Persuasibility as a function of source credibility and locus of control: Five cross cultural experiments1

McGinnies, Elliott; Ward, Charles D.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1974.tb00680.x

Cited by 47 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, with regard to performance, it must be concluded that intemals were less responsive to the demands of their leaders than extemals, regardless of the form of power or feedback strategy used by the leader. Such results are consistent with those on persuasion and verbal conditioning (Getter, 1966;Strickland, 1970;Jolley & Spielberger, 1973;Alegre & Murray, 1974;Ritchie & Phares, 1969;Biondo & McDonald, 1971;McGinnies & Ward, 1974) which have shovra that intemals are more resistant to direct manipulation attempts than extemals. One possible objection to this conclusion is that the demands of the leaders were stated in percentages of increases and that intemals might have initially had a higher rate of production, thus making it harder for them to meet the leader's demands.…”

Section: Performance Variablesupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Intemals "were negatively influenced or showed reactance" to high influence but did not resist the low influence manipulation, yet they failed to conform. McGinnies and Ward (1974) studied attitude change as a function of source credibility and locus of control. They observed as did Ritchie and Phares that extemals reacted more to a highly credible source than to a low credible source and that intemals were not differentially affected by source credibility.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The differential effects of rewarding and coercive leaders on group members differing in locus of control¹

Cravens

Worchel

1977

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Performance Variablesupporting

confidence: 90%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The differential effects of rewarding and coercive leaders on group members differing in locus of control¹

Cravens

Worchel

1977

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In contrast, when the source was less credible, a moderate level of discrepancy was most persuasive. Many studies have replicated this linear relationship for a highly credible source (Aronson, Turner, & Calsmith, 1963;Bergin, 1962;Brewer & Crano, 1968;Choo, 1964;Halperin, Snyder, Shenkel, & Houston, 1976;Hill, 1963;Johnson & Steiner, 1968;McGinnies, 1973;Solomon, 1972) and the curvilinear relationship for a low-credibility source (Aronson et al, 1963;Brewer & Crano, 1968;Koslin, Stoops, & Loh, 1967).…”

Section: Message Variablesmentioning

confidence: 93%

The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades' Evidence

Pornpitakpan

2004

J Applied Social Pyschol

1,603

1,129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the empirical evidence of the effect of credibility of the message source on persuasion over a span of 5 decades, primarily to come up with recommendations for practitioners as to when to use a high-or a low-credibility source and secondarily to identify areas for future research. The main effect studies of source credibility on persuasion seem to indicate the superiority of a high-credibility source over a low-credibility one. Interaction effect studies, however, show source credibility to be a liability under certain conditions. The variables found to interact with source credibility are categorized into 5 categories: source, message, channel, receiver, and destination variables. The most heavily researched variables have been the message and receiver variables. Implications for marketerdadvertisers and suggestions for future research are discussed.Most studies that attempt to determine how to effectively persuade consumers are guided mainly by theories and empirical findings about attitude change or persuasion in social psychology. McGuire (1 978) identified five components of persuasive communication: source, message, channel, receiver, and destination variables. The source variables comprise three main aspects; namely, credibility, attractiveness, and power.For decades, marketers, advertisers, politicians, professionals of various areas, and researchers in many fields have tried to find out whether a high-or a low-credibility source will be more effective or will have no different effects in changing beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors of the audience. The objective of this paper is to review primarily published empirical evidence since 1950 from consumer behavior, social psychology, and related disciplines regarding source credibility effects on persuasion.First, the paper reviews past evidence of the main effects of source credibility. Next, it reviews the interactions between source credibility and other variables, which are categorized into five components: source variables, message variables, 244 CHANTHIKA PORNPITAKPAN channel variables, receiver variables, and destination variables. Following that, it suggests implications for marketerdadvertisers.By consolidating the findings from studies conducted over the past five decades, this paper puts forward many interesting ideas and implications for marketers/advertisers. In particular, the paper discusses when it would be optimal to employ a high-credibility source over a low-credibility source and vice versa, and what marketers should do to strengthen the persuasive impact of the advertisement once a high-credibility or a low-credibility source is selected. Finally, it identifies several gaps in the literature and suggests areas for future research.The dimensions of source credibility have been commonly identified to consist of expertise and trustworthiness. Expertise refers to the extent to which a speaker is perceived to be capable of making correct assertions, and trustworthiness refers to the degree to which an audience perceives the as...

show abstract

“…There is substantial research support in terms of attitude change showing that internals tend to resist influence attempts by prestigious (competent) sources, whereas externals are more susceptible to such influence attempts (Ritchie & Phares, 1969; McGinnies & Ward, 1974). In several studies (Strickland, 1970; Biondo & McDonald, 1971), internals were found to engage in behaviors directly opposite to the responses desired and subtly reinforced by the prestigious source.…”

Section: Study Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Source-Related Determinants of Perceived Job Scope

Blau

1985

Human Comm Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of manipulating source competence, locus of control, and social cues on perceivedjob scope was examined in an experimental study. A total of 185 business students participated in a 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 factorial research design. The design partitions were: task level (enriched versus unenriched), social cues (positive versus neutral), source competence (high versus low), and locus of control (high versus low). Subjects were screened on a locus of control measure such that those either in the upper or lower third score range were eligible to participate. A threeway interaction was found, involving source competence x social cues x locus of control on perceivedjob scope. The results of this study are discussed in temzs of the Social In$omtion Processing Approach (SIPA) to task design.

show abstract

Persuasibility as a function of source credibility and locus of control: Five cross cultural experiments1

Cited by 47 publications

References 7 publications

The differential effects of rewarding and coercive leaders on group members differing in locus of control¹

The differential effects of rewarding and coercive leaders on group members differing in locus of control¹

The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades' Evidence

Source-Related Determinants of Perceived Job Scope

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Persuasibility as a function of source credibility and locus of control: Five cross cultural experiments1

Cited by 47 publications

References 7 publications

The differential effects of rewarding and coercive leaders on group members differing in locus of control1

The differential effects of rewarding and coercive leaders on group members differing in locus of control1

The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades' Evidence

Source-Related Determinants of Perceived Job Scope

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The differential effects of rewarding and coercive leaders on group members differing in locus of control¹

The differential effects of rewarding and coercive leaders on group members differing in locus of control¹