The Elaboration Likelihood Model

Petty, Richard E.; Briñol, Pablo; Teeny, Jacob; Horcajo, Javier

doi:10.4324/9781315624365-2

Cited by 31 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Future research should examine other mediators, including non‐conscious cognitions and basic affect heuristics (Peters, Lipkus, & Diefenbach, 2006). Theoretical accounts, such as the elaboration likelihood model (Petty & Briñol, 2012), have been useful in accounting for the multiple roles of affect in communication effects more broadly and could serve as an organizing framework for such investigations (Geers, Briñol, & Petty, 2019c). Finally, we noted at the outset that it is generally theorized that placebo and nocebo effects result from similar processes, such as expectations and conditioning.…”

Section: Can Placebos Regulate Affective States?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Affect and emotions in placebo and nocebo effects: What do we know so far?

Geers

Faasse

Guevarra

et al. 2020

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Once considered nuisance variance in clinical trials, placebo effects and nocebo effects are now widely recognized as important and mutable psychobiological contributors to mental and physical health. Psychological theory explaining these effects emphasizes associative learning and conscious expectations. It has long been suggested, however, that affective states such as moods, emotions, and distress could play a significant role. In this paper, we draw together and review the empirical data linking affective states to placebo and nocebo effects. To organize this disparate literature, three questions are addressed: (1) Does pre‐existing state and trait affect modulate placebo and nocebo effects? (2) Does administering placebo and nocebo treatments change affective states, and if so, does the resulting affect causally influence placebo and nocebo effects? Finally, (3) Can placebo treatments be successfully employed as a regulation strategy to modulate different affective states? In reviewing the evidence in relation to these three questions, it is clear that affect does play a key role in placebo and nocebo effects in many circumstances, and further, there may be a reciprocal dynamic at play between a treatment event, affect, and placebo/nocebo effects. The paper concludes by discussing implications for theory and intervention and recommends future research priorities.

show abstract

Section: Can Placebos Regulate Affective States?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Affect and emotions in placebo and nocebo effects: What do we know so far?

Geers

Faasse

Guevarra

et al. 2020

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The weighted cues model is similar to two other well‐established theories of persuasion, the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM, Petty & Caccioppo, 1986; Petty & Briñol, 2012) and the Systematic/Heuristic Processing Model (SHP, Chaiken & Eagly, 1976; Chaiken & Ledgerwood, 2012). Both of these models propose two routes to persuasion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Persuasiveness and sensitivity to witnessing conditions depend on how testimony is presented

Hicks

Clark

2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present experiment examined the persuasiveness (measured primarily by proportions of guilty verdicts) of the testimony of a single eyewitness as a function of witnessing conditions and method of presenting the testimony-via a Video or Audio recording or a written Transcript or Summary. Proportions of guilty verdicts showed little variation across presentation methods when witnessing conditions were relatively good, but were higher for Video and Audio presentations than for Transcript and Summary presentations when witnessing conditions were relatively poor. These results combined to show a decrease in sensitivity to witnessing conditions for Video and Audio presentations relative to Transcript and Summary presentations. These results were accounted for by a simple weighted cues model.

show abstract

“…The aim of the present article is to explore the concept of placebo expectancy through the lens of a well-established theoretical model explaining psychological change: The ELM (Petty & Briñol, 2012; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). The ELM was developed to clarify the effects of persuasive communications on evaluative judgment, and it is now a framework widely used for understanding psychological change broadly defined.…”

Section: A Model Of Placebo Expectations and Placebo Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ELM (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) makes a number of propositions that we describe next (for more detailed descriptions, see Petty & Briñol, 2012; Petty & Wegener, 1998). First, the model highlights the fact that changing judgments can be accomplished either with a relatively low level of thought or a relatively high level of thought.…”

Section: A Model Of Placebo Expectations and Placebo Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, expectations should have a greater influence on outcomes the more accessible they are, when they are held with confidence, and seen as important. We propose that placebo expectations, and ultimately placebo effects, can be understood using the psychological mechanisms outlined in one of the most established theories of psychological change: The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) of persuasion (Petty & Briñol, 2012; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). We will use the ELM to describe how placebo-relevant situational and personal variables (e.g., a doctor’s lab coat, a patient’s motivation) can work to affect expectations by low versus high thinking processes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Analysis of the Basic Processes of Formation and Change of Placebo Expectations

Geers

Briñol

Petty

2018

Review of General Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Placebo effects are the measurable psychological, biological, and behavioral changes that can result from expecting a treatment to be effective. Here we argue that not all expectations are created equally and there is much to learn by clarifying the psychological processes that underlie the expectations that cause placebo effects. It is proposed that the formation and change of placebo expectations can be understood from the standpoint of a general psychological model describing the basic processes of mental change. Specifically, we use the Elaboration Likelihood Model to explain how placebo-relevant variables (e.g., doctor's lab coat, drug price, number and color of pills, patient's mood) can work to affect expectations. Clarifying the antecedent processes responsible for placebo expectations leads to new insights regarding placebo effects, including their durability, directionality, and ability to alter subsequent behaviors (e.g., treatment adherence). A key point from our approach is that expectations causing placebo effects can be formed under high or low thought. High-thought expectations should be more likely to resist change, last over time, predict placebo effects better than low-thought expectations, and have a greater likelihood to alter subsequent behaviors. We conclude by describing a variety of theoretical innovations that this new conceptualization raises and suggest novel paths for research and application.

show abstract

The Elaboration Likelihood Model

Cited by 31 publications

References 1 publication

Affect and emotions in placebo and nocebo effects: What do we know so far?

Affect and emotions in placebo and nocebo effects: What do we know so far?

Persuasiveness and sensitivity to witnessing conditions depend on how testimony is presented

An Analysis of the Basic Processes of Formation and Change of Placebo Expectations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About