The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Self‐Schema Matching and Attitude Change: Situational and Dispositional Determinants of Message Elaboration
Abstract
Research indicates that messages or products matching individuals' self-schemata are viewed more favorably, but little is known about how or when such effects occur. Experiment 1 indicates that messages matched to participants' level of extroversion lead to larger argument quality effects on attitudes than do mismatched messages. In experiment 2, these effects are replicated with the self-schema of need for cognition. Across studies, matching messages to recipients' self-schemata leads to increased or decreased persuasion, depending on the advertisement's argument quality. The interaction of self-schema matching with argument quality along with participants' pattern of cognitive responses suggests an elaboration-based account.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60214-2 · Cited by 8,822
Self-citationValidation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81 · Cited by 6,404
The theory of planned behaviour: self identity, social identity and group norms.
Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A., & White, K. M. (1999) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1348/014466699164149 · Cited by 1,126
Cited by
Psychological targeting as an effective approach to digital mass persuasion
Matz, S. C., Kosinski, M., Nave, G., & Stillwell, D. J. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1710966114 · Cited by 892
Influencing attitudes toward near and distant objects
Fujita, K., Eyal, T., Chaiken, S., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2008) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2007.10.005 · Cited by 287
Do (microtargeted) deepfakes have real effects on political attitudes?
Dobber, T., Metoui, N., Trilling, D., Helberger, N., & de Vreese, C. (2021) · The International Journal of Press/Politics · doi:10.1177/1940161220944364 · Cited by 256
Personalization in Email Marketing: The Role of Noninformative Advertising Content
Sahni, N. S., Wheeler, S. C., & Chintagunta, P. (2018) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.2017.1066 · Cited by 303
Self-citationTruthiness, the illusory truth effect, and the role of need for cognition
Newman, E. J., Jalbert, M. C., Schwarz, N., & Ly, D. P. (2020) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2019.102866 · Cited by 64
Effects of Worldview and Mortality Salience in Persuasion Processes
Magee, R. G., & Kalyanaraman, S. (2009) · Media Psychology · doi:10.1080/15213260902849919 · Cited by 16
Abdulrahman, A., & Richards, D. (2021) · Multimodal Technologies and Interaction · doi:10.3390/mti5090056 · Cited by 11
“[96] found that the explainer needs to deliver a message that provides a link between the recommendation and the explainee’s beliefs.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Wheeler, S. C., Petty, R. E., & Bizer, G. Y.
- Venue
- Journal of Consumer Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 787-797
- ISSN
- 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5277
- OpenAlex
- W2098246194
- Cited by
- 297
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 33.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
