And when shall a little child lead them? evidence for an altercasting theory of source credibility

Abstract

In two crucial test experiments pitting altercasting against traditional source credibility theories (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953; Kelman, 1958), students received a message emphasizing either technical or protective themes attributed to a child or an expert. Traditional theories predict an expert should be more effective than a child. According to altercasting theory, credibility is a function of the privileges and responsibilities associated with positions in a role-set. A child places a message recipient into the role of protector and is most effective when arguing for protective as opposed to technical messages. An expert is most effective when arguing within a domain of expertise (technical issues) as opposed to common opinion. The results overwhelmingly support an altercasting interpretation of source credibility.