Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.
-
Upload
oliver-robinson -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
1
Transcript of Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.
![Page 1: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Persuasion
MAR 3503
February 7, 2012
![Page 2: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
A traditional model of persuasion
![Page 3: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Untrustworthy sources can be persuasive!
• …When they are arguing against their own interests
• An experiment by Walster et al. (1966):• Ps read about a convicted criminal, Joe “the
Shoulder” Napolitano, who argues either for– More powerful, stricter courts– More lenient courts and sentences
![Page 4: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Untrustworthy sources can be persuasive!
![Page 5: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
When is a disliked source persuasive?
• Again, when their messages are unexpected• Ps read a message by a new university
administrator who:– …Is likeable or unlikeable– …Delivers a desirable or undesirable message
Eagly & Chaiken, 1975
Source is:
Message is: Likeable Unlikeable
Undesirable 2.6 0.1
Desirable 2.3 2.6
![Page 6: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Dual process theories
• System 1 (peripheral route): relatively fast, associative, based on simple heuristics, often automatic, requiring little cognitive capacity, often unconscious
• System 2 (central route): relatively slow, rule-based, operating on high-effort, systematic reasoning, requiring cognitive capacity, often conscious when operating
• Domains: judgment, decisions, attribution, person perception, stereotyping, persuasion
![Page 7: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Elaboration Likelihood Model
• Two routes to persuasion:– Central route: when the target is motivated and
able to systematically process the message– Peripheral route: when they are not
• The success of various source and message cues depends on which route a target is taking
![Page 8: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
![Page 9: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Involvement and argument strength
• Ps read an essay arguing in favor of comprehensive exams, either– At their own school (high involvement)– At another school (low involvement)
• Arguments were either strong or weak• Hypothesis: Argument strength should have a
larger impact on attitudes under conditions of high involvement
Petty & Cacioppo, 1979
![Page 10: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Involvement and argument strength
Petty & Cacioppo, 1979
![Page 11: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Involvement and argument strength
Argument strength:
Issue involvement Strong Weak
High
Low
Petty & Cacioppo, 1979
Data: agreement with author’s position
![Page 12: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Mood and argument strength
• Ps are placed in a good mood or a bad mood by writing about happy or sad life events
• Then they read weak or strong arguments in favor of a tuition hike at their school
Bless et al., 1990
![Page 13: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Involvement, message, and source• Issue: School should change to a trimester
system, to be implemented either:– Next year (high involvement)– 10 years from now (low involvement)
• Source is either likeable and presents 1 argument or dislikeable and presents 5 arguments
• ELM makes unique predictions:• Central route will lead to more change with
dislikeable source, while peripheral route will lead to more change with likeable source
Chaiken, 1980
![Page 14: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Involvement, message, and source
Source/message quality
Dislikeable, 5 arguments Likeable, 1 argument
High involvement
Low involvement
Chaiken, 1980
![Page 15: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Involvement, message, & expertise
• Comprehensive exams to be instituted:– Next year (high involvement)– 10 years from now (low involvement)
• Message contains 8 strong or 8 weak arguments
• Message is attributed to a high schooler (low expertise) or a Princeton professor (high expertise)
Petty, Cacioppo, & Goldman, 1981
![Page 16: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Involvement, message, & expertise
Petty, Cacioppo, & Goldman, 1981
High personal relevance Low personal relevance
![Page 17: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Celebrity endorsements
• Participants evaluate a magazine ad for a disposable razor
• High involvement: Product would soon be market tested in their community, and they would have an opportunity to select a razor as a free gift
• Low involvement: Product would soon be market tested in several distant cities
• Strong or weak arguments• Endorsed by celebrities or random citizens
Petty, Cacioppo, & Schumann, 1983
![Page 18: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Celebrity endorsements
Petty, Cacioppo, & Schumann, 1983
![Page 19: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Celebrity endorsements
Petty, Cacioppo, & Goldman, 1981
High personal relevance Low personal relevance
![Page 20: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Message strength vs. # of arguments
• Comprehensive exams to be implemented in one year or 10 years (yes, again!)
• Number of arguments: 3 or 9
• Argument strength: strong or weak
Petty & Cacioppo, 1984
![Page 21: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Message strength vs. # of arguments
Low involvement High involvementPetty & Cacioppo, 1984
![Page 22: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Message strength vs. composition
• Tuition hike, at one’s own school or a different school
• Three sets of arguments:– 3 strong arguments– 3 weak arguments– 3 strong and 3 weak arguments
Petty & Cacioppo, 1984
![Page 23: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Message strength vs. composition
Petty & Cacioppo, 1984
![Page 24: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
When does attitude change endure?
• Attitudes formed via the central route:– Persist longer• Watts (1977): Ps either write or read a persuasive
essay. Attitudes are assessed immediately and 6 weeks later• He found that writing and reading the essay produced
the same amount of attitude change initially• But writing the essay led to more processing via the
central route, and thus more change 6 weeks later– Are more predictive of behavior• Cornell housing study
![Page 25: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Necessary psychological steps
• Perceive the message
• Favorably evaluate the message
• Understand the message
• Remember the message
If any of these steps fails, information will be
of no use
If any of these steps fails, information will be
of no use
![Page 26: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Perception
![Page 27: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Favorable evaluation
• Why might people not favorably evaluate a helpful message?– The medium• Not funny, interesting, likeable, fun
– The message itself• People get defensive when they’re being criticized
– Sometimes people just don’t like things
![Page 28: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Understanding
Costanzo et al., 1986
![Page 29: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Remember this
• Memory is not perfect• Information may even backfire
![Page 30: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Persuasion process
![Page 31: Persuasion MAR 3503 February 7, 2012. A traditional model of persuasion.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070408/56649e545503460f94b4a6e2/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Summary• Persuasion can happen through one of two routes:
central and peripheral– Central route when people have motivation or ability to
think about message– Peripheral when they do not
• What cues work to change attitudes differs depending on which route is in use– Peripheral cues include superficial aspects of endorsers
and number of arguments– Central cues include argument strength and expertise,
• Central route attitude change is more likely to stick
• Next time: When do people comply with requests?