Notes on Campbell & Kirmani (2000) – Consumer Persuasion Knowledge

Paper: “Consumers’ Use of Persuasion Knowledge: The Effects of Accessibility and Cognitive Capacity on Perceptions of an Influence Agent”

Main Topic or Phenomenon

This paper examines when and how consumers use their persuasion knowledge to evaluate influence agents (particularly salespeople) in interpersonal selling contexts. The core phenomenon is that consumers don’t always apply their knowledge about persuasion tactics and motives when forming impressions of salespeople, despite possessing this knowledge.

Theoretical Construct

Persuasion Knowledge Model (PKM): Consumers develop knowledge about persuasion attempts and use this knowledge to “cope” with persuasion episodes. Persuasion knowledge includes beliefs about marketers’ motives, strategies, tactics, their effectiveness, and ways of coping with persuasion attempts.

Key Definitions:

• Persuasion Knowledge Usage: The process by which consumers draw inferences about ulterior persuasion motives underlying an influence agent’s behavior
• Accessibility: How readily a construct (like ulterior motives) is coded in terms of a given category
• Cognitive Capacity: Mental resources available for higher-order attributional processing
• Suspicion: The psychological state where an individual considers that an actor may have hidden motives for their behavior

Key Findings

1. Interaction Effect: When ulterior persuasion motives are highly accessible, both cognitively busy targets and unbusy observers use persuasion knowledge and perceive salespeople as less sincere. When motives are less accessible, busy targets are less likely than unbusy observers to use persuasion knowledge.
2. Target vs Observer Differences: Targets of persuasion attempts are more cognitively constrained than observers, making them less likely to engage in the effortful process of inferring ulterior motives.
3. Mediation Process: Persuasion knowledge usage (measured as suspicion thoughts and inferences about persuasive intent) mediates the effects of accessibility and cognitive capacity on salesperson sincerity perceptions.
4. Priming Effects: External priming of persuasion motives (unrelated to the sales context) can increase busy targets’ use of persuasion knowledge.
5. Specificity of Knowledge Types: Only persuasion motive knowledge (not general persuasion tactic knowledge) effectively triggers suspicion and modified evaluations.

Boundary Conditions and Moderators

Primary Moderators:

• Cognitive Capacity: Busy targets vs. unbusy observers
• Accessibility of Ulterior Motives: High (flattery before purchase) vs. low (flattery after purchase)

Boundary Conditions:

• External priming can overcome cognitive capacity limitations
• Suppressing persuasion knowledge through priming non-persuasion constructs can prevent even unbusy observers from using persuasion knowledge
• The type of persuasion knowledge matters - motive knowledge is more influential than tactic knowledge
• Goal congruence between consumer and agent may change the valence of persuasion knowledge effects

Building on Previous Work

Extensions:

• Moves beyond advertising contexts to interpersonal selling situations
• Provides process evidence for when PKM is actually used (not just possessed)
• Introduces cognitive capacity and accessibility as key conditional factors

Challenges:

• Challenges the assumption that targets would be more motivated to use persuasion knowledge than observers
• Questions whether persuasion knowledge is always “hovering in readiness” as originally proposed

Integration:

• Combines PKM with attribution theory (characterization vs. correction stages)
• Links to ingratiation literature but provides cognitive rather than motivational explanations for target-observer differences

Major Theoretical Contribution

The paper provides a process model of persuasion knowledge usage that specifies when consumers will actually apply their persuasion knowledge. The key insight is that persuasion knowledge usage requires cognitive resources and occurs during the effortful “correction” stage of attribution, not the automatic “characterization” stage. This transforms PKM from a descriptive model of what consumers know into a predictive model of when they’ll use that knowledge.

Major Managerial Implication

For Salespeople/Marketers: Understanding when consumers are likely to be suspicious provides strategic guidance. When customers are cognitively busy (common in retail environments), persuasion attempts may be more effective unless the selling context makes ulterior motives highly salient. However, this creates ethical considerations about taking advantage of customers’ cognitive limitations.

For Consumer Protection: Training programs should focus on making persuasion motives more accessible to consumers before they enter selling situations, as this can help overcome the cognitive capacity limitations that prevent persuasion knowledge usage.

Unexplored Theoretical Factors

Individual Differences:

• Chronic skepticism or suspicion tendencies
• Need for cognition
• Expertise or familiarity with the product category
• Cultural differences in persuasion knowledge

Situational Factors:

• Time pressure beyond cognitive busyness
• Emotional state (positive/negative affect)
• Social presence of others
• Physical environment characteristics

Relationship Factors:

• Prior relationship with the salesperson/company
• Trust levels
• Power dynamics beyond the basic target-observer distinction

Agent Characteristics:

• Salesperson expertise credibility
• Physical attractiveness
• Similarity to the consumer
• Nonverbal behavior and authenticity cues

Temporal Factors:

• Duration of the interaction
• Timing within the customer journey
• Frequency of exposure to persuasion attempts

Take home messages

Persuasion Knowledge Model (PKM): Consumers have knowledge about persuasion tactics and motives, but don’t always USE this knowledge. Usage depends on:

1. Cognitive Capacity (busy vs. unbusy)
2. Accessibility (how readily ulterior motives come to mind)

The Main Effect

2x2 Interaction Pattern:

• High Accessibility: Target = Observer (both use persuasion knowledge, both skeptical)
• Low Accessibility: Target < Observer (target more trusting, observer more skeptical)

Memory Device: When motives are obvious (high accessibility), everyone’s skeptical. When motives are hidden (low accessibility), only the observer (who has mental bandwidth) gets suspicious.

Process Model (3 Steps)

1. Characterization Stage: Automatic first impression (“salesperson seems nice”)
2. Correction Stage: Effortful adjustment based on ulterior motives (“wait, they want commission”)
3. Final Evaluation: Modified perception (“less sincere than I first thought”)

Key Point: Persuasion knowledge operates in Step 2, which requires cognitive resources.

Reference

Campbell, Margaret C. and Amna Kirmani (2000), “Consumers’ Use of Persuasion Knowledge: The Effects of Accessibility and Cognitive Capacity on Perceptions of an Influence Agent,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (1), 69–83.