a description of the theory of attitude change that best explains Julie’s dilemma. Per the theory, explain whether Julie would be more likely to change her attitude or her behavior. Please explain why.
The theory of attitude change that best explains Julie’s dilemma is the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). According to this theory, there are two routes to persuasion: the central route and the peripheral route. The central route occurs when individuals are motivated and capable of processing the message in a systematic and thoughtful manner. On the other hand, the peripheral route occurs when individuals rely on simple cues or heuristics to evaluate the message.
In Julie’s case, she is faced with a dilemma regarding same-sex marriage. This suggests that her attitude towards same-sex marriage may not be firmly established or may be susceptible to change. To determine whether Julie would be more likely to change her attitude or her behavior, we need to consider the factors influencing the persuasiveness of the message she receives and her personal motivation and ability to process the information.
If Julie is highly motivated to form a strong opinion about same-sex marriage and has the cognitive resources available to process the arguments thoroughly, she would be more likely to engage in the central route processing. This would entail critically evaluating the arguments presented to her, considering the evidence, and weighing the pros and cons of same-sex marriage. In this case, changing her attitude (i.e., her belief or evaluation of same-sex marriage) would be more likely.
On the other hand, if Julie is not highly motivated or lacks the cognitive resources to process the arguments in a systematic manner, she may rely on peripheral route processing. This would involve evaluating simple cues such as the source of the message, the emotional appeal, or the perceived popularity of the position. In this case, changing her behavior (i.e., her actions or support for same-sex marriage) would be more likely, even though her attitude may remain relatively unchanged.
To determine which route Julie is more likely to take, we need to consider her personal characteristics and the information environment she is exposed to. For example, if Julie is highly educated, analytical, and has prior knowledge and experience with the topic of same-sex marriage, she may be more inclined to engage in central route processing. On the other hand, if Julie is less knowledgeable, easily influenced by social cues, or swayed by emotional appeals, she may rely more on peripheral route processing.
Additionally, the persuasive messages Julie is exposed to also play a crucial role in determining the route of persuasion. If the messages she encounters are highly logical, supported by empirical evidence, and presented by trustworthy sources, they are more likely to elicit central route processing. Conversely, if the messages rely on emotional appeals, social endorsements, or simple heuristics, they are more likely to elicit peripheral route processing.
In summary, whether Julie is more likely to change her attitude or behavior depends on her personal motivation and ability to engage in systematic processing, as well as the characteristics of the persuasive messages she encounters. If Julie is highly motivated and capable of critically evaluating arguments, she may be more likely to change her attitude. However, if Julie relies on simple cues or is influenced by peripheral route factors, she may be more likely to change her behavior.