Matching Versus Mismatching Attitude Functions: Implications for Scrutiny of Persuasive Messages

Abstract

Two studies were conducted to examine the hypothesis that matching the content of a persuasive message to the functional basis of people's attitudes enhances message scrutiny. In Study 1, high and low self-monitors were exposed to a message that matched or mismatched the functional basis of their attitudes (i.e., image appealfor high self-monitors and quality appealfor low self-monitors) and that -contained either strong or weak arguments. Attitudes were more strongly affected by message strength when the message arguments matched rather than mismatched thefunctional basis of the attitude. In Study 2, this outcome was especially characteristic of individuals who typically do not enjoy thinking (those low in need for cognition). These studies show that matching arguments to the functional basis of an attitude is not invariably beneficialfor persuasion but can enhance or reduce attitude change (compared to mismatched arguments) depending on the cogency of the matched information.