Ideological group influence: central role of message meaning

References

• Asch, S. E. (1940). Studies in the principles of judgments and attitudes: II. Determination of judgments by group and by ego standards. Journal of Social Psychology, 12, 433–465. doi:10.1080/00224545.1940.9921487
   Google Scholar
• Buehler, R., & Griffin, D. (1994). Change-of-meaning effects in conformity and dissent: Observing construal processes over time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 984–996. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.6.984
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Sidera, J. A. (1982). The effects of a salient self-schema on the evaluation of proattitudinal editorials: Top-down versus bottom-up message processing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18(4), 324–338. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(82)90057-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(3), 460–473. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.66.3.460
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, G. L. (2003). Party over policy: The dominating impact of group influence on political beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 808–822. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.808
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046. doi:10.1037/a0015141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2013). Conditional process modeling: Using structural equation modeling to examine contingent causal processes. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 217–264). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Jost, J. T. (2006). The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist, 61, 651–670. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.7.651
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2109. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mackie, D. M., Worth, L. T., & Asuncion, A. G. (1990). Processing of persuasive in-group messages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 812–822. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.5.812
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maule, A. (2015, April 2). Yelp reviewers sound off on Memories Pizza’s religious freedom views. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/yelp-reviewers-lash-out-memories-pizza
   Google Scholar
• Payne, E. (2015, April 3). Indiana pizzeria finds itself at the center of ‘religious freedom’ debate. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/02/living/indiana-religious-freedom-pizza-feat/
   Google Scholar
• Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847–855.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petty, R. E., Wheeler, S. C., & Bizer, G. Y. (2000). Attitude functions and persuasion: An elaboration likelihood approach to matched versus mismatched messages. In G. R. Maio & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Why we evaluate: Functions of attitudes (pp. 133–162). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185–227. doi:10.1080/00273170701341316
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, W., Pool, G. J., Leck, K., & Purvis, D. (1996). Self-definition, defensive processing, and influence: The normative impact of majority and minority groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 1181–1193. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.6.1181
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar