Liudzius 1

Rebecca Liudzius
17 March 2015
Theory Critique Paper: Elaboration Likelihood Model

Theory Overview
Richard Petty and John Cacioppo created the Elaboration Likelihood Model in 1986.
Petty wrote his PhD dissertation on the topic of teenage driving to test the relative effectiveness
of strong-message arguments and high source credibility (Griffin, Ledbetter & Sparks, 2015, p.
189). This is when he first labeled the two cognitive routes that the listener uses as central and
peripheral. Petty then recruited Cacioppo to start an intensive program of study to discover the
best way for a persuader to activate each route (Griffin et al., 2015, p. 189).
According to Griffin et al. (2015), the peripheral route is a mental shortcut process that
accepts or rejects a messaged based on irrelevant cues as opposed to actively thinking about the
issue (p. 189). For example, a principal enters a classroom full of second semester high school
seniors. She is there to lecture about the importance of the students continuing to do their
homework even though they have been accepted to college already. Those students are likely to
use the peripheral route of thinking. They are not going to elaborate on the message of the
speaker, they are going to consider that this person is old and out of touch, that her voice is shrill,
and that it is too early in the morning for her to have this much energy. Those students will only
consider the irrelevant peripheral cues, and not think about the actual message. The principal
used a weak argument, as well. As the Principal, she told them to do their homework, simply
because she said so. That is not an argument that will sit well with teenagers on the brink of
graduation.

Liudzius 2
The central route is message elaboration; the path of cognitive processing that involves
scrutiny of message content (Griffin et al., 2015, p. 189).Take that same group of students,
relaxing in the park after school, talking about how excited they are for college and how they
cannot wait for graduation. They are joined by a few students who graduated last year and are
home on break. Those college students talk to the high schoolers casually about keeping up with
their work, offering the example of Johnny who lost his scholarship because he failed two classes
senior year. They assure the seniors that doing the work will be worth it once they get to college.
The seniors elaborate on these messages. Maybe theyre right; I wont be able to afford college
without my scholarship. It will be worth it, I have gotten As and Bs all through high school, why
should I give that up now, its my last semester. Those students were presented with a strong
argument in a better environment, which gave them the ability to elaborate on the message,
which led to a much more successful route of persuasion.
Research Review
Chen and Lee (2008) randomly assigned college students to either a cosmetic or hotel
website and then conducted a survey of those students experiences with their assigned site (p.
1385). They found that when the students used the peripheral route to analyze the website, it
had a positive and significant impact on hedonic value [of the website], and when the central
route was used, it had a positive and significant impact on their perceived utilitarian value [of
the site] (p. 1391). Their study supported Elaboration Likelihood Model.
Tam and Ho (2005) conducted an experiment to test three major elements of a web
personalization strategy: level of preference matching, recommendation set size, and sorting
cue, and how those elements relate to ELMs two routes of cognitive processing (p. 271). They
found that preference matching is vital to stimulating the central route and sorting cue is more
salient to simulate the peripheral route. Their results supported ELM.

Liudzius 3
Yang, Hung, Sung, & Farn (2006) conducted an experiment to investigate consumers
trust in online shopping, with respect to ELM. They found that both the central and peripheral
routes allowed consumers to trust online sites. When consumers used the central route, they
found trust in the site through quality product information. When they used the peripheral route,
they achieved trust through third party seals and presentation of the website (p. 442). The study
supported Elaboration Likelihood Model.
Trampe, Stapel, Siero, & Mulder (2010) conducted an experiment to test how ELM and
product relevance would influence consumers decisions to buy a product that was advertised by
an attractive model. They found that when elaboration likelihood was high, using an attractive
model was not a successful advertising tool when the product was not relevant to beauty. In
contrast, when elaboration likelihood was low, product relevance did not matter as much (p.
1114). The study supported Elaboration Likelihood Model.
Theory Analysis
Elaboration Likelihood Model is an interpersonal theory, and its primary function is to
influence the listener. ELM explains the process of interpersonal communication fairly well.
Petty and Cacioppo explain clearly that when the listener is receiving the message, he or she will
take either the central route or the peripheral route in order to process the message. If the listener
takes the central route, he or she will elaborate on the message, which results in either a strong
positive or strong negative attitude change. If he or she takes the peripheral route, it will result in
no attitude change or weak attitude change. (Griffin et al., 2015, p. 190).
Because the theory is so focused on how the listener reacts to what is said, ELM
effectively explains the results of interpersonal communication. If the listener vehemently
disagrees with the persuasive message, ELM explains that he or she must have taken the central
route, but likely had a high personal interest in the topic which was contrary to the message. If

Liudzius 4
the listener has a strong positive attitude change, ELM explains that he or she probably took the
central route, and that he or she likely already agreed with what the speaker was saying. If the
listener has no attitude change, he or she likely either attempted to take the central route, but had
no interest in the topic. Or, he or she took the peripheral route, and was not convinced by those
peripheral cues. If the listener has a weak attitude change, he or she took the peripheral route, but
his or her attitude change will likely be temporary as those cues which caused the change are not
deeply ingrained in his or her mind. (Griffin et al., 2015, p. 190).
ELM explains the process for the listener well, but the explanation for the speaker is not
as strong. The entire theory relies on the listener electing to take the route which will lead them
to the attitude change that the speaker desires. Petty and Cacioppo offer little explanation of the
right way to choose which path to take, only explaining why the message was weak or strong
after the cognitive path has already been taken. (Griffin et al., 2015, p. 198).
Elaboration Likelihood Model explains the context of interpersonal communication in the
realm of businesses tailoring their advertising messages to their individual customers. If a
company wants their website to elicit a certain response from consumers, it can use ELM. The
company will have to choose which route it would like to stimulate in order to elicit the buying
behavior that the company desires.
Thesis
I argue that Elaboration Likelihood Model works best in interpersonal communication
when used to influence consumers online buyer behavior.
Theory Application
Communication professionals can take advantage of Elaboration Likelihood Model when
designing their companys websites in order promote consumer purchasing. First, she must

Liudzius 5
research her target audience to find out if her consumers are more likely to use the central route
or the peripheral route- this will be vital to understanding how she should design the website.
Before designing the site, it must be understood that one of the most important features of
the website is that it must be trustworthy to consumers. According to Chen and Lee (2008) trust
in online shopping is referred to as a willingness of customers to be vulnerable to the action, to
the product, or website (p. 1394). Trust is important because trust has been found to positively
influence buying behavior (p. 1385).
Some of the indicators of a customer that would use the central route include them being
highly involved with the products and having low trait anxiety (Yang et al., 2006, p. 442).
Additionally when message recipients have both the motivation and the ability to consider
detailed information in a given message they are more likely to use the central route. (Tam and
Ho, 2005, p. 274). I have several recommendations based on the previously referenced academic
studies on how to design a site for users who use the central route.
Taking into account the results of their study, Chen and Lee (2008) recommend that
businesses should design their websites with central route characteristics to increase utilitarian
customer value (p. 1390). Tam and Ho discuss what those characteristics are. Preference
matching on the site will stimulate the central route, causing users to elaborate on the content
more extensively. This causes the business promotional message to be stored in the users long
term memory (p. 276). Yang et al. (2006) provide privacy and security policies as well as
product information (p. 443) as other examples of central characteristics. Finally, when the
central route is used, the practitioner should be wary of using a model when she is not relevant to
the product being sold, as that will not be acceptable to consumers using the central route.
(Trampe et al., 2010, p. 1119).

Liudzius 6
Some indicators of a customer who will use the peripheral route include them being not
very involved with the product or very anxious (Yang et al., 2006, p. 442). Additionally, when
message recipients lack either the motivation or the ability to process the detailed information in
the message content they are more likely to use the peripheral route (Tam and Ho, 2005, p.
274). If it is found that the customers will use the peripheral route, the communication
professional should keep the following recommendations in mind when designing their website.
Chen and Lee (2008) state that peripheral route characteristics stimulate hedonic
customer value (p. 1390). Those peripheral characteristics will include sorting cues, which are
persuasive messages [that] influence a user by diverting attention, reallocating cognitive
resources, and evoking affective responses and behaviors (Tam and Ho, 2005, p. 273). Other
examples of peripheral cues are third-party seals, links from reputable sites, and presentation
style of Web site (Yang et al., 2006, p. 443). Lastly, relevance of the model for the product is
less important when the consumer uses peripheral route, so a model could be useful even if she is
not relevant to the product (Trampe et al., 2010, p. 1119).
Theory assessment
Elaboration Likelihood Model is an objective theory. The criteria for a good objective
theory are prediction of future events, explanation of data, relative simplicity, hypotheses that
can be tested, and practical utility (Griffin et al., 2015, p. 25-28).
ELM fulfills the criterion of explanation of data. Petty and Cacioppo explain clearly why
someone was persuaded or not persuaded. The lack of persuasion usually comes from the listener
having taken the cognitive path not intended by the speaker, the speaker having had a weak
argument, or was an unattractive persuader. Once the persuasion act has occurred and the listener
has made a decision on that persuasion, ELM explains why the listener reacted in that way.
(Griffin et al., 2015).

Liudzius 7
ELM also fulfills the criterion of relative simplicity. The theory has two paths: central and
peripheral. The two paths have simple explanations and distinct characteristics and can be
understood easily. (Griffin et al., 2015, p. 189). The theory is also useful. If someone is
wondering why he or she can never seem to persuade their audience of anything, this theory can
help him or her understand why.
The criteria that this theory does not meet are prediction of future events and hypotheses
that can be tested. The two go hand in hand. The main criticism of the theory is that descriptions
of the ELM are sufficiently imprecise and ambiguous as to prevent an adequate test of the entire
model. (Mongeau &Stiff, 1993, p 67). Petty and Cacioppo cannot offer any guidance on how to
persuade, only explain why it went right or wrong after the fact. That makes for a very difficult
theory to test and predict outcomes of.
Yang et al.s (2006) study of internet shopping found that both users who used the central
route and users who used the peripheral route found trust in websites, only getting there by
different characteristics. Those who used peripheral cues reached trust through consumers
assurance perception, and those who used central processing through consumers perceived
result demonstrability. (p. 442) This is valid according to the ELM model.
Additionally, Yang et al.s study found that when consumers had a high level of product
involvement and low trait anxiety, they would use the central route, and when they had less
involvement with the product or were highly anxious, they would trust the e-tailer through the
peripheral route. (p. 442). This also applies ELM well.
Tam and Hos (2005) study applied ELM. Through their experiment, they explored which
aspects of a website would encourage consumers peripheral and central routes. Preference
matching, which is the extent to which the web content generated by the personalization agent

Liudzius 8
appeals to users, was found to stimulate central route, which supports ELM. If the site can make
content that matches the taste and preference of a user, they would elaborate (p. 276).
Sorting cues are ways to format the website to appeal to users heuristic values. For
instance, having the first item the most popular one on the site, or arranging by similar users
ratings. Tam and Hos study found that these were better for the user who uses the peripheral
route. ELM applies (p. 276).
Chen and Lees (2008) study also applied the theory well. They found that when their
subjects used the peripheral route, it increased perceived hedonic value, or likeability of the
website, which makes sense according to ELM. When the subjects used the central route, it
increased the perceived utilitarian, or practicality of the website, which also applies ELM (p.
1391). In the theory section of their article, they discussed how involvement and heuristics have
always been regarded as important variables that determine when someone will use the central or
peripheral route. They went on to say that this study helped them determine that involvement is
more information-searching oriented, whereas heuristics are more environment-oriented (p.
1380). This also applies to the organization of ELM.
Trampe et als (2010) also applied the theory of ELM in their study, and it supported their
findings. When their subjects elaborated on their given advertisement, the model had to be
relevant to the product or else they would not be persuaded. When the subjects did not elaborate,
whether or not the model related to the product did not effect if they were persuaded (p. 1114).
When ELM is applied, both of these findings make sense. The authors used ELM as a basis for
their entire study, and their predictions that ELM would apply to the advertisements were
confirmed. They conducted the experiment twice, first with a diet product and deodorant, and
then with diet product and a computer (p. 1116). Both times ELM was confirmed.

Liudzius 9

Liudzius 10
References
Chen, S.H., & Lee, K.P., (2008) The Role of Personality Traits and Perceived Values in
Persuasion: An Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective on Online Shopping. Social
Behavior and Personality, 36(10), 1379-1400.
Griffin, E., Ledbetter, A., Sparks, G., (2015). A First Look at Communication Theory. New York:
McGraw Hill Education.
Mongeau, P. & Stiff, J., (1993) Specifying Causal Relationships in the Elaboration Likelihood
Model. Communication Theory, 3, 67-68.
Tam, K.Y., & Ho, S.Y., (2005) Web Personalization as a Persuasion Strategy: An Elaboration
Likelihood Model Perspective. Information Systems Research, 16(3), 271-291.
Trampe, D., Stapel, D., Siero, F., & Mulder, H., (2010) Beauty as a Tool: The Effect of Model
Attractiveness, Product Relevance, and Elaboration Likelihood on Advertising
Effectiveness. Psychology & Marketing, 27(12), 1101-1121.
Yang, S.C., Hung, W.C., Sung, K., Farn, C.K., (2006) Investigating Initial Trust Toward E-tailers
from the Elaboration Likelihood Model Perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 23(5),
429-445.