Persuasion: Theory and Research by Daniel J. O'Keefe

Author:Daniel J. O'Keefe
Language: eng
Format: mobi
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Published: 2015-02-17T14:00:00+00:00

Liking

The General Rule

Perhaps it comes as no surprise that a number of investigations have found support for the general principle that on the whole, liked communicators are more effective influence agents than are disliked communicators (e.g., Eagly & Chaiken, 1975; Sampson & Insko, 1964).14 But the general principle that liked persuaders are more successful can be misleading. Important exceptions and limiting conditions on that principle are discussed in the following section.

Some Exceptions and Limiting Conditions

Extant research evidence suggests at least three important caveats concerning the effects of liking for the communicator on persuasive outcomes: The effects of liking can apparently be overridden by credibility, the superiority of liked over disliked communicators is minimized as the topic becomes more personally relevant to the receiver, and disliked communicators can at least sometimes be significantly more effective persuaders than can liked communicators. (For indications of additional possible limiting conditions, see Chebat, Laroche, Baddoura, & Filiatrault, 1992; Roskos-Ewoldsen & Fazio, 1992.)

Liking and Credibility

The effects of liking on persuasive outcomes appear to be weaker than the effects of credibility (e.g., Lupia & McCubbins, 1998, pp. 196–199; Simons, Berkowitz, & Moyer, 1970; see, relatedly, Eisend & Langner, 2010). Thus when the receiver’s judgment of the source’s credibility conflicts with the receiver’s liking for the source, the effects of liking may be overridden by the effects of credibility. This may be exemplified by the results of an investigation in which participants were asked to make a judgment about the size of the monetary award to be given in a personal injury damage suit. Each participant heard a persuasive message from a source who advocated either a relatively small or a relatively large monetary award; the source was portrayed either as cold and stingy or as warm and generous. Although the warm, generous source was liked better than was the cold, stingy communicator, the stingy source was nevertheless sometimes a more effective persuader, namely, when the stingy source was arguing for a relatively large award. Indeed, of the four source-message combinations, the two most effective combinations were the stingy source arguing for a large award and the generous source arguing for a small award (Wachtler & Counselman, 1981). Both these combinations, of course, represent sources who are (given their personalities) advocating an unexpected position and who thus may well have been perceived as relatively higher in credibility. Of particular interest is that the communicator who was disliked and (presumably) high in credibility (the stingy source advocating the large award) was significantly more effective than the communicator who was liked and (presumably) low in credibility (the generous source advocating the large award), thus suggesting that the effects of liking for the communicator are weaker than the effects of communicator credibility.

Liking and Topic Relevance

The effects of liking on persuasive outcomes are minimized as the topic becomes more personally relevant to the receiver. Thus, although better-liked sources may enjoy some general persuasive advantage, that advantage is reduced when the issue is personally relevant to the receiver (Chaiken, 1980; see, relatedly, Kang & Kerr, 2006).

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.