Dissuasion: the Elaboration Likelihood Model and young children

被引:5
|
作者
McAlister, Anna R. [1 ]
Bargh, Danielle [2 ]
机构
[1] Endicott Coll, Curtis L Gerrish Sch Business, Beverly, MA 01915 USA
[2] Univ Sydney, Sch Psychol, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
来源
YOUNG CONSUMERS | 2016年 / 17卷 / 03期
关键词
Marketing; Children; Persuasion; Advertising; Elaboration likelihood model; ELM;
D O I
10.1108/YC-02-2016-00580
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Purpose - The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) proposes two routes to persuasion - the central route (persuasion occurs via information) and the peripheral route (persuasion occurs via visual cues, attractive actors and other source characteristics). The central route is typically used for high-involvement decisions and the peripheral route is used in low involvement situations. The ELM has received extensive support when tested with adults; however, its ability to explain young children's responses to persuasive communications has not been fully tested. Hence, the purpose of this research is to assess whether the standard tenets of the ELM apply to children's processing of persuasive messages. Design/methodology/approach - This study involved 84 preschool children, ages three to six. It used a 2 (involvement) x 2 (argument strength) x 2 (source attractiveness) design to test children's responsiveness to advertisements for a novel breakfast cereal. Findings - The findings suggest that children are naturally inclined to be persuaded by advertising messages, regardless of their level of involvement. It is the weak arguments and weak peripheral cues that dissuade children who are highly involved with a message. Originality/value - This research makes an original contribution to the existing literature by testing the extent to which the ELM applies to children's processing of persuasive advertisements. The finding that weak peripherals dissuade children from believing an ad's message has strong implications for advertising practitioners.
引用
收藏
页码:210 / 225
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Effect of Recruiter on Attraction to the Firm: Implications of the Elaboration Likelihood Model
    Don A. Larsen
    James I. Phillips
    Journal of Business and Psychology, 2002, 16 : 347 - 364
  • [32] Influence processes for information technology acceptance: An elaboration likelihood model
    Bhattacherjee, Anol
    Sanford, Clive
    MIS QUARTERLY, 2006, 30 (04) : 805 - 825
  • [33] Online Review Consistency Matters: An Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective
    Navid Aghakhani
    Onook Oh
    Dawn G. Gregg
    Jahangir Karimi
    Information Systems Frontiers, 2021, 23 : 1287 - 1301
  • [34] Effect of recruiter on attraction to the firm: Implications of the elaboration likelihood model
    Larsen, DA
    Phillips, JI
    JOURNAL OF BUSINESS AND PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 16 (03) : 347 - 364
  • [35] RECONCEPTUALIZING SOCIAL-INFLUENCE IN COUNSELING - THE ELABORATION LIKELIHOOD MODEL
    MCNEILL, BW
    STOLTENBERG, CD
    JOURNAL OF COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGY, 1989, 36 (01) : 24 - 33
  • [36] Web personalization as a persuasion strategy: An elaboration likelihood model perspective
    Tam, KY
    Ho, SY
    INFORMATION SYSTEMS RESEARCH, 2005, 16 (03) : 271 - 291
  • [37] Environmental primer elaboration to aware children and young people
    Uyeno, Marcio Takashi
    Guizelini, Andressa De Angelis
    Passos Okawa, Cristhiane Michiko
    REVISTA ELETRONICA EM GESTAO EDUCACAO E TECNOLOGIA AMBIENTAL, 2015, 19 : 19 - 29
  • [38] Extension of central processing in the elaboration likelihood model: Consideration of involvement types
    Oh, H
    2001 AMA WINTER EDUCATORS' CONFERENCE - MARKETING THEORY AND APPLICATIONS, 2001, 12 : 291 - 298
  • [39] Privacy concerns for mobile app download: An elaboration likelihood model perspective
    Gu, Jie
    Xu, Yunjie
    Xu, Heng
    Zhang, Cheng
    Ling, Hong
    DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, 2017, 94 : 19 - 28
  • [40] Understanding internet recruitment via signaling theory and the elaboration likelihood model
    Gregory, Christina K.
    Meade, Adam W.
    Thompson, Lori Foster
    COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2013, 29 (05) : 1949 - 1959