The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ease of Retrieval Effects in Persuasion: A Self-Validation Analysis
Abstract
Three studies are reported examining a new explanation for ease of retrieval effects in persuasion. In each study, participants read a persuasive communication and were induced to generate either a low or high number of favorable or unfavorable thoughts in response. In conflict with the assumptions of most previous studies, the authors predicted and found that ease of retrieval effects occur primarily under high rather than low-elaboration conditions. Under high-elaboration conditions, people were more influenced by their thoughts when few rather than many were retrieved (ease of retrieval effect), and this was mediated by the confidence participants had in those thoughts. These findings are consistent with the self-validation hypothesis. Under low-elaboration conditions, participants based judgments more on the actual number of thoughts generated, reflecting a numerosity heuristic.
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
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984 · cited 3×
“In a recent chapter on ease of retrieval in the attitudes domain, Wänke and Bless (2000) departed from prior research and suggested that ease effects should be more likely to occur when processing motivation is relatively high. In two studies reported in this chapter, they presented participants with a strong or a wea…”
BackgroundThe 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-citationCacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116 · Cited by 5,359
Self-citationMeta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research
Rosenthal, R. (1991) · doi:10.4135/9781412984997 · Cited by 4,635
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.197 · Cited by 2,517
Self-citationExposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987.
Bornstein, R. F. (1989) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265 · Cited by 1,970 · cited 1×
“Perceptual fluency suggests that the easier it is to process stimuli, the more favorably those stimuli tend to be evaluated (Bornstein, 1989).”
BackgroundPetty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.1.69 · Cited by 1,727 · cited 3×
“Finally, in accord with prior research on the number heuristic (Pelham et al., 1994; Petty & Cacioppo, 1984), we hypothesized that the number effect (i.e., more thoughtcongruent attitudes when many thoughts are listed) would be more apparent under low- than high-elaboration conditions.”
BackgroundMethodResultSelf-citationEase of retrieval as information: another look at the availability heuristic
Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons, A. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.195 · Cited by 1,412
Cited by
Mediation Analysis in Social Psychology: Current Practices and New Recommendations
Rucker, D. D., Preacher, K. J., Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2011) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00355.x · Cited by 2,430
Self-citationA question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement.
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82 · Cited by 2,163
Schwarz, N., Sanna, L. J., Skurnik, I., & Yoon, C. (2007) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(06)39003-x · Cited by 441
Source factors in persuasion: A self-validation approach
Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2009) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/10463280802643640 · Cited by 243
Self-citationConsumer conviction and commitment: An appraisal‐based framework for attitude certainty
Rucker, D. D., Tormala, Z. L., Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2014) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2013.07.001 · Cited by 202
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Tormala, Z. L., Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2002-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1700-1712
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2009683163
- Cited by
- 199
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 22.13
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ease of Retrieval Effects in Persuasion: A Self-Validation Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/014616702237651
- The paper
- Tormala, Z. L., Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2002). Ease of Retrieval Effects in Persuasion: A Self-Validation Analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616702237651
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.
