The elaboration likelihood model: review, critique and research agenda

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to review, critique and develop a research agenda for the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). The model was introduced by Petty and Cacioppo over three decades ago and has been modified, revised and extended. Given modern communication contexts, it is appropriate to question the model’s validity and relevance. Design/methodology/approach – The authors develop a conceptual approach, based on a fully comprehensive and extensive review and critique of ELM and its development since its inception. Findings – This paper focuses on major issues concerning the ELM. These include model assumptions and its descriptive nature; continuum questions, multi-channel processing and mediating variables before turning to the need to replicate the ELM and to offer recommendations for its future development. Research limitations/implications – This paper offers a series of questions in terms of research implications. These include whether ELM could or should be replicated, its extension, a greater conceptualization of argument quality, an explanation of movement along the continuum and between central and peripheral routes to persuasion, or to use new methodologies and technologies to help better understanding consume thinking and behaviour? All these relate to the current need to explore the relevance of ELM in a more modern context. Practical implications – It is time to question the validity and relevance of the ELM. The diversity of on- and off-line media options and the variants of consumer choice raise significant issues. Originality/value – While the ELM model continues to be widely cited and taught as one of the major cornerstones of persuasion, questions are raised concerning its relevance and validity in 21st century communication contexts.

A Theory-Based Approach to the Development and Evaluation of Public Education Messages Aimed at Social Interactive Technology Use on Smartphones among Young Drivers

“…A final point to note is that all these theories were developed in a vastly different communication landscape of mass media campaigns and new research is needed to assess their utility in today's world of online digital communications (Kitchen et al, 2014). Indeed, Kerr et al (2015) replicated one of the original ELM studies (i.e., Petty, Cacioppo, & Schumann, 1983) in three countries.…”

“…The ELM (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) has been a leading theory in the persuasion literature although it has been criticised, for example, with regard to its descriptive (as opposed to analytic) nature, and lack of ability to imply causality (Cook & Jones, 2011;Kitchen, Kerr, Schultz, McColl, & Pals, 2014). Key questions still exist regarding the nature of the model, such as the assumption that there is little overlap between the two processing routes (i.e., high elaboration and low elaboration) and exactly where affective variables lie on the continuum (Kitchen et al, 2014).…”

“…Key questions still exist regarding the nature of the model, such as the assumption that there is little overlap between the two processing routes (i.e., high elaboration and low elaboration) and exactly where affective variables lie on the continuum (Kitchen et al, 2014). For the distinction drawn between the two processing routes (i.e., high elaboration and low elaboration), it is not clear whether it is possible to move between the two routes and whether the two types of processing can occur at the same time (Kitchen et al, 2014). The impact of affective variables has received research attention and the debate is ongoing as to whether emotion forms a peripheral cue or is part of the central processing route (Kitchen et al, 2014).…”

“…For the distinction drawn between the two processing routes (i.e., high elaboration and low elaboration), it is not clear whether it is possible to move between the two routes and whether the two types of processing can occur at the same time (Kitchen et al, 2014). The impact of affective variables has received research attention and the debate is ongoing as to whether emotion forms a peripheral cue or is part of the central processing route (Kitchen et al, 2014).…”

“…The TPB (Ajzen, 1991), the EPPM (Witte, 1992), and the ELM (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), while consistently applied to a variety of research contexts, have remained largely unchanged since their inception (Head & Noar, 2014;Kerr et al, 2015;Kitchen et al, 2014;Maloney et al, 2011;Popova, 2012;Sniehotta et al, 2014). The exception is Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1969(Bandura, , 1977 which has since been modified and renamed Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986).…”