Mood, source characteristics, and message processing: A mood-congruent expectancies approach

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.04.014Get rights and content

Abstract

Based on two lines of research, a model is proposed to explain when individuals in a positive mood as well as individuals in a negative mood invest more or less effort in message processing. First, research has shown that moods affect likelihood estimates. That is, positive (negative) mood leads to a mood-congruent increase regarding the occurrence of positively (negatively) valenced events. Second, research has shown that mood-unrelated expectancies affect message processing. Combining both lines of research, I argue that mood-congruent expectancies also affect message scrutiny, that is, more effortful processing given expectancy disconfirmation rather than expectancy confirmation. This prediction was tested in two experiments involving initial information regarding source honesty and likability, respectively. As predicted, individuals in both positive and negative moods evinced more effortful message processing when initial information disconfirmed rather than confirmed expectancies. Thus, these results are consistent with a quite flexible view of individuals in both positive and negative moods regarding the effort invested in information processing.

Section snippets

Existing findings and accounts regarding mood effects on message processing

In an early study on mood and message processing, Worth and Mackie (1987) found that people in a neutral mood processed a message more thoroughly than people in a happy mood. That is, when people were in a neutral mood, strong arguments led to more attitudinal agreement than weak arguments. In comparison, attitudes of people in a happy mood were not affected by argument strength. In a similar vein, Bless et al. (1990) found that happy people were less likely to engage in message elaboration

Mood and expectancies

In his seminal work on mood and memory, Bower (1981) suggested that “it seems likely that mood affects the way people elaborate on or draw inferences from interpersonal events and that their expectations and predictions are positive or negative depending on their mood” (p. 139). In fact, research has found that positive moods lead to more positive expectations than negative moods (e.g. Forgas and Moylan, 1987, Johnson and Tversky, 1983, Mayer et al., 1992). Collectively, this research has shown

Expectancies and message scrutiny

Persuasion research has shown that recipients’ expectancies play a role for the extent of message processing when the elaboration likelihood (cf. Petty & Cacioppo, 1986) is neither particularly high nor low, that is, when the elaboration likelihood is unconstrained. For instance, Ziegler et al. (2002) showed that different combinations of two source factors (e.g. expertise and likability) may be more or less expectancy-congruent. Specifically, two source characteristics of the same valence were

Mood-congruent expectancies and message processing

Based on findings regarding mood and expectancies (e.g. Mayer et al., 1992), and expectancies and message scrutiny (e.g. Ziegler et al., 2002), I suggest that the effects of different affective states on message processing depend on whether mood-congruent expectancies are confirmed or disconfirmed. This is assumed to be the case as long as factors unrelated to mood do not constrain elaboration likelihood to be high or low (cf. Petty, DeSteno, & Rucker, 2001). Specifically, more effortful

Cue effects

Various source characteristics such as likability, trustworthiness, expertise, and consensus status have been shown to affect attitudes directly when ability and/or motivation for argument processing are low as a result of non-mood factors (Chaiken, 1980, Eagly et al., 1978, Martin et al., 2007, Petty et al., 1981). More precisely, a positive value of these factors (i.e., a likable, trustworthy, expert or majority source) leads to more attitudinal agreement than a negative value (i.e., a

Implications for mood and message processing

Similar to these latter findings regarding the effects of different combinations of two mood-unrelated (source) factors on processing effort, I suggest that mood affects the extent of message processing in combination with other factors. More specifically, this should hold for factors that have been shown to affect the extent of message processing given both unconstrained elaboration likelihood and unconstrained/uncontrolled mood. In particular, I propose that source factors may lead to more or

Overview of the current research

Two studies were conducted to test predictions derived from the present approach. In particular, these studies focus on the interplay of an individual’s mood and initial information regarding source characteristics for message scrutiny. In both studies, participants are first put into a positive or negative mood. Next, in the context of an impression formation task, initial source-related information suggests either high or low source trustworthiness (Study 1) or high or low source likability

Study 1

According to the hedonic contingency view (Wegener et al., 1995), the nature of the advocacy (counterattitudinal versus proattitudinal) determines to what extent happy people elaborate a persuasive message. Specifically, their research showed that happy people scrutinized a proattitudinal (“uplifting”) message more thoroughly than a counterattitudinal (“depressing”) message. Sad people scrutinized both a pro- and a counterattitudinal message. In light of these findings, the first empirical test

Study 2

In the first study, participants read a non-discrepant message, that is, the advocacy was presumably neither very proattitudinal nor very counterattitudinal for them (tunnel construction in a distant city). Hence, a first objective of Study 2 was to test the generality of the proposed approach by the use of a more controversial attitude topic. To the same end, Study 2 introduced a female source rather than a male source, and focused on another source factor, that is, likability. Perhaps more

Discussion

As the results of Study 2 reveal, different combinations of mood and source likability affect the extent of message scrutiny in a similar way as mood and source honesty. Attitudes and thought valence of individuals in a positive mood were affected by argument strength given a dislikable source, but not given a likable source. To the contrary, in the case of individuals in a negative mood these measures were affected by argument strength given a likable source, but not given a dislikable source.

General discussion

The present approach integrates research on the effects of mood on expectancies and on the role of mood-unrelated expectancies for message processing. I argue that mood-based expectancies may affect the extent of message processing of individuals in either positive or negative mood. In line with other persuasion research, effects of mood on message processing are predicted when non-mood factors do not constrain elaboration to be very high or low (cf. Petty et al., 2001). In particular, it is

Hedonic contingency view

According to the present approach, mood-congruency of information will affect message processing in positive and negative mood when such information is available and accessible to individuals before they encounter the persuasive message. In this respect, it could be argued that this was already the case in the work by Wegener et al. (1995). In this research, instructions given to participants provided initial information of clear valence regarding the uplifting or depressing nature of the

Future directions

The present approach suggests a number of avenues for future research. For one, it seems worth investigating whether the role of mood-based expectancies generalizes to other source characteristics such as, for instance, the ingroup—outgroup status of the source (e.g. Mackie, Worth, & Asuncion, 1990). With respect to advertising effectiveness, the role of a source’s celebrity status for the interest of individuals in product information may depend on these individuals’ affective state (cf.

Conclusion

Overall, the present mood-congruent expectancies model (MEM) suggests that both individuals in positive mood and individuals in negative mood may be quite flexible in the amount of effort they invest in information processing. In particular, in the persuasion domain, one factor that appears crucial for message scrutiny is whether mood-based expectancies are confirmed or disconfirmed. Thus, the present research may contribute to a fuller understanding of mood effects on message processing.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Michael Diehl for helpful comments. I would also like to express my gratitude to John Skowronski and three anonymous reviewers for enormously thoughtful and helpful suggestions. I also thank Franziska Drogla, Mandy Raumschüssel, Monika Stoll, and Katharina Wais for their help in conducting this research.

References (47)

  • N. Schwarz et al.

    Mood and persuasion: Affective states influence processing of persuasive communications

  • L.S. Aiken et al.

    Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions

    (1991)
  • S.M. Baker et al.

    Majority and minority influence: Source-position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1994)
  • H. Bless et al.

    Mood and persuasion: A cognitive response analysis

    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

    (1990)
  • G.V. Bodenhausen et al.

    Happiness and stereotypic thinking in social judgment

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1994)
  • G. Bohner et al.

    Affect and persuasion: Mood effects on the processing of persuasive message content and context cues and on subsequent behavior

    European Journal of Social Psychology

    (1992)
  • G. Bohner et al.

    Negative affect can increase or decrease message scrutiny: The affect interpretation hypothesis

    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

    (2001)
  • G.H. Bower

    Emotional mood and memory

    American Psychologist

    (1981)
  • S. Chaiken

    Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1980)
  • M.S. Clark et al.

    Toward understanding the relationship between feeling states and social behavior

  • A.H. Eagly et al.

    The psychology of attitudes

    (1993)
  • A.H. Eagly et al.

    Causal inferences about communicators and their effect on opinion change

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1978)
  • J.P. Forgas et al.

    After the movies: Transient mood and social judgments

    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

    (1987)
  • I.M. Handley et al.

    Mood and information processing: When happy and sad look the same

    Motivation and Emotion

    (2002)
  • M. Heesacker et al.

    Field dependence and attitude change: Source credibility can alter persuasion by affecting message-relevant thinking

    Journal of Personality

    (1983)
  • E.T. Higgins

    Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience

  • E.J. Johnson et al.

    Affect, generalization, and the perception of risk

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1983)
  • H.H. Kelley

    Attribution theory in social psychology

  • A.W. Kruglanski et al.

    Persuasion by a single route: A view from the unimodel

    Psychological Inquiry

    (1999)
  • D.M. Mackie et al.

    Processing deficits and the mediation of positive affect in persuasion

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1989)
  • D.M. Mackie et al.

    Feeling good, but not thinking straight: The impact of positive mood on persuasion

  • D.M. Mackie et al.

    Processing of persuasive in-group messages

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1990)
  • R. Martin et al.

    Systematic and heuristic processing of majority- and minority-endorsed messages: The effects of varying outcome relevance and levels of orientation on attitude and message processing

    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

    (2007)
  • Cited by (24)

    • Biased belief updating in depression

      2023, Clinical Psychology Review
    • Mood and Processing Effort. The Mood-Congruent Expectancies Approach.

      2014, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology
      Citation Excerpt :

      The better participants’ mood, the more positive were their expectations. Building on these findings, an experiment was conducted (n = 82) with a 2 (positive vs. negative mood) × 2 (honest vs. dishonest source) × 2 (strong vs. weak arguments) between-subjects factorial design (Ziegler, 2010, Study 1). After mood induction, source honesty was manipulated by varying the source’s handling of an erroneously high bonus payment on the occasion of an anniversary of service.

    • Mood and the impact of individuating information on the evaluation of ingroup and outgroup members: The role of mood-based expectancies

      2011, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
      Citation Excerpt :

      The present findings are consistent with a symmetrical role of mood and category membership for the impact of individuating information on ingroup and outgroup target evaluations. Taken together with other recent research (Ziegler, 2010; Ziegler & Diehl, in press), they indicate the importance of mood-based expectancies for social judgments in different domains. Hence, we hope that future research regarding intergroup relations (Sherif, 1966), stereotyping (Allport, 1954), and related areas may find it worthwhile to examine the effects of (dis)confirmed mood-based expectancies for information processing, judgments, and decisions.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text