ABSTRACT
If we look at the history of social influence research we can probably detect a shift in emphasis, reflecting developments in the discipline more broadly. That is, research has increasingly examined the cognitive processes involved in persuasion. This is a positive development that has brought welcome specification, and understanding. For example the work on dual process models (e.g., Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) and the Systematic-Heuristic Model (HSM)) provides many insights into the cognitive and affective mechanisms underlying attitude change, and the different routes it can take (see e.g., Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). However, it also probably is true to say that the focus on the actual cognitive processes (e.g., on elaboration of the message) has gone hand in hand with a shift away from considering the social circumstances of social influence. For example, much early social influence research, such as the classic studies of Sherif, Asch, and another sort of dual process model of Deutsch and Gerard (1955), were all concerned with these circumstances, and primarily how the group effected influence. To be sure, the influence of the group has been integrated into the new dual process models. However, in these approaches it can be seen as part of the source (a "source characteristic"), rather than a principal mechanism of influence in itself.
