Class Notes (808,703)
Canada (493,376)
Psychology (3,816)
PSYC 2310 (443)
Saba Safdar (370)

CHAPTER 7.docx

9 Pages
Unlock Document

University of Guelph
PSYC 2310
Saba Safdar

CHAPTER 7: PERSUASION  Persuasion= communication that is designed to influence a person‟s attitudes and behaviour. METHODS OF INVESTIGATION  Controlled experiment- Ad: provides context for addressing whether or not an effect is real and which theoretical account explains it. Dd: eliminate other sources of influence.  Participant Observation- when researchers become an observer and participant of the situation and learn the dynamic of the setting. HOW DO WE PROCESS PERSUASIVE MESSAGES?  Smith & Shaffer- Asked participants to listen to a speech supposedly made by another student. Condition 1) speech had strong arguments, 2) didn‟t > weak arguments at normal speed lease persuaded. But speed made a difference at first. ROUTES TO PERSUASION  Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)- Petty & Cacioppo:  Central/systematic route= when people think carefully about communication message and are influenced by the strength of arguments.  Peripheral/heuristic route= don‟t think carefully and are influenced by superficial characteristics.  Factors that influence type of route used;  High ability/motivation > Central route and vice versa.  Ability to focus: Petty- found those who had no distraction were persuaded by strong messages but not by weak.  Motivation to focus: if you are uninvolved or uninterested in message so are likely to rely on peripheral cues (associated with context of message rather than content). Howard- found when participant‟s involvement with a message as low were more persuaded by familiar phrases than by literal phrases.  Peripheral cues also include the presumed expertise of the person delivering the message: Petty- students listened to a speaker promoting benefits of mandatory exams for all students, 3 IV: 1) expertise of speaker 2) message strength 3) personal involvement > primary factor that predicted attitude was expertise of speaker.  Hafer, Reynolds and Obertynski- varied argument strength, word complexity and source status > found when arguments were easy to comprehend attitudes were more favourable when the arguments were strong. WHICH ROUTE IS MORE EFFECTIVE?  Messages high of personal relevance motivate us to pay attention so use central route.  Messages low of personal relevance are processed peripherally.  Attitude change that is based in central route processing is longer lasting and more resistant to future persuasion efforts. WHAT FACTORS INFLUENCE PERSUASION?  Liberman & Chaiken- Participants (those who drank coffee and those who didn‟t) had to evaulaute article > those who drank coffee found the strong and weak reports much less convincing > found information personally relevant- were threatened-processed info in defensive way. SOURCE: WHO DELIVERS THE MESSAGE  Attractiveness: Eagly & Chaiken- attractive people were successful in getting signatures 41% of the time compared to 32% > partly because attractive people are seen to have positive qualities.  Similarity: we remember message presented by in-group members better than those presented by outgroup member. More persuaded by people we identify with. Dal Cin- found greater identification with the smoking protagonist predicted stronger associations between the self and smoking and increase smokers intention to smoke.  Silva- Students who believed they shared a first name and birth date with author of essay rated their agreement with the essay 6.18 compared to 4.19.  Credibility: competent and trustworthy. People who argue unexpected positions are especially persuasive because they are seen as highly credible. Eagly, Wood & Chaiken- when speech was delivered by pro-businessman candidate it was most persuasive because he was seemed most sincere and credible and environmentalist seen as biased. Non-credible sources can become more persuasive over time because people forget who the source is= sleeper effect. CONTENT OF MESSAGE  Length: long messages are more effective if they are strong and processed centrally but less effective if weak and processed peripherally, and vice versa.  Stealing the thunder: lawyers volunteer the weaknesses in their own case, reduces impact of negative info.  Discrepancy: between the message and the audience‟s original attitude > messages that differ excessively from people‟s attitudes are likely to be ignored > this helps to explain why attitudes become more extreme over time as people gather support for own beliefs and ignore other stuff.  Audience: Individual factors; age, gender and personality traits.  Demographic factors= Those in late adolescent most influenced by persuasive messages. Lips- men and women use different strategies to influence others > men use direct and assertive strategies. Reason for this difference is social expectations.  Personality= „self-monitoring‟ > changing attitudes and behaviour to fit situation. People regulate their behaviour either by focusing on their ideals, wishes or aspirations and avoiding negative outcomes. Yi- Messages emphasising positive outcomes were more persuasive for those who focused on positive outcomes. People who focused on avoiding negative outcomes were more influenced by messages by presenting a negative outcome. Also people‟s need to think about things affects personality > people who have a high need for cognition are more persuaded by strong message. SIX PRINCIPLES OF PERSUASION  Cialdini; found the key to successful influence is what we do before attempting to influence. 1. Reciprocation= we comply with requests of those who have previously done us a favour.  Berry & Kanouse- sent questionnaire to physicians: some received letter saying if you complete the questionnaire they will get a $20 cheque, other half received the check with the questionnaire > 78% who received check completed questionnaire and sent it back, those that were told the cheque would be sent upon completion 66%.  This is known as door-in-the-face technique (or reciprocal concessions procedure)  Cialdini- Chaperoning juvenile delinquents at a zoo > most are not willing to help. However, when asked are they willing to give 3 hours of their time every week for 2 years to juvenile delinquency (response „no‟) followed up by asking if they would be willing to chaperone juvenile delinquents at the zoo > say yes as don‟t feel comfortable saying no twice. 2. Social Validation= we comply if others similar to us are.  Based on Social Comparison Theory (Festinger).  We follow the lead on many others and similar others.  Milgram, Bickman & Berkowitz- found when one person was looking up 47% of participants looked up at the empty sport, but when there were 6 people already looking up, 84% looked up. 3. Consistency= Once we take a position we tend to comply with requests consistent with this position (commitment).  This is an example of Cognitive Dissonance (Festinger).  This is an example of foot-in-the-door technique.  Pliner, Hart, Kohl & Sarri- study on charity donation: sent research assistant a month before annual drive to collect money for charity, sent to houses in Toronto to ask residence to wear pins they were providing > majority accepted these pins. 1 month later the actual fund started fund raising. Communities where they had been visited and given pins 76% donated compared to 46% who did not receive a pin.  Legitimixation-of-paltry-favours (or even a penny would help) technique.  “How are you feeling?” technique. Always publically committed that your ok when you answer that you are feeling good (i.e. on the phone) > significant increase in people who contribute once they have passed through these techniques. 4. Friendship/Liking= One is more likely to comply with the requests of friends or other liked individuals.  Tupperware Corporation  Stella & Dot Products  To increase friendship/liking: if someone is similar (you tend to comply with their request more). Compliments. Cooperation (people cooperate with you - tend to like them). Physical attractiveness (those that are> we think they are intelligent, kind and we can trust them). 5. Authority= One complies to the request of someone who is legitimate authority.  6. Scarcity= we value opportunities and products that are less available.  Sources of power scarcity: o Scarcity means better q
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 2310

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

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

Sign up

Join to view


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.