In Western dualistic culture, it is assumed that thoughts cannot be treated as material objects; however, language is replete with metaphorical analogies suggesting otherwise. In the research reported here, we examined whether objectifying thoughts can influence whether the thoughts are used in subsequent evaluations. In Experiment 1, participants wrote about what they either liked or disliked about their bodies. Then, the paper on which they wrote their thoughts was either ripped up and tossed in the trash or kept and checked for errors. When participants physically discarded a representation of their thoughts, they mentally discarded them as well, using them less in forming judgments than did participants who retained a representation of their thoughts. Experiment 2 replicated this finding and also showed that people relied on their thoughts more when they physically kept them in a safe place-putting their thoughts in their pockets-than when they discarded them. A final study revealed that these effects were stronger when the action was performed physically rather than merely imagined.

This article hypothesizes that the individual-difference variable, need for cognition (NFC), can have opposite implications for priming effects, depending on prime blatancy. Subtle primes are argued to be more effective for high- versus low-NFC individuals. This is because for high-NFC individuals, (a) constructs are generally easier to activate, (b) their higher amount of thought offers more opportunity for an activated construct to bias judgment, and (c) their thoughtfully formed judgments are more likely to affect behavior. However, because high-NFC individuals are adept at identifying and correcting for bias, with blatant primes the activated construct should be less likely to exert its default influence. Furthermore, with blatant primes, low-NFC individuals may achieve sufficient activation for primes to affect judgment. Across three studies, it is shown that as NFC increases, the magnitude of priming effects increases with a subtle prime but decreases with a blatant prime.

The present research examines two main issues relevant to consumer persuasion: (1) whether automatic evaluations can change (both directly and indirectly) in response to verbal ads that engage deliberative information processing activity, and (2) whether such messages can result in spreading activation of implicit change that is consistent with balance principles. The first study showed that automatic evaluations of vegetables were more favorable after people read a health ad than a control message. The results of Study 2 showed that automatic associations toward Heineken (a brand associated with the color green) were also more favorable as a result of processing a message advocating the color green than a neutral control message. Consistent with the idea that automatic changes can be consequential not only for brands but also for consumer identity, participants of Study 3 showed more automatic self-vegetable associations after thinking about the benefits (rather than the negative consequences) of consuming vegetables. A final study revealed that false feedback increasing (vs. decreasing) self-product identity led to more favorable automatic attitudes toward the product, but only for those with relatively high scores on the implicit measure of selfesteem. Taken together, this series of studies suggests that automatic changes that result from consumer persuasion are consequential in terms of spreading activation and that they seem to respond to balance principles.

No abstract

The present research proposes that sources in the numerical majority (vs. minority) can affect persuasion by influencing the confidence with which people hold their thoughts in response to the persuasive message. Participants received a persuasive message composed of either strong or weak arguments that was presented by a majority or a minority source. Consistent with the self-validation hypothesis, we predicted and found that the majority (vs. minority) status of the source increased the confidence with which recipients held their thoughts. As a consequence, majority (vs. minority) sources increased argument quality effects in persuasion when source status information followed message processing (Experiment 1). In contrast, when the information regarding source status preceded (rather than followed) the persuasive message, it validated the perception of the position advocated, reducing message processing. As a consequence of having more confidence in the position advocated before receiving the message, majority (vs. minority) sources reduced argument quality effects in persuasion (Experiment 2). Finally, Experiment 3 isolated the timing of the source status manipulation, revealing that sources in the numerical majority (vs. minority) can increase or decrease persuasion to strong arguments depending on whether source status is introduced before or after processing the message.