lecture 4 attitude change and persuasion Flashcards
the yale attitude change approach
attitude change depends on ‘who’ says ‘what’ to ‘whom’
‘who’ yale attitude change approach
source of communication ie
credibility
attractiveness - physically, personality, similarity to audience
likeability
competency - expertise?
trustworthy - willing to report truthfully w/o compromise
‘what’ attitude change approach
the method of communication used ie percieved intention (if no intent then great persuade), method of presentation (primacy/recency), the argument (bias/objective- ie able to refute opponent), arousal and affect
‘whom’ attitude change approach
personality and audience expectations distractability positive mood low intelligence (high ses and iq more deloperative and central processing - want to exert cog effort) mod self esteem 18-25 years
dual route model of persuasion
petty and cacioppo 1986
persuasion is dependent on the route taken when listening to an attitude/opinion ie central or peripheral route
central route dual route
source message strong, compelling and has lots of evidence, think critically
audience actively and deeply processing the info
high ability and motivation to elaborate on what listening to
persuasion is enduring
peripheral route dual route
source/message more influenced by length and who is delivering speech (not swayed by logic)
audience focus on surface message - superficial processing
low ability and motivation to listen ie not personally relevant
little persuasion/short term
chaiken persuasion of student attitudes
brochure persuade and manipulate attitude
- relevant or irrelevant topic (term structure)
- likeability of source (author preference of uni with others)
- irrelevant info - students influenced by likeability of source and length of arguement
- relevant info - influences by arguements given not by the likeability of the source
what is attitude training
weirs et al 2011
trying to change rigid implicit attitudes towards unhealthy lifestyles ie alcoholism - associate with negative images or avoidance (push away when see) - weirs et al 2011
appears to form lower recidivism rates in addicts
problem with attitude training research
only publish research that is significant and therefore cannot reliably conclude the usefulness of attitude training
cogntiive dissonance theory
festinger 1957
people are motivated to maintain cognitive consistency eading to irrational/maladaptive behaviours
when there is a dissociation between what think/know and what people actually do - will try to justify behaviour by changing their behaviour and remove inconsistency
commit self to action when inconsistent makes unpleasant tension
compliance to attitudes
surface change i nbehaviour and expressed attitudes in response to request/influence/presence of others
may be explicit or implicit - urged to respond in a desired way
bem self perception theory
attitude change doesnt result from dissonance but simply inference of attitude from behaviour
interpret ambiguity by refering to own behaviour in different situations
ciadini compliance principle ‘consensus’/’commitment’
gain compliance by getting people to commit to first request - therefore continue to commit to bigger requests (feel committed to say yes again)
people feel driven by need to be consistent with previous behaviours
first request must be minimally invasive so get affirmative response
ciadini commitment foot in the door technique
freedman and fraser 1966
when asked a few simple questions vs complex, sig more likely to allow 6+ people into home to do thorough inventory of household products
resistance to change: attitute inoculation - mcguire 1964
exposure to small contra-arguments ‘immunises’ people to not be easilt persuaded when later exposed to strongly contradicting arguments
brehm 1966 reactance theory
when freedom to perform a certain behaviour is threatened - more likely to perform that behaviour to reinstate the sense of freedom/choice ie rebelling against rules in society
i
hovland and weiss 1951 credibility
‘who’ Yale att change
read speach either by american physicist or written by soviet propaganda newspaper advocating the development of nuclear submarines
greater agreement when thought to be written by physicist
tripp et al 1994 trustworthiness
‘who’ yale att change
more wary of people who try to persuade for own gain
ie the more a celebrity endorses a product the less trustworthy they appear
chaiken 1979 appearance
‘who’ yale att change
41% people sign petition for attractive>32% for less attractive endorser
mackie et al 1990 similarity
‘who’ yale att change
students read strong/weak speach by own student or diff uni student
greater persuasion when own
miller and campbell primacy and recency
what yale att change
primacy - more influenced by what hear first when there is a delay following both arguements
recency - more influenced by what last hear when delay between arguements
londau et al 2004 fear arousal
what yale att change
students more supportive of President Bush when reminded of own mortality/exposed to 9/11 Images
keller 1999 fear arousal
what yale att change
fear messages are only persuasive if contains reassuring advice on how to cope with the threat/danger otherwise panic and tune out message
mather and chattopadhyay 1991 positive affect
what yale att change
prefer commercial when follows upbeat programme > sad
positivity thought to activate peripheral route of persuasion - not focus on bad intent?
petty et al 1998 central route
if forewarned about tendency to agree wit communicator who is likelable then over correct and majority sgree with undesirable speaker
elaboration likelihood model
petty et al 2009
source > audience > high opp + motivation/ low opp + motivation > central / peripheral
festinger and carlsmith 1959
cognitive dissonance
pps given $20 or $1 to lie to next pps that study fun - dont think study fun
those who given $1 report greater internal atttiudinal change - actually enjoyed- than those given $20
$1 insufficient justification for behaviour
alternative ways to reduce cognitive dissonance
rationalise that others are also hypocrites
deny personal responsibility for beh
trivialise the issue
change att to match beh
bern 1967 self perception theory
observers read step by step study on cog dissonance and asked to predict the results
- same info but no personal conflict
predict correctly - suggests dissonance not needed for attitude change
cialdini 2004 reciprocity
norm that obliges us to repay others what we recieved from them
build trust and equality
cialdini 2004 reciprocity door in the face technique
precede a desired request with one so extreme it is likely to be reected
feel normative need to reciprocate agents demands with demand of own and move to compliance with desire
cialdini 2004 social norms
look for norms in gaining understanding of how to behave in ambigous situations
brehm reactance theory
pennebaker and sanders 1976
reaction in bathroom to one of two signs
1. please dont write on these walls
2. do not write on these walls under any circumstances
2nd increase graffiti
