discussion

profilebodhi5734
Chapter2.pdf

8/15/2013

1

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 1 Prepared by Robert Gass & John Seiter

WHAT IS PERSUASION?

How does “persuasion” differ from similar, related terms?

 influence

 advice

 educate

 compliance gaining

 propaganda

 indoctrination

 brainwashing

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 2

Pure persuasion

 Obvious, clear-cut cases of persuasion

 a TV commercial

 an attorney’s closing remarks to a jury

 a pop-up ad on the Internet

Borderline persuasion

 Less clear-cut cases of influence

 a derelict’s appearance

 social modeling of behavior

 persuasive attempts that backfire

PURE VERSUS BORDERLINE PERSUASION

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 3

8/15/2013

2

 Pure persuasion is:

 intentional

 measured by its effectiveness

 Borderline persuasion:

 may or may not be intentional

 may or may not produce the intended effect

PURE VERSUS BORDERLINE PERSUASION

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 4

LIMITING CRITERIA FOR DEFINING PERSUASION

Litmus tests for defining persuasion

 intentional vs. unintentional

 effective vs. ineffective (or even counterproductive)

 free will and conscious awareness vs. coercion and/or lack of awareness

 symbolic action vs. pure behavior

 interpersonal versus intrapersonal

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 5

INTENTIONALITY

Are there cases of “accidental” persuasion?

 Persuaders’ goals aren’t always clear

 Social modeling of behavior (Bandura) by parents, peers

 Socialization processes such as gender roles, cultural norms

 The unintended receiver effect

 Difficulties in interpreting another’s intent

 Interpersonal influence is mutual, two-way

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 6

8/15/2013

3

EFFECTS

Has persuasion occurred if nothing changes?

 Persuasion as a product or outcome vs.

persuasion as a process or activity

 The activity of persuading occurs even if there is no observable change

 Persuasion is often two-way, not one-way or linear

 Measuring persuasive outcomes can be difficult

 Persuasion may boomerang, producing the opposite of the intended effect

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 7

Is a free, voluntary choice required?

 Persuasion often operates at a low level of awareness

 Persuasive may occur without another’s conscious awareness

Few decisions ever involve completely free choice

 rewards, punishments, incentives, drawbacks

 social consequences for saying no

FREE WILL AND CONSCIOUS AWARENESS

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 8

SYMBOLIC ACTION

Does persuasion exist in the “world of words” and symbolic actions?

 Much of persuasion is visual

 Images carry meaning outside of words

 Much of persuasion is nonverbal

 Not all nonverbal cues are clearly codified

 A person who watched an infomercial with

the sound off might still be persuaded

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 9

8/15/2013

4

INTERPERSONAL VS. INTRAPERSONAL

Does persuasion require two or more persons?

 Self-persuasion does occur

 A person might talk him/her self into doing (or not doing) something

 New Year’s resolutions are designed to increase commitment

 Persuasion involves numerous intrapersonal processes

 attitude formation and change

 desire for cognitive consistency

 counter-arguing

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 10

Pure persuasion:

 is intentional

 is effective or successful

 is noncoercive

 relies on language and symbolic action

 involves two or more persons

Borderline persuasion

 is missing one or more of these litmus tests

GASS & SEITER MODEL OF PERSUASION

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 11

THE ROLE OF CONTEXT

The communication context shapes how persuasion occurs

 Mass media is linear, with delayed feedback.

 Face to face persuasion is synchronous or simultaneous.

 Email, Texting, IM and Twitter lack nonverbal cues.

 Socio-cultural factors affect message processing.

 Participants’ goals affect how persuasion functions.

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 12

8/15/2013

5

A WORKING DEFINITION OF PERSUASION

“Persuasion involves one or more persons who are engaged in the activity of creating, reinforcing, modifying, or extinguishing beliefs, attitudes, intentions, motivations, and/or behaviors within the constraints of a given communication context” (Gass & Seiter, 2014)

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 13

COMPLETED MODEL OF PERSUASION

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 14

WHAT ISN’T PERSUASION?

Most human communication involves the potential for influence

Things that don’t necessarily qualify as persuasion include:

 Breathing, sleeping, sneezing

 Stubbing your toe on a rock

 Torture

 ESP, clairvoyance, and other psychic phenomena

 hypnosis

 Chameleon-like behavior in the animal kingdom

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 15

8/15/2013

6

ELABORATION LIKELIHOOD MODEL (ELM)

Two basic routes to persuasion: Central and Peripheral

They represent the ends of an “elaboration continuum”

They represent qualitatively different modes of information processing

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 16

The Central route is reflective, requires mental effort, and relies on cognitive elaboration

 Motivation (willingness) to process a message

 Ability to process (understand) a message

Example: Lulu is car shopping

She looks up information comparing safety, reliability, performance, customer satisfaction, mileage, and depreciation for three makes of sporty cars

She scrutinizes the information carefully before making a decision

CENTRAL PROCESSING

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 17

The Peripheral route is reflexive, based on mental shortcuts:

 credibility, appearance cues, quantity of arguments

 heuristic cues (decision rules): rules for simplifying the thought process

Example: A Christian homeowner hires a plumber because the plumber’s ad in the Yellow Pages includes an ichthys symbol (sign of the fish)

PERIPHERAL PROCESSING

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 18

8/15/2013

7

Peripheral cues

 “Experts can be trusted”

 “As seen on TV”

 “Always tip 18%”

 “It’s your watch that says the most about you” (slogan for Seiko watches)

 If a celebrity endorses a product does that mean it’s good?

 Are 10 arguments necessarily better than 3?

The role of involvement

 High involvement increases the likelihood of central processing

 Low involvement increases the likelihood of peripheral processing

 High involvement decreases reliance on credibility (peripheral cue)

ELM CONTINUED

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 19

20C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D

Petty & Cacioppo’s ELM

PERSISTENCE OF PERSUASION

Persuasion that takes place via the central route tends to be more lasting

Persuasion that takes via the peripheral route tends to be more transitory

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 21

8/15/2013

8

HEURISTIC-SYSTEMATIC MODEL (HSM)

Bears many similarities to the ELM

Two basic routes or modes of information processing

Systematic processing is more thoughtful, deliberate, analytical

 Analogous to “central” processing in the ELM

Heuristic processing is more reflexive, automatic

 Analogous to “peripheral” processing in the ELM

 Relies on decision rules, e.g., “Never pay retail,” “Buy low, sell high”

 Decision rules are activated under the appropriate circumstances

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 22

IS SIMULTANEOUS PROCESSING POSSIBLE?

Is there true simultaneous processing, or simply rapid switching back and forth?

Multi-tasking as an example:

 driving + cellphone (difficult)

 studying + background music (less difficult)

If simultaneous processing exists, does it exist for words? For images?

 Processing two oral or written messages at once?

 Processing a written message and an image?

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 23

HEURISTIC CUES MUST BE

Available: stored in memory for potential use

Accessible: activated from memory

Applicable: related to the receiver’s goals or objectives

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 24

8/15/2013

9

HSM-CONTINUED

Motivation and ability to process a message are key determinants

Sufficiency principle: people don’t want to spend too much or too little time/effort making a decision

HSM allows for the possibility of simultaneous processing (both systematic and heuristic)

 Example: Ned thinks Mini Coopers look really cool and, after doing some research, he finds they also perform well in crash tests and have higher than average reliability

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 25

UNIMODEL OF PERSUASION

An alternative to dual process models

The unimodel rejects the notion of two distinct types of processing

There is simply more or less processing

 One can think more or less about an issue

 If one thinks more, cognitive elaboration will be higher

 If one thinks less, cognitive elaboration will be lower

C O P Y R I G H T © 2 0 1 4 P E A R S O N E D U C A T I O N , I N C . A L L R I G H T S R E S E R V E D 26

less elaboration more elaboration