Knowledge, Ambivalence, and Congressional Approval

Abstract

This paper explores which individuals are most susceptible to congressional approval. To this end, the paper is based on the information-processing logic of two moderators (knowledge and ambivalence) in the attitude change stages. Reception of validity-seeking messages is more likely to occur among individuals that possess a large store of political knowledge. However, in the acceptance stage, ambivalence mediates attitude change toward persuasive messages. These two moderators playa central role in a trade-off between two axioms (accuracy and efficiency) of decision-making in information processing. With the concept of the role of the two moderators in mind, I use the 2004 American National Election Studies data to examine four different groups' responses by combining two moderators (HKHA, HKLA, LKHA, and LKLA). The findings show that interpersonal heterogeneity is evident for four different groups. In particular, because they seek the contextual information and willingness to engage in cognitive differentiation as well as embrace central arguments in both parties' debate. publics with high knowledge and high ambivalence are less likely to rely on simple heuristic cues but more likely to depend on institution-specific criteria in evaluating congressional performance.