Class Notes (836,992)
Canada (510,027)
Brock University (12,126)
Psychology (853)
PSYC 2P30 (63)
Lecture

2p30 March 5.docx

5 Pages
131 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYC 2P30
Professor
Gordon Hodson
Semester
Winter

Description
2P30 March 5 (Contemporary) Cognitive Approaches to Persuasion - traditional approaches revealed much about when and how persuasion happens “Cognitive Response Analysis” - What do people think about when exposed to persuasion attempt? - How do these thoughts and mental processes -> persuasion? Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) 1. Central Route Processing a. When you use: when the message is important, interesting or personally relevant b. When is happens: cognitive elaborations (careful information processing) c. Results: persuaded by the strength/quality of the message 2. Peripheral Route Processing a. When you use: when the message is unimportant not personally relevant b. What happens: shallow information processing; using heuristics c. Result: use persuasion cues (e.g., prestige of the speaking; mood; how handsome he is) rather than cognitive elaboration; message quality less important Examples of Heuristics: - “Experts are to be trusted” - “Consensus implies correctness” - “We agree with people that we like” Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion - chart on Sakai Petty and Cacioppo (1984) - IV 1: exposed Ps to weak or strong arguments, advocating comprehensive exams - IV 2: given 3 or 9 arguments that were either weak or strong o Heuristic: “more arguments means better arguments” - IV 3: low vs. high (i.e. affect you); personal relevance - Low relevance: processed heuristically – processed number of arguments rather than quality of arguments - High relevance: processed quality of arguments Findings and Implication: - Weak argument, when added to strong ones, will weaken the case (reduce persuasion), especially when it’s personally relevant - Central route leads to lasting persuasion - Central route leads to more resistant to additional persuasion attempts - Central route leads to attitude behavioural link strengthened Conclusions: - Central processing requires ability and motivation - Therefore, central less likely to happen - I.e., are “cognitive misers” when more relevant, or when cognitively busy - Two routes can co-occur Cognitive Dissonance Festinger (1957) - Sometimes we change our own attitudes - Tensions created when experiencing dissonance (inconsistency) between: o A) beliefs/attitude o B) beliefs/attitudes vs. behaviours - Focal Element: I smoke cigarettes o Dissonant Element:  Smoothing is a healthy hazard o Consonant Element:  Smoking keeps my weight down How Dissonance Reduction Works: - Alternative to reduce dissonance and restore consonance: o 1. Change attitude (to be consonant with behaviour) o 2. Change behaviour (to be consonant with attitude) o 3. Maintain both the attitude and the behaviours but introduce an additional cognition (to restore consonance between them attitude and behaviour ** Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) - Ps completed a very boring, repetitive task - Upon leaving, asked to tell the next participant that the task very interesting (i.e. a lie) - Given either $1 or $20 for doing so - After, rate the favourability of the task Results: - $1 reward Ps showed higher contentment with the study than the $20 reward Ps - good reason for attitude-discrepant behaviour ($20) -> weak dissonance -> little attitude change - weak reason for attitude-discrepant behaviour ($1) -> strong dissonance -> much attitude change Post-Choice Dissonance - decisions can produce dissonance o when you choose something from your own free will, you’ll convince yourself it was the right/good choice - Brehm study: o Women rate 8 products; no manipulation, simply asking their opinion o Then shown 2 items, told they could keep whichever one they chose o They then rated product again - Result: o Increase positive evaluation of the chosen item, and a decreased evaluation of the item they didn’t choose Self-Perception Theory - Alternative (parsimonious) theory to dissonance theory - Bem (1972) o Observe own behaviour when making attributions o Infer own attitude from own behaviour o How is this different from dissonance theory?  No motivation (or tension) When Self-Perception “Works” - This happens when you consider things/attitudes to be unimportant Changing Behaviour: Influence and Conformity 1. Norms a. Asch line length studies b. Sherif auto-kinect effect studies - shared beliefs about what is the appropriate conduct for a group member - attitudinal and behaviour uniformities that def
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 2P30

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit