and that was not actually specific to HSM and thus didn't feel appropriate to revise and retain. Tag: Visual edit Next edit →
Line 50: Contrary to previous viewpoints, the heuristic-systematic model and the [[elaboration likelihood model]] should be treated as complementary models to create a dual-processing framework for use in future research for understanding a variety of [[social influence]] phenomena.<ref name=Eagly /> Future research should seek to link persuasion more closely with impression formation, which has previously focused on impressions based on agents' behaviors. An example would be to test if perceived expertise of a communicator is more stable over time and more resistant to counter-factual evidence if it is based on systematic processing than when it is based on a short description. Research has revealed that two-sided messages might not only be more persuasive but might also enhance the perceived credibility of a communicator.<ref name= Reimer>Reimer, T., Mata, R & Stoecklin, M. (2004). The use of Heuristics in Persuasion: Deriving Cues on Source Expertise from Argument Quality. In Current Research in Social Psychology, 10(6), 69-83.</ref> == Criticisms ==

Heuristic-systematic model of information processing: Difference between revisions