Source factors (2 of 2)

5. (a) Does perceived similarity (of receiver and source) influence persuasive outcomes directly or indirectly? Explain. Through what avenues does perceived similarity influence persuasive outcomes? (b) Can perceived similarities influence judgments of communicator credibility? Identify a necessary condition for a perceived similarity to influence credibility judgments. Will all relevant perceived similarities enhance credibility? Will all relevant perceived dissimilarities diminish credibility? Explain. (c) What is attitudinal similarity? How does perceived attitudinal similarity influence liking? Explain the connection between this phenomenon and balance. Can liking be influenced by perceived similarities that are not relevant to the message topic?

6. Explain how other communicator characteristics (that is, other than credibility, liking, and similarity) influence persuasive outcomes indirectly.

Message factors (1 of 3)

1. (a) What are the effects (on persuasive outcomes) of the citation of evidence sources (information sources)? Is this effect explained by the effect that evidence-source citation has on perceptions of the communicator’s credibility? Does evidence-source citation affect persuasive outcomes differently for high-credibility and low-credibility communicators? What is the most plausible account of the effect of evidence-source citation on persuasive outcomes? Describe two possible ways in which evidence-source citation might directly enhance acceptance of an argument.

2. (a) What appears to be the most satisfactory general picture of the relationship between discrepancy and attitude change? What factors influence the point of inflection in the curve that relates discrepancy and attitude change? (b) Does the point of inflection occur at lower discrepancies for high-credibility communicators or for low-credibility communicators? Does the point of inflection occur at lower discrepancies for high-involvement topics or for low-involvement topics?

3. (a) What is a consequence-based argument? How do variations in the perceived desirability of the consequences affect the persuasiveness of such arguments? Give examples. (b) Explain how cultural differences in individualism-collectivism are reflected in corresponding differences in the relative persuasiveness of different persuasive messages. What kind of appeals, individualist or collectivist, are more persuasive to recipients in individualist cultures? To recipients in collectivist cultures? (c) Explain how individual differences in consideration-of-future-consequences are reflected in corresponding differences in the relative persuasiveness of different persuasive messages. What is “consideration of future consequences” (CFC)? What kind of appeals, those to long-term consequences or those to short-term consequences, are more persuasive to recipients who are high in CFC? To those low in CFC? (d) Explain the potential importance of looking beyond (what seem to be) the consequences that obviously should be mentioned in persuasive appeals. How is this illustrated by research findings concerning persuasive messages about health behaviors?