C1

Question 1

what is the first factor of the Hovland-Yale Theory?

Answer 1

Communicator:
a communicator is more persuasive if they have credibility, they have high credibility if they are seen as an expert. Credibility comes from personal experience and if the individual is seen as trustworthy.

Question 2

what is one factor that can add to the communicator to make them more persuasive?

Answer 2

Attractiveness: if the individual finds the communicator attractive they are more likely to be persuaded by them, this is called the halo effect. We assume people who are attractive have other desirable qualities.

Question 3

what is the second factor of the Hovland-Yale Theory?

Answer 3

Communication:
Emotional appeal: using fear factor can change behaviour in an individual.
One side or two?: people find one sided arguments patronising and prefer two sided arguments more.

Question 4

what is the third factor of the Hovland-Yale Theory?

Answer 4

Recipient:
Intelligence: higher intelligent people are harder to persuade.
Self-esteem: people with low self-esteem are easier to persuade.

Question 5

what is a strength of the Hovland-Yale Theory?

Answer 5

Hovland Weiss
Participants changed their minds more often with a high credibility source.
Low credibility were almost always seen as presenting unfair arguments
Overtime agreement with high credibility sources decreased (on average by 10.7%) as agreement with low credibility sources increased (on average 7.4%)
This shows a sleeper effect. People who are initially not persuaded by low credibility sources eventually forget where the information has come from. Then they may change their opinions as they do not remember that it is from a low credibility source.
Weakness of the study:
Self-report = low validity

Question 6

what is another strength of the Hovland-Yale Theory?

Answer 6

Research by Sturges and Rogers found that messages who were the most persuasive for giving up smoking in 15-20 year olds were ones that combined high threat with the suggestion that it is possible to quit. Therefore showing that emotional appeal is only persuasive when recipients believe they can cope with change.

Question 7

what is a weakness of the Hovland-Yale Theory?

Answer 7

Credibility is less important than emotional appeal for long term changes.

Question 8

what is low Fear Arousal?

Answer 8

Low: a message that uses little to no fear

Question 9

what is moderate Fear Arousal?

Answer 9

Moderate: uses enough fear to make the individual change their behaviour

Question 10

what is high Fear Arousal?

Answer 10

High: uses a lot of fear and creates a lot of unpleasant arousal meaning the individual will not change their behaviour because there is too much fear, denial reduces fear arousal so it is rewarding therefore is used through negative reinforcement.

Question 11

which level of Fear Arousal would change an individuals behaviour?

Answer 11

Moderate fear is more likely to help change an individual’s behaviour as it isn’t too much fear, too much fear can cause the individual to think that their behaviour will not be enough to cope with the unpleasant arousal.

Question 12

what did Dollard and Miller find?

Answer 12

Dollard and Miller → fear motivated change. Fear creates unpleasant psychological and physiological arousal. By changing behaviour to avoid this the unpleasant state s reduced. The change in behaviour is strengthened through negative reinforcement.

Question 13

what did Janis and Feshbach find?

Answer 13

Janis and Feshbach → fear and behaviour change is not a linear relationship but curvilinear. High levels of arousal are counterproductive. Too much fear and the individual will go to denial.
Group 1: strong fear arousal —> 8% ppl changed = more anxiety 43% compared to low fear group (24%)
Group 2: moderate dangers described and less personal —> 22% ppl changed
Group 3: factual information (nuteual) —> 36% ppl changed

Results:
The research does not support their original hypothesis of a curvilinear relationship between fear and behaviour change

Question 14

what is a strength of Fear Arousal?

Answer 14

Study: janis and feshbach = fear and behaviour change is not a linear relationship but curvilinear. High levels of arousal are counterproductive. Too much fear and the individual will go to denial.
weakness of the study:
The research does not support their original hypothesis of a curvilinear relationship between fear and behaviour change
Normal strength:
Janis & Feshbach did measure behaviour change rather than just attitude

Question 15

what is a weakness of Fear Arousal?

Answer 15

Very little replication of Janis & Feshbach research which impacts validity of theory

Question 16

what are the two routes of the Elaberation-Likelihood Model?

Answer 16

Central route: you think a lot about the content of the message
Peripheral route: not thinking of the content of the message and focusing on other factors

Question 17

how can celebrities effect this model?

Answer 17

Celebrities can be used in both routes. Some celebrities draw attention to the message itself, so elaboration is high (central route).
On the other hand, some of the audience may pay attention to other factors, like the celebrities glamour, attractiveness or likability, so elaboration is low (peripheral route).

Question 18

how can individual influences affect this model?

Answer 18

Need for cognition (NFC) people with high NFC have the cognitive ability to pay attention to the detail in the message. They are more likely to elaborate a massage, meaning they will go for the central route.

Question 19

what is a strength of the Elaberation-Likelihood Model?

Answer 19

Practical applications – health campaigns might be tempted to use peripheral route i.e. celebs. However the ELM shows this doesn’t work and a better route it to use both. I.e. for drug use ex drug user and then help the audience process the message more actively using role play. Good for hard to reach groups i.e. adolescents

Question 20

what is another strength of the Elaberation-Likelihood Model?

Answer 20

Petty et al
Research by Petty et al (1981) on college students found that when they believed that a final exam was required for their year, the content of the message (facts vs opinions) was more important that who delivered the information.
However, when the test was not directed to them but to a cohort in 10 years time, students were more interested in who delivered the message (expert vs non expert) over the content of the message.
Therefore: When personally relevant the quality of the argument was more important. Central route as a need to elaborate When not personally relevant the person presenting the information was important peripheral route

Question 21

what is a weakness of the Elaberation-Likelihood Model?

Answer 21

It doesn’t explain how persuasive message affect attitude and behaviour it offers detailed descriptions of the 2 routes but does not address how they work