Elaboration Likelihood Paradigm

In order to begin this investigation, it is first helpful to consider what has been written about the basic tenets of the elaboration likelihood model (ELM). Dijkstra (1999) in her examination of the elaboration likelihood paradigm notes that this theory is one that is predicated upon "A social psychological theory of persuasion" (p. 399). As reported by this author, "According to the ELM, the recipient's judgment of a message is not always based on a thorough examination. Often, recipients do not pay attention to the context of a message but are persuaded by simple cues like the communicator's presumed expertise.. In ELM is this called the peripheral route to persuasion" (p. 399). What this effectively suggests is that there are external variables, outside of the message itself that will serve as the basis for attracting (or rejecting) the attention of the audience and prompting action (or inaction). The ELM focuses on both direct methods that can be used to foster elaboration as well as the indirect (or peripheral) methods that are used to increase elaboration.

Other authors examining the specific context of the elaboration likelihood model have argued that the descriptive nature of the model provides a clear understanding of what types of behaviors will occur. According to Wegener and Claypool (1999) "The term elaboration was chosen for the ELM, in part, to reflect the idea that people processing information about an attitude object often go beyond the content of message arguments (in contrast to prior message-learning approaches in which more passive reception and retention of the presented message arguments was the supposed key to attitude change" (p. 179). These authors go on to note that,

Elaboration, therefore, typically results in the self-generation of information unique to the externally provided communication and we mean...information added by the subject in the process of vigilantly scrutinizing the arguments and information in memory bearing specifically on the desirability of a persuasive recommendation...the link of interest in the ELM is...between the self-generated issue-relevant thoughts (i.e., elaborations) and attitudes (p. 179).

What this effectively suggests is that the process of understanding the message is one that is highly subjective overall. Further, as Wegener and Claypool note, the process of persuasion is one that is contingent upon the specific ideas and experiences of the individual in comparison with the specific context in which a particular message is presented.

Finally, Petty, Wheeler and Bizer (1999) in their examination of the elaboration likelihood model argue that, at its core, ELM focuses on the specific attitudes that are held by the individual before a message is sent. Attitudes are important because they will ultimately impact the way in which the individual understands and interprets a message. While attitudes serve as the basis for how the individual will receive the message, the goal for researchers is to discern how the individual will interpret the message once received. If motivation is high, elaboration will be high. This means that the receiver will be motivated to investigate the message being sent, taking an active interest in ideas put forth. Elaboration is considered to be a cognitive process that requires recall, judgment and evaluation.

What this data clearly suggests is that the elaboration likelihood model provides a means for the advertiser, researcher, etc to frame the context of a message that is provided to a targeted audience. Not only must the sender consider the message that will be sent, but the sender must consider the specific manner in which the message will be delivered and the social environment in which the message will be presented. In order to accomplish this feat, the message sender makes specific assumptions about the target audience. Through these assumptions, the sender is able to better understand the potential elements of the message that will attract the attention of audience members and force them to engage in some type of elaboration. When elaboration occurs, the message sender has overcome a critical hurdle: garnering the attention of the audience. Once the process of elaboration has begun, the message sender has a better chance of getting a specific message across.

Perspective

Considering the specific perspective utilized by the elaboration likelihood model, Dijkstra (1999) has noted that this model is one that is one that is predicated upon the social psychological. In order to illustrate this point, one only needs to examine the specific elements of the model in order to demonstrate the manner in which the social and psychological play a role in the development of the model. With respect to the psychological element, Wheeler and Bizer (1999) clearly note that ELM focuses on the specific attitudes that are internalized by the individual for the processes of decision making. Based on these attitudes, it is possible for message senders to tailor their messages such that they appeal to these internalized attitudes and make it possible for the message receiver to engage in the process of elaboration. As such, the focus on directing messages consists of an examination of the attitudes that will be held by the target audience before the message is sent.

The social component of the elaboration likelihood model comes from the specific social environment that will produce the attitudes held by the target audience. The transfer of data from sender to receiver does not take place in a vacuum. As such, the specific environment in which message transmission takes place must be addressed by the message sender. If this issue is not addressed by the sender, even when the opportunity of elaboration is high, the environment may not provide a context of elaboration to occur. What this suggests is that the social component of how the message is sent must be considered in order for the process of elaboration likelihood to take place.

What is perhaps most interesting about this method of understanding social exchange is that it clearly identifies a wide range of variables that can, and in practice do, impact how the individual will respond to the transmission of information. While the message being sent is, in and of itself, an important component, the specific environment in which the message is delivered and the atmosphere surrounding the message will have a notable impact on how the individual responds. Thus, all of these issues must be taken into consideration when developing a message for a targeted audience.

Evaluation

Researchers evaluating the specific context of the research that has been produced with respect to the elaboration likelihood model have noted that internal and external validity are significant issues for the evaluation of this model. This is because the issues of validity are central to the process of social psychology research. With respect to the issue of internal validity, researchers have noted that experiments that utilize surveys can provide considerable internal validity because of the controlled nature of the variables under investigation. The elaboration likelihood model can utilize surveys as a principle means for measuring the impact of a particular message. Thus, when the outcomes of the ELM are measured in this manner a high degree of internal validity can be obtained (White, 1997).

While ELM methods that utilize surveys can indeed provide a high degree of internal validity, it is evident that the external validity of this method can be difficult to ensure. Although the researcher will be able to draw specific conclusions about the population being investigated, based on the data obtained from the survey, it will be difficult for this researcher to effectively apply what has been learned in a particular population to the larger population as a whole. As such, the elaboration likelihood model is engendered with some problems when it comes to ensuring the integrity of the external validity (White, 1997). Clearly, this issue must be taken into consideration when using the elaboration likelihood model for the development of experimental research.

What this effectively suggests is that even though research on the elaboration likelihood model may provide notable insights about the attitudes and motivations of a particular group, it will be difficult for researchers to effectively generalize this information such that it can be used to understand other target audiences in the future. The social nature of the variables being investigated makes them susceptible to change over the course of time. Thus, the impact of a particular message on a group may not be the same a week or month later. This makes the internal validity difficult to substantiate. Researchers examining the experimental conditions under which this type of research would take place have noted that: "the most frequently cited and probably the most severe criticism leveled against the experimental approach is hat laboratory findings are obtained in an artificial and sterile atmosphere that precludes and generalization to a real life situation" (Christensen, 2001, p. 70).

Practical Application

With the basic context of the elaboration likelihood model clearly elucidated, it is now possible to consider the practical situations in which the model could be applied. In order to accomplish this task, a targeted behavior will be identified and a variable and/or process from the ELM will be identified to explicate the behavior. Finally, a description of how the variable or process can explain the behavior will be addressed. By utilizing the scenario presented at the beginning of this investigation, it will be possible to examine the specific manner in which the elaboration likelihood model can be utilized in practice.

Considering first Kevin's response to the presidential debate, it becomes evident that because Kevin had no specific interest in the particular message that was be made by the candidates, the specific impact of the information being provided did not have an impact on It overall. What is effectively demonstrates is that the direct message provided in the context of a presidential debate will not have to impact on an individual that has no interest whatsoever in political issues. Rather, it Kevin's case the peripheral variables of fact shape the delivery of the message had more impact on his elaboration likelihood. In particular, the specific body language utilized by the candidates along with their emotional responses to the situation impacted the weight which Kevin viewed each candidate. What is effectively demonstrates is that peripheral variables in the context of message delivery will indeed impact the elaboration of potential of some individuals.

Stacey's response to the presidential debate is clearly indicative of a direct response to the message being sent by both candidates. Space is elaboration likelihood stems from the fact that she is well-versed in political discourse. As such, they see is able to watch the debate and integrate the information provided directly by each of the candidates. Utilizing a framework that primarily supports the Republican viewpoints however they see has chosen to criticize comments made by Senator Kerry while supporting comments made by President Bush. In addition to integrating information as it is presented in the debate, Stacey is also able to examine the debate after it had taken place such that she can articulate our particular viewpoints about politics and which candidate she believes will make the best choice for president.

Dave's response to the political debate is indicative of how previously established attitudes can impact the manner in which the message interacts with the receiver. Although Dave has been raised as a Democrat, his attitude toward Kerry is not positive overall. As such, when Dave views the debate he begins to see clear weaknesses in Kerry's overall message. As a direct result of this process, Dave begins to feel less positively about Senator Kerry and the Democratic party as a whole. For Dave, the message presented by President Bush and the Republican Party appears to have more appeal in general. As a result of the negative attitudes that Dave had before the debate, he chooses to switch political parties and become a Republican. In this case, it is evident that Dave's elaboration likelihood was clearly predicated upon his preconceived attitudes about Senator Kerry. Because the image and messages being sent by Kerry did not have a positive influence on Dave, he was unable to support the Democratic Party

Conclusion

The elaboration likelihood model is one that provides the researcher with the necessary tools to evaluate the attitudes and beliefs of target audiences before and after a particular event occurs. Although this data can serve as the basis for elucidating the particular methods that are utilized by the individual or information processing, the reality is that the results garnered in this research context and not be widely applied or generalized. As such, this limitation of the elaboration likelihood model must be taken into consideration when developing research studies that utilize this framework for understanding. If the researcher is to effectively make generalizations about specific behaviors observed, these generalizations can only be made in the context of the target audience involved in the experiment as well at the particular event that is being observed.

Despite the considerable limitations that are associated with this research method, it is evident that the data collected in this context can provide considerable information for researchers to effectively understand what promulgates human behavior and motivation. Rob is they attack, researchers may choose to make inferences or assumption about target audience response to similar events. While this information will not be completely or totally accurate for predicting audience outcomes, it will enable researchers to make a salient assessment about potential behaviors in a given situation. This information is clearly critical for the development of advertising and providing messages to the larger public. If organizations and individuals do not know how to reach their target audiences they will be unable to effectively convey their messages. As such, understanding the process of motivation as it occurs in a specific context is an important part of understanding potential outcomes.

References

Christensen, L.B. (2001). Experimental Methodology (8^th Ed.) Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Dijkstra, J.J. (1999). User agreement with incorrect expert system advice. Behavior & Information Technology, 18(6), 399-411.

Petty, R.E. Wheeler, S.C., & Bizer, G.Y. (1999). Is there want persuasion process or more? Lumping versus splitting and attitude change theories. Psychological Inquiry, 10(2), 156-163.

Wegener, D.T., & Claypool, H.M. (1999). The elaboration continuum by any other name does not smell as sweet. Psychological Inquiry, 10(2), 176-172.

White, H.A. (1997). Considering interacting factors in the third-person effect: Argument strength and social distance. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 557-564.