Mood, source characteristics, and message processing: A mood-congruent expectancies approach
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)
- et al.
Mood and persuasion: Affective states influence processing of persuasive communications
- et al.
Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions
(1991) - et al.
Majority and minority influence: Source-position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1994) - et al.
Mood and persuasion: A cognitive response analysis
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
(1990) - et al.
Happiness and stereotypic thinking in social judgment
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1994) - 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) - et al.
Negative affect can increase or decrease message scrutiny: The affect interpretation hypothesis
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
(2001) Emotional mood and memory
American Psychologist
(1981)Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1980)- et al.
Toward understanding the relationship between feeling states and social behavior
The psychology of attitudes
Causal inferences about communicators and their effect on opinion change
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
After the movies: Transient mood and social judgments
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Mood and information processing: When happy and sad look the same
Motivation and Emotion
Field dependence and attitude change: Source credibility can alter persuasion by affecting message-relevant thinking
Journal of Personality
Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience
Affect, generalization, and the perception of risk
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Attribution theory in social psychology
Persuasion by a single route: A view from the unimodel
Psychological Inquiry
Processing deficits and the mediation of positive affect in persuasion
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Feeling good, but not thinking straight: The impact of positive mood on persuasion
Processing of persuasive in-group messages
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
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
Cited by (24)
Biased belief updating in depression
2023, Clinical Psychology ReviewCelebrity endorsements: Investigating the interactive effects of internalization, identification and product type on consumers’ attitudes and intentions
2021, Journal of Retailing and Consumer ServicesWho said what: The effects of cultural mindsets on perceptions of endorser-message relatedness
2015, Journal of Consumer PsychologyMood and Processing Effort. The Mood-Congruent Expectancies Approach.
2014, Advances in Experimental Social PsychologyCitation 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.
When a product takes on characteristics of the person who created it: Sometimes it sounds sweeter
2013, Journal of Consumer PsychologyMood 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 PsychologyCitation 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.