The viability of persuasion theory as a framework for the assessment of program evaluation utilization was assessed. Independent variables studied included credibility, involvement, and role groups. More specifically, the research was designed to address three questions concerning: (1) the occurrence of peripheral involvement persuasive effects regardless of the impact of the evaluation report on its readers; (2) the occurrence of evaluator peripheral credibility cue effects independently of involvement effects; and (3) the differential sensitivity of high-level administrators and licensed evaluators to peripheral cue information. Subjects included 20 administrators working with local educational agencies in Louisiana and 51 program evaluators. The subjects' responses to simulated evaluation reports and questionnaires were assessed. Results indicate that evaluator credibility is perceived by report readers and that these perceptions may even affect counterargumentation. Furthermore, counterargument may lead to inaction or delay even when dealing with favorably received recommendations. The findings also indicate that issue-involvement intervention did not directly affect the perception of involvement; attitude change is a function of the extent and direction of cognitive responses; and program evaluators and high-level administrators are more similar than dissimilar in their perceptions of evaluation information. (TJH)