Are the Tabloids Always Wrong or Is That Just What We Think? Need for Cognition and Perceptions of Articles in Print Media

Abstract

This study examines how need for cognition, source credibility, and communication strength influence perceptions of a print‐media communication. Participants read a strong or weak communication about an evolutionary theory, presented as an article from the Washington Post (high credibility) or the National Enquirer (low credibility). Results revealed a significant Need for Cognition × Source × Communication Strength interaction. Low‐need‐for‐cognition participants who read the weak communication rated the article more positively when it was attributed to the high‐credibility source than to the low‐credibility source. Source credibility did not affect impressions of the article and theory among participants high in need for cognition or reading the strong communication. However, articles from the Washington Post were rated as more believable, factual, accurate, and true than those from the National Enquirer.

Explanation Fiends and Foes: How Mechanistic Detail Determines Understanding and Preference

“…For instance, a low-NFC person would be more likely to be persuaded when confronted with multiple arguments even if the arguments are redundant, whereas a high-NFC person would be more responsive to the quality of the arguments (Chaiken 1987). Those low in NFC are also more likely to use source expertise as a proxy for the quality of argument (Haugtvedt et al 1992;Kaufman, Stasson, and Hart 1999), an effect that strengthens as the complexity of the argument increases (Cooper et al 1996). These results differ from ours in that complexity, length, and source expertise tend to be positively related to persuasion for low-NFC participants.…”

When credibility attacks: The reverse impact of source credibility on persuasion

“…The logic behind this eVect is that source credibility aVects the perceived validity of information in a message (e.g., Kaufman, Stasson, & Hart, 1999; see also Fragale & Heath, 2004) and, thus, has implications for the conWdence people have in their thoughts based on that information. When thoughts have been generated in response to valid information (high credibility), people can be conWdent in those thoughts.…”

Challenging the Darwin Skeptics: Examining Proevolutionist Media Persuasion

“…Importantly, high elaboration is predicated upon a message recipient's ability and motivation to scrutinize a communication's claims, resulting in favorable or unfavorable reactions that result from argument quality (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986, p. 142). Some noteworthy variables that have been shown to influence motivation include the perceived personal relevance of a message, as well as the number of message sources bolstering a position, while prior knowledge about the discussed topic adds to a recipient's ability to elaborate upon persuasive message claims (Burnkrant & Howard, 1984;Cacioppo & Petty, 1989;Kaufman, Stasson, & Hart, 1999;Petty & Cacioppo, 1979, 1986Petty, Cacioppo, & Heesacker, 1981;Petty, Wells, & Brock, 1976).…”