. Only if one understands how the measures are arrived at, can one determine their significance. Delia cites commentators who explain the process of impression formation as one in which a perceiver listener brings certain "constructs" to bear on the communication process in order to "construe" a situation and then act/react accordingly (2:368, passim). Many studies, Delia points out, have sought to identify the character of construing by suggesting variable factors (i.e., giving preceptor attitudes names on a scale) and then measuring the factors. Delia contends, however, that this is really "a cluster of constructs used in functionally equivalent ways" (2:370; emphasis added). In other words, the rating scale is not decisive, while the process of using constructs is.
This is where Delia's conclusion about credibility theory comes in. It rests on the acceptance of the existence of "rhetorical situations," which is a term referring to the creation of a moment at which a perceiver's interpretations can be brought to bear on the fact that an argument made by the one being perceived. The one being perceived (i.e., the "rhetorical agent" or the one making the argument) is not the center of the rhetorical situation as regards the attribution of credibility. Rather, the agent seeks to alter attitudes of behavior of perceiver on one hand, and the perceiver understands that the agent is doing this on the other. Credibility, then, rests on the effect that the perceiver experiences as a result of the agent's presentation. The perceiver may be persuaded or not, depending on how the agent is interpreted as well as on what the agent says. But the argument itself is secondary to the cognitive act of interpretation. Delia calls for studies that are centered on the process of perceiver interpretation and cognition rather than on designations of argument as such.
In a study of children's interaction, Delia and Clark wanted to study the relationship...