L5 - Personal Persuasion

The Yale Method of Persuasion

Top-down, simplistic explanation of persuasion

Focuses on source, quality and audience of communication

Original Yale Model (5 steps)

Exposure, attention, comprehension, learning (yielding aka actually agree to message), retention

How is Source Attractiveness related to persuasion?

Halo effect = if a person is physically attractive, they probably have other good qualities

e.g. using a celebrity to endorse a product

How effective is source attractiveness?

Only works when participants are not paying much attention.

Or if product being sold is related to personal attractiveness (e.g. george clooney advertising a razor)

How is source certainty related to persuasion?

Wells et al (1981) found that witness testimony expressed with maximum confidence is more effective, even if its less realistic/ accurate

How is source power related to persuasion? - French and Raven’s 6 sources of power

1. Coercion = threat increases how much attention is paid to source

2. Expertise

3. Information = access to unique information - e.g. the government has statistics

4. Legitimacy = e.g. socially elected

5. Referent power = friends have more power

6. Reward = in order to bias their response

Argument Vividness

how interesting and memorable a message is = e.g the death of a single solider is a tragedy, but the death of a million is a statistic

Argument Quality

arguments that are clear and logical

The Elaboration Likelihood Model:

Elaboration = refers to the process of generating thoughts in favour/ against a possible attitude position

High elaboration = system II persuasion

This produces stronger attitudes

What controls elaboration likelihood?

Depends on both ability to process and motivation to process..

Factors effecting ability = distraction (temporary) and intelligence (persistent)

Factors effecting motivation = personal responsibility (temporary - eg.. you can make a difference) and need for cognition (persistent - people who enjoy thinking deeply)

Study example of Elaboration Likelihood in system 1 vs system 2 arguments ( Cooper et al. 1996)

Jurors given testimony from either an expert or non-expert that is either easy to understand or complicated (due to jargon).

They found when argument was easy to follow = people focused on the arguments over the credentials = system II

But when it was complicated = people focused on credentials rather than arguments

How does expectancy violation affect elaboration?

Expectancy violation increases our elaboration (ie. counter-attitudinal arguments increase elaboration)

Study which demonstrates expectancy violation and elaboration: (Petty and Baker, 1994)

University students either recieved an expected or suprising message

Expected = message was shared by majority and pro-attitudinal OR shared by minority and counter-attitudinal

Suprising = majority+CA, minority+PA

FINDINGS: Suprising combination messages were processed more deeply than expected

How are we biased in persuasion?

Selective Attention = actively attend to pro-attitudinal information and filter out counter-attitudinal information

Study of Selective Attention in Persuasive messaging (Kleinhesselink and Edwards, 1975)

Students listened to pro marujuana legalization messages on headphones with a static buzz. They are able to stop static sound for 5 seconds at a time using a button.

Pro-legalization students, used button more when arguments were strong.

Anti-legalization students used button more when arguments were weak

What is selective processing?

Tendency to evaluate soundness of arguments and credibility of sources in ways that support existing beliefs

Study of selective processing (Ditto and Lopez, 1992)

Deeper processing/ critical thinking when they reach an unwanted conclusion.

Unwanted conclusion = message comes from an unlikeable but intelligent person = scrutinize argument more

Which model describes the effect of emotions on persuasion systems?

The Hedonic Contingency Model

What is the Hedonic Contingency Model (Wegener and Petty, 1994)?

People in a good mood/happy want to maintain mood by avoiding negative messages = therefore take system I

People in bad mood/ unhappy = more open to new messages = more objective

Is fear-based messaging effective?

Moderate fear in combination with clear messaging = central processing.

BUT fear-based messaging ALONE is rarely effective HOWEVER accompynaying this message with useful information IS effective

eg. Levanthal et al, 1967 = showed graphic film of cancer either with or without pamphlet on quitting smoking. = using BOTH reduced smoking the most