Media portrayals, in this case, should simply enhance the dominant response of the consumer. These individuals are not initially interested in the issue or motivated to seek out and analytically process information. Status, therefore, may become a heuristic cue used in attitude formation by a large portion of the audience. An individual's stand is influenced by the rhetorical context within which he or she is embedded. For most members of the public, attitudes regarding animal experimentation are unlikely to be formed solely by the assertions of those on either side of the issue.
Public attitudes regarding medical testing on nonhuman animals seem somewhat inconsistent.
In part, this may be influenced by media coverage of the debate. At the same time, emphasis is frequently placed upon either past medical breakthroughs ostensibly achieved through animal testing or the potential consequences for future advances should such research is be abolished. This paper does not suggest that perceived source status is the only, or even the primary, determinant of individuals' attitudes regarding animal experimentation. Media representation, including the status of those being quoted, is only one element of the rhetorical context. To the extent that the media are a principal source of information on an issue, however, such representation is likely to play a more important role in shaping this context.