Class Notes (834,585)
Canada (508,623)
Psychology (4,206)
PSY274H5 (129)

PSY274 Nov 5 Human Comm. & Understanding .docx

6 Pages
Unlock Document

Craig Chambers

PSY274 Nov 5 i) Communication things about brands BUILDING ASSOCIATIONS Branding Goal: build an ASSOCIATION between a brand and particular qualities/”feelings” e.g., apple? Goodyear? Pepsi? Mercedes? Fido? – setting up an identity. Ways to link associations to brands… Brand naming: Revisiting ARBITRARINESS: - sound pattern for a given concept is generally arbitrary - BUT: some sounds or sound combinations seem to “fit” better than others for certain concepts Timex is better in a tech name, greenex, farmex, healthex are not suitable for a tech name Snapple, grug cant be the name of this. Iconicity in speech sounds i.) acoustic iconicity (onomatopoeic words) swoosh, crash, etc. ii.) articulatory iconicity rigid/soft things small/big things what is the basis of the impression? e.g., KIKI vs. BOORA – the kuh sound is a sharp sound that correlates with the sharp edges picture, so we can say that it can be consistent with the left image. While BOORA sounds smooth reflecting the right image. Sounds articulated is the basis that kiki is left and boora is right. - consonant sounds - those that fully stop the flow of air: choppy airflow – jagged edges? - those that do not fully impede airflow: smooth edges? Another example: - vowel sounds - bleef vs blawf - vowel sounds produced with comparatively narrowed oral cavity (e.g., “ee” sound)  little things - vowel sounds produced with comparatively open oral cavity (e.g., “aw” sound)  big things iii.) associative iconicity (phonaesthemes) e.g., sn- gl- fl- , sniffle snowboard, glow glee glare language specifc you cant find it in different languages. (language-specific, not general) overall implications: if people are sensitive to these pattern, brand naming should take them into account. Another incidental source of “meaning” in brand names: The company a word keeps. Lexical neighborhood (similar-sounding words) e.g., “DARK” dart, hark, Darth, dork, darn, bark, Dirk, lark, Mark… Hearing/reading a word may subconsciously “activate” meanings of similar- sounding words. Bad naming, undesirable features. The Ford Edsel (late 1950s) Lexical neighbors? Pretzel, dead cell, hard sell you cant associate these with these words. Compare with “Apple” Applaud, application, appeal, ripple Conclusion: Brand names (even made-up names) can indirectly “inherit” meanings due to abstract SOUND MEANING associations OR the meanings of SIMILAR- SOUNDING WORDS. (can be both a good and bad thing for an advertiser) - many products/services not easily differentiable in terms of meaningful/objective features - consequence for advertisers: must CREATE differences in mind of consumer - Create associations between product/brand and specific concepts relating to lifestyle/happiness/status/satisfaction, etc. - Language can be one means to do this. PERSUASION - humans are COOPERATIVE language users (e.g., turn-taking, common ground and perspective-taking, the balance between speaker economy and auditor economy, etc.) - this is also reflected in how we interpret the content of sentences: we routinely “fill in” information that is not explicitly communicated. Fred returned the book to the library Zelda is getting a divorce Valerie’s cellphone rang loudly in the middle of the lecture This “filling in” process =INFERENCE (adding information beyond what is explicitly provided) How robust is this process? Smashed – the result is when we say smash it is generally faster assumptions of how fast the motorcycle when it smashed the truck. We can get inferences with these words HIT and SMASH. Loftus & Palmer - showed film of 2 cars in an accident - viewers estimate of spped were higher when less neutral terms such as smashed were used in question Loftus Miller & Burns (1978) 1. did you see any blood? 2. When you saw the broken glass, did you see any blood? Loftus & Zani (1975) Did you see the/a broken headlight? Cooperation, exploited by this language, produce certain characteristics. Cooperative behavior, draw people infer how persuasion can happen. Inferences in language – 2 major types Presuppositions - the filled-in/added information is something we “have to” assume in order for the sentence to actually make sense. Implicatures - the filled-in/added information is optional and is added according to our assessment of what is plausible or relevant. - There are typically many implicatures that could in principle be generated from a sentence, and the one(s) we choose tend to depend on context. Presupposition: “Fred returned the book to the library”  someone must have taken a book out previously. “Zelda is getting a divorce”  she must currently be married. A “test” for presupposition: Follow up with a second sentence denying the information inferred in the first one. The result will sound CONTRADICTORY. e.g., “Fred returned the book to the library, But, the book was never taken out in the first place”. Implicature “valerie’s cellphone rang loudly in the middle of the lecture”.  she probably made some attempt to silence it. A “test” for implicature: Follow up with a second sentence denying the information inferred in the first one. The result may be surprising or sound odd, but will not be contradictory. e.g., “Valerie’s cellphone rang loudly in the middle of the lecture. She didn’t even make an attempt to silence it.” Human communication = characterized by automatic process of “fillin in”, in part with infer
More Less

Related notes for PSY274H5

Log In


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.