Nuances in inoculation: The role of inoculation approach, ego-involvement, and message processing disposition in resistance

This investigation attempted to provide further understanding of the inoculation model of resistance to influence. It examined the efficacy of inoculation treatments designed to promote central versus peripheral message processing in instilling resistance to influence, taking into account message pr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Communication quarterly 1997-09, Vol.45 (4), p.461-481
Main Authors: Pfau, Michael, Tusing, Kyle James, Lee, Waipeng, Godbold, Linda C., Koerner, Ascan, Penaloza, Linda J., Hong, Yah-huei, Yang, Violet Shu-huei
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Cognitive Processes
Communication Research
Communication Strategies
ego-involvement
ELM
influence
Influence Strategies
inoculation
Interpersonal Communication
message elaboration
Personality
resistance
Resistance (Psychology)
Studies
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This investigation attempted to provide further understanding of the inoculation model of resistance to influence. It examined the efficacy of inoculation treatments designed to promote central versus peripheral message processing in instilling resistance to influence, taking into account message processing disposition. The study also tested the potential of social judgment theory to explain the cognitive process which occurs in inoculation. A total of 790 participants took part in the investigation. The study employed three issues that represented low, moderate, and high involvement, and featured multiple inoculation and attack messages. The results indicate that inoculation treatments, using central and peripheral approaches, confer resistance to influence and, thus, imply that threat is more prominent than refutational preemption in the process of resistance. Further, the pattern of results suggest that greater receiver need for cognition enhances resistance, but only with highly involving issues. Finally, the results of the investigation rule out assimilation and contrast as a potential explanation of the cognitive process triggered via threat, but suggest that receiver ego-involvement facilitates threat.
ISSN:0146-3373
1746-4102
DOI:10.1080/01463379709370077