PERSUASION & ATTITUDE CHANGE (FEAR BASED MESSAGES (PROTECTION…
PERSUASION & ATTITUDE CHANGE
FEAR BASED MESSAGES
JANIS & FESHBACH 1953
Dentists > low fear, moderate fear, high fear. Greater effect with low fear. inverse relationship
LEVENTHAL, WATTS & PAGANO, 1967
Quitting smoking. High fear condition showed greater willingness to stop
KELLER & BLOCK, 1995
in line with dual models of info processing, as fear increases so does attention, arousal and interest, however too high and the factual message is missed due to panic or anxiety.
PROTECTION MOTIVATION THEORY
THREAT APPRAISAL + COPING APPRAISAL (
BLASCOVICH'S BIOPSYCHOSOCIAL MODEL OF CHALLENGE & THREAT, 2008
DE WIT & STROEBE, 2003
How vulnerable am I?
How severe is the risk?
Once people accept there is a risk (1st), they are more likely to follow a health recommendation (2nd)
THE MESSAGE & MEDIUM
CHAIKEN & EAGLEY, 1983
Video > Audio > Written
Moderating factor is comprehension and whether simple or not. Simple? video sufficed, Complex? written is best
SASSENBERG & BOOS, 2003
study on computer mediated attitude change
KELMAN & HOVLAND, 1953
onCe a message is received, the argument becomes more enduring. the sleeper effect predicts that the message survives in memoty but the source doesn't.
MODERATOR VARIABLES; a causes b but only when c is present
susceptibility to attitude change is high in early adulthood
TYLER & SHULLER, 1991
age is irrelevant to attitude change
lifelong openness hypothesis
VISSER & KROSNICK'S 1998
life stages hypothesis
lower susceptibility during middle adulthood
from work on development of prejudice, negative attitudes towards ethnic and national outgroups are crystallised from around the age of 10.
- the tendency to notice, refute and regard as weak, arguments that contradict our prior beliefs
important in both attitude change and formation.
DUCK, HOGG & TERRY 1999
High student identifiers acknowledged impact of AIDs advert
Low student identifiers showed
third person effect
(I'm not affected)
WHO IS PERSUADED? AUDIENCE
persuasibility & self esteem is curvilinear, so
self esteem are easily persuadable
self esteem not so much due to self assurance,
would be less attentive or more anxious when processing message..
;If female reader, tentative, males more persuaded
If male reader, tentative or assertive, equally persuasive,
eliciting fear - it must be dangerous
elicit guilt by being viewed as morally respectable
elicit pity by helplessness
getting others to like you so they comply more easily
CIALDINI, 1975, PATCH, 1986
contrast of larger request first
CIALDINI ET AL., 1978
is getting confirmation then telling them the bad news, e.g. appointment for a study, then after they say yes, being told its at 7am. 56% compliance vs 31%.
greater compliance from those who had received a favour; guilt eliciting
self perception theory
; people see themselves as more 'giving' having completed one small task before complying to a larger task (foot-in-the-door technique). compels them to be
action research > using housewives to discuss new unusual heart food and kidneys increased action by 29% if not talked at.
people will change their ideas to make them 'consistent' with their behaviour
DUAL PROCESS THEORY
PETTY & CACIOPPO, 1986
ELM - Elaboration Likelihood Model
If the arguments of a message are followed closely
May even indulge in counter arguments internally
SPENDING COGNITIVE POWER ON THE MESSAGE
superficial whim; cognitive miser
HSM - Heuristic-Systematic Model
heuristic methods of processing, eg; 'longer argments may be stronger'
PETTY & WEGENER, 1998
sufficiency threshold, when heuristics turn to more systematic processing -when we lack sufficient confidence in the message, we need to know more
GEORGE & BELCH, 2012
through classical conditioning, product paired with good mood (music can induce) can become evaluated positively.