|
|||||
|
Persuasion
Theories
last updated 8/14/2014
I. Cognitive Response - Rational Theories (mental processing)
A. Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
(AP 3 &
4 )
1.The
Two Routes to Persuasion - Persuasion depends on receiver motivation to think/care,
that is, personal
relevance of the issue and ability to think about the persuasive topic.
a. Peripheral
route - receivers have low attention, little processing, less persistent (1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
b. Central route
- receivers consider the merits [much elaboration]. This is the
same as the Rational Model below (1)
(2)
(3)
B.
Rational Model
--
Persuasion is thinking through the issue and figuring out what makes sense
for you, the audience member - Aristotle/traditional rhetoric
centers on this
(AP 3 & 4) 1. a. b.
2. a. b. 3.
4.
B + V &/or M = attitude - - -
> behavior ( This model assumes: ) a. credible sources for beliefs b. incentive to act c. reflectivity on the part of the receiver
II.
Learning
Theories Persuasion is really just a version of learning the
desired response to persuasive efforts (often using conditioning and prestige suggestion)
A. Hovland's Learning Theory
1.
2.
3.
4.
B. McGuire’s - 2 Stage Theory
1. reception stage -
2. yielding stage -
C. Identity Emotive Model 1.
2.
3.
4.
III. Consistency Theories - Inconsistent cognitions create pressure for (mental) change, thus persuasion.
A. Balance theory - Heider 1.
Valance of relationships
(positive or negative) between Source, Cognition, & Receiver
S / \ C ------ R
2. Premises a. imbalance is unpleasant b. we're "driven" to reduce imbalance
in some ways c. Methods of coping with imbalance (1) (2) (3) (4) 3. 4. Strengths of the model a. b. 5. Weakness of the model a. b. c.
B. Congruity Theory - Osgood's improvement on balance model. When a source favors a concept favorability of source and concept move toward each other on the -3 to +3 persuasion continuum.
C. Cognitive Dissonance:
Leon Festinger This is one of the most researched persuasion theories. Festinger took Osgood's theory and concluded that the receiver's view of the source is just one more kind of "cognition."
1.
Cognitions can have three relationships
a.
dissonant
b.
consonant
c.
irrelevant --
and dissonance causes tension ---> pressure for change.
2.
Methods of coping with imbalance
a.
seek social support or evidence for our preferred opinion
b.
misperceive source's position
c.
compartmentalize the difference
d.
attempt to change the source's view
3.
Case 1 -- Decisions
(e.g. choice of car)
4.
Case 2 - Involuntary exposure to counter information --
dissonance is high if: a. b. and c.
5.
Case 3 - Social support (Confronting a source who
disagrees with you) Dissonance is high
if:
a.
the person is highly liked
b.
the issue is important
c. note sleeper and boomerang effects
6.
Case 4 -- Forced compliance - offer rewards for doing
something disliked (or punishments)
a.
when reward is low; persuasion is high if act is done
b.
when reward is high; persuasion is high if act is NOT done
c.
Note the effect of rhetorical overkill
d.
self persuasion again is at work e. if source is disliked but you go along, higher persuasion
A. Social Judgment Theory - assimilation & contrast
1. When persuasive effort falls within the
latitude of acceptance, change occurs (like congruity)
2. When persuasive effort falls in the latitude of rejection, a contrast effect occurs - boomerang
3. size of latitudes is influenced by centrality of belief & attitude.
B. Attribution Theory - how we attribute motives, actions, affects our
interpretations and, thus, persuades
1.
2.
3.
V. Fishbein-Ajzen Theory
of Reasoned Action -- Behavior-Attitude
Discrepancy
A. behavior is the result of attitude toward
object AND
B. attitude toward
behavior
C. and behavior involves belief/attitude
complexes 1. Will the behavior accomplish what I want, 2. Will I risk something, 3. Are there constraints on my actions, 4. Do I have the knowledge of how to act, 5. Are there competing values, 6. Have I made public commitments that
influence my action,
7.
inertia, etc. D.
Persuasion is the result of an implicit or explicit
“cost-benefit
analysis.”
|