Cognition in persuasion: An analysis of information processing in response to persuasive communications
By Dolores Albarracin. 2002
141 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Applied Psychology, Literature and Literary Theory, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0e2ea314c3010a52daea0c8e03054c1ad3e6e8c4
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Applied Psychology
- Galen Bodenhausen
- Bertram Gawronski
- Laura Glasman
- Blair T. Johnson
- M. Zanna
- Dolores Albarracin
- Florian Arendt
- J. de Houwer
In Literature and Literary Theory
- Laura Glasman
- Bertram Gawronski
- Galen Bodenhausen
- Blair T. Johnson
- M. Zanna
- Dolores Albarracin
- A. Reid
- T. Marcinkowski
In Sociology and Political Science
- Bertram Gawronski
- Galen Bodenhausen
- Laura Glasman
- Blair T. Johnson
- M. Zanna
- Dolores Albarracin
- J. de Houwer
- Nilanjana Dasgupta
Citations in the corpus
- Attitudes and persuasion. (2006, unknown): “The cognition in persuasion model (Albarracín 2002, Albarracín & Wyer 2001) also takes a single-process perspective, but postulates a series of processing stages that occur in response to persuasive messages.”
- The Handbook of Attitudes (2005, background): “1989) and has since become a broadly accepted premise in many subsequent models of persuasion (e.g., Albarracin, 2002; Kruglanski & Thompson, 1999; see also Johnson, Maio, & Smith-McLallen, this volume).”
- Unraveling the Processes Underlying Evaluation: Attitudes from the Perspective of the Ape Model (2007, background): “Even though this variety of patterns seems rather difficult to explain from the perspective of extant models of attitude change (e.g., Albarracín, 2002; Chen & Chaiken, 1999; Kruglanski & Thompson, 1999; Petty & Wegener, 1999), the APE Model makes specific predictions about the particular…”
- Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: a meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation. (2006, background): “For example, Albarracı́n and Wyer (2000, Experiment 1) induced two levels of concentration but one level of outcome relevance. Leippe and Elkin (1987) induced two levels of outcome relevance but only one level of concentration.”