Quality & Quantity

, Volume 49, Issue 5, pp 2187–2201 | Cite as

Heuristics in digital communication media: theoretical explications and empirical observations

  • Ki Joon Kim


This study explicates the process in which heuristics triggered by technological features of digital communication media affect persuasive outcomes and demonstrates the actual operation of a heuristic by validating the “priming plus unrelated tasks” procedure and the moderated mediation analysis strategy proposed by Bellur and Sundar (2014) for measuring heuristics. In a between-subjects experiment \((N = 100)\), the being-here heuristic primed and non-primed participants were assigned a smartphone with either a large or small screen. The results indicate that both manipulations are key to greater self-reported use of the heuristic and affective trust. A follow-up analysis based on the proposed method using the PROCESS macro for SPSS captured the actual operation of the being-there heuristic. This provides statistical evidence of the role that the being-there heuristic plays in explaining why and how a larger screen leads to greater affective trust, thereby demonstrating the validity and applicability of the proposed method.


Heuristic Heuristic measure Technological affordance Moderated mediation 



The author wishes to thank Dr. S. Shyam Sundar and Dr. Saras Bellur for their insightful suggestions offered at the preliminary stage of this study.


  1. Bellur, S., Sundar, S.S.: How can we tell when a heuristic has been used? Design and analysis strategies for capturing the operation of heuristics. Commun. Methods Meas. 8, 116–137 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berkowitz, L., LePage, A.: Weapons as aggression-eliciting stimuli. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 7, 202–207 (1947)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biocca, F.: The cyborg’s dilemma: progressive embodiment in virtual environments. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 3(2), (1997)Google Scholar
  4. Chaiken, S.: Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 39, 752–766 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., Eagly, A.H.: Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In: Uleman, J.S., Bargh, J.A. (eds.) Unintended Thought, pp. 212–252. The Guilford Press, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  6. Chen, S., Chaiken, S.: The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In: Chaiken, S., Trope, Y. (eds.) Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology, pp. 73–96. The Guilford Press, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  7. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Kubey, R.: Television and the rest of life: a systematic comparison of subjective experience. Public Opin. Q. 45(3), 317–328 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Danova, T.: CHART: consumers love Samsung’s huge screens, and that’s changing the smartphone market. Business Insider. (2013). Accessed 10 May 2014
  9. Detenber, B., Reeves, B.: A bio-informational theory of emotion: motion and image size effects on viewers. J. Commun. 46, 66–84 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fiske, S.T., Taylor, S.E.: Social Cognition. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (1984)Google Scholar
  11. Gibson, J.J.: The theory of affordances. In: Shaw, R., Bransford, J. (eds.) Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing: Toward an Ecological Psychology, pp. 67–82. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J (1977)Google Scholar
  12. Grabe, M., Lombard, M., Reich, R., Bracken, C., Ditton, T.: The role of screen size in viewer experiences of media content. Vis. Commun. Q. 6(2), 4–10 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hayes, A.F.: Introduction to Mediation, Moderation and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. The Guilford Press, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  14. Higgins, E.T., Rholes, W.S., Jones, C.R.: Category accessibility and impression formation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 13(2), 141–154 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hou, J., Nama, Y., Peng, W., Lee, K.M.: Effects of screen size, viewing angle, and players’ immersion tendencies on game experience. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28, 617–623 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jansen, Y.H.: Mudpad: fluid haptics for multitouch surfaces. In: Proceedings of the 28th of the International Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 4351–4356. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  17. Kane, S.K., Bigham, J.P., Wobbrock, J.O.: Slide rule: making mobile touch screens accessible to blind people using multi-touch interaction techniques. In: Proceedings of the 10th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, pp. 73–80. ACM, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  18. Kim, K.J., Sundar, S.S.: Can interface features affect aggression resulting from violent video game play? An examination of realistic controller and large screen-size. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 16(5), 329–334 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kim, K.J., Sundar, S.S.: Does screen size matter for smartphones? Utilitarian and hedonic effects of screen size on smartphone adoption. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 17(7), 466–473 (2014)Google Scholar
  20. Koh, Y.J., Sundar, S.S.: Heuristic versus systematic processing of specialist versus generalist sources in online media. Hum. Commun. Res. 36, 103–124 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kynaslahti, H.: In search of elements of mobility in the context of education. In: Kynaslahti, H., Seppala, P. (eds.) Mobile Learning, pp. 41–48. IT Press, Helsinki (2003)Google Scholar
  22. Lee, K.M.: Presence, explicated. Commun. Theory 14, 27–50 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lombard, M.: Direct responses to people on the screen: television and personal space. Commun. Res. 22, 288–324 (1995)Google Scholar
  24. Lunden, I.: Android smartphone sales, led by big screens: are growing everywhere except in the U.S. TechCrunch. (2012). Accessed 10 May 2014
  25. Marmolin, H.: Multimedia from the perspective of psychology. In: Kjelldahl, L. (ed.) Multimedia: Principles, Systems and Applications, pp. 301–315. Springer, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  26. McGloin R, Farrar K.: The impact of controller naturalness on spatial presence, gamer enjoyment, and perceived realism in a tennis simulation video game. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Communication Association. San Francisco, CA (2010)Google Scholar
  27. Metzger, M.J., Flanagin, A.J., Medders, R.B.: Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. J. Commun. 60(3), 413–439 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Norman, D.A.: The Design of Everyday Things. Doubleday, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  29. Reeves, B., Detenber, B., Steuer, J.: New televisions: the effects of big pictures and big sound on viewer responses to the screen. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Washington, D.C. (1993)Google Scholar
  30. Reeves, B., Nass, C.: Perceptual bandwidth. Commun. ACM 43(3), 65–70 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Skalski, P., Tamborini, R.: The role of social presence in interactive agent-based persuasion. Media Psychol. 10(3), 385–413 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Skalski, P., Tamborini, R., Shelton, A., Buncher, M., Lindmark, P.: Mapping the road to fun: natural video game controllers, presence, and game enjoyment. New Media Soc. 13(2), 224–242 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Soh, H., Reid, L.N., King, K.W.: Measuring trust in advertising: development and validation of the ADTRUST Scale. J. Advert. 38(2), 83–103 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Srull, T.K., Wyer, J.R.S.: The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: some determinants and implications. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37(10), 1660–1672 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Steuer, J.: Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence. J. Commun. 42, 73–93 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sundar, S.S.: The MAIN model: a heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In: Metzger, M., Flanagin, A.J. (eds.) Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility, pp. 72–100. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2008)Google Scholar
  37. Sundar, S.S.: Media effects 2.0: social and psychological effects of communication technologies. In: Nabi, R.L., Oliver, M.B. (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Media Processes and Effects, pp. 545–560. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA (2009)Google Scholar
  38. Sundar, S.S., Xu, Q., Bellur, S., Oh, J., Jia, H.: Modality is the message: interactivity effects on perception and engagement. In: Proceedings of the 28th of the International Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 4105–4110. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Interaction ScienceSungkyunkwan UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations