View article

Hypothesized that when a persuasive communication was on a topic of (a) high personal relevance, attitude change was governed by issue-relevant arguments, and (b) low personal relevance, peripheral features were more important. 145 undergraduates expressed their attitudes on the issue of comprehensive senior exams after exposure to a counterattitudinal advocacy that was of high or low personal relevance containing either strong or weak arguments that emanated from a source of either high or low expertise. Another 18 Ss were controls who were surveyed but not exposed to a counterattitudinal advocacy. Interactions of the personal relevance manipulation with the argument quality and expertise manipulations revealed that under high relevance (the exams were to be instituted the following year), attitudes were influenced primarily by the quality of the arguments in the message, whereas under low …