The relationship between mood and information processing, particularly when reviewing the Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion, lacks conclusive evidence. This study was designed to investigate the hypothesis that information processing would be greater for mood-topic congruence than non mood-topic congruence. Undergraduate students (N=216) were induced with either a dysphoric, neutral, or elated mood condition and given either a strong or weak counterattitudinal appeal supporting senior comprehensive examinations. Depending on condition, subjects were informed that the examinatiions would be implemented either within 6 months (high personal relevance) or within 10 years (low personal relevance). A 2 x 2 x 2 Analysis of Variance and the Ryan-Einot-Gabriel-Welsch-Q individual comparisons method were used for group and cell comparisons. The results showed that dysphoric subjects elicited more favorable attitudes under the strong argument condition than did subjects within the elated condition. Dysphoric subjects therefore engaged in more effortful processing than did elated subjects. Personal relevance appeared to have no significant effect in either affective condition. In the neutral mood condition with high personal relevance, more favorable attitudes toward the message occurred within the strong argument condition than within the weak argument condition. Little significant message scrutiny occurred in the low relevance conditions. Overall results suggest that mood-topic congruence elicits more diligent processing of a counterattitudinal appeal. (Author)