1 / 40

Introduction to Theories of Communication Effects: Emotional Appeals

Introduction to Theories of Communication Effects: Emotional Appeals With special emphasis on Fear Appeals. A service of the Communication Science & Research Resource Group. Persuasive Appeals. Aristotle – 3 Means to Persuasion LOGOS Logic/Reasoning ETHOS Ethics/Credibility

eve-vinson
Download Presentation

Introduction to Theories of Communication Effects: Emotional Appeals

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Introduction to Theories of Communication Effects: Emotional Appeals With special emphasis on Fear Appeals A service of the Communication Science & Research Resource Group

  2. Persuasive Appeals Aristotle – 3 Means to Persuasion LOGOS Logic/Reasoning ETHOS Ethics/Credibility PATHOS Emotion/Passion

  3. Example of Pathos Appeal • Positive Emotions • Altruism • Love • Humor • Negative Emotions • Guilt • Pity • Anger • Fear

  4. Positive Appeals • Work for brand recall • Biases Processing • Sympathy / Altruism – Feel sympathy in response to emotional appeal

  5. Negative Appeals • Guilt • Anger • Fear

  6. Fear Appeals (Health Risk Message) • Will this message work?

  7. Fear Appeals (Health Risk Message) • How About • This one?

  8. Fear Appeals (Health Risk Message) • This one?

  9. Fear Appeals (Health Risk Message) • This one?

  10. Health Risk Messages (Fear Appeals) – Two Components • A Threat Component • Severity of Threat - is it serious or severe? (magnitude of threat) • Susceptibility to Threat - can it happen to me? (possibility of experiencing threat) • A Recommended Response (addresses efficacy issues) • Response Efficacy - does response work? • Self-Efficacy - can I do response? • Barriers to Self-Efficacy - what blocks me from doing response? • Target of Threat Key

  11. How it Works

  12. Outcomes Predicted by the Model

  13. Threat determines Strength of ResponseEfficacy determines Nature of Response

  14. Individually-targeted fear appeals were more frightening than family-targeted fear appeals for members of individualist cultures. Family-targeted fear appeals were more frightening than Individually-targeted fear appeals for members of collectivist cultures.

  15. Applications • Materials Testing and Evaluation • Program Development • HIV Counseling and Testing • Systematic Formative Evaluation, Message Design, Summative Evaluation.

  16. Materials Evaluation

  17. Sample Focus Group Protocol [THREAT - SEVERITY] Question 1. Do any harmful or negative consequence come from being infected with HIV according to these messages? Please explain. Question 2. Do any harmful or negative consequence come from actually getting the disease AIDS according to these messages? Please explain. [THREAT - SUSCEPTIBILITY] Question 3. What level of risk for you getting infected with HIV is implied in these materials? Probe 1. Does it make you feel like you might get infected? Why or why not? Probe 2. Do you think it might make your friends or family members feel like they could get infected? Why or why not? [EFFICACY - RESPONSE EFFICACY] Question 4. What kinds of responses do these materials recommend to prevent HIV/AIDS? Probe 1. Do you think these responses are effective in preventing HIV infection? Why or why not? Probe 2. Do you think your friends or family would think these responses are effective in preventing HIV infection? Why or why not? [EFFICACY - SELF-EFFICACY] Question 5. Do these materials address one's ability to use the recommended responses? Why or why not? Probe 1. Do these materials make you feel like you can successfully use the recommended responses? Why or why not? Probe 2. Do you think these materials would make your friends or family believe they were able to use them? Why or why not?

  18. Program Development (Formative Research) • FLOWCHART OF FOCUS GROUP PARTICIPANTS' BELIEFS AND BEHAVIORS • High Threat/ -----> Fear Control -----> Fatalism • Low Efficacy Processes Denial • Perceptions Defensive Avoidance • Juju Causes Disease • Reactance (perceive manipulation • from whites or government)

  19. Program Development for EE Program in Ethiopia

  20. Examine Theoretical Variables

  21. From Formative Research, Create Table of Beliefs Category of Beliefs Results of Formative Res. BELIEFS TO CHANGE BELIEFS TO REINFORCE BELIEFS TO INTRODUCE AUDIENCE PROFILE

  22. Journey of Life Results

  23. Journey of Life Results

  24. Journey of Life Results Baseline Summative

  25. HIV Counseling and Testing • RISK BEHAVIOR DIAGNOSIS SCALE • A Rapid Assessment Tool • Determines whether danger control or fear control processes are dominating • A Quick 12-item template scale

  26. HIV Counseling and Testing Define Threat= HIV/AIDS Define Recommended Response: Use Condoms Strongly Strongly Disagree Agree RE 1. Condoms are effective in preventing HIV/AIDS infection: 1 2 3 4 5 RE 2. Condoms work in preventing HIV/AIDS infection: 1 2 3 4 5 RE 3. If I use condoms, I am less likely to get infected with HIV/AIDS: 1 2 3 4 5 SE 4. I am able to use condoms to prevent getting infected with HIV/AIDS : 1 2 3 4 5 SE 5. I am capable of using condoms to prevent HIV/AIDS infection: 1 2 3 4 5 SE 6. I can easily use condoms to prevent HIV/AIDS infection: 1 2 3 4 5 SEff___ ******************************************************************************************************************* Strongly Strongly Disagree Agree SEV 7. I believe that HIV/AIDS infection is severe: 1 2 3 4 5 SEV 8. I believe that getting HIV/AIDS has serious negative consequences: 1 2 3 4 5 SEV 9. I believe that getting HIV/AIDS is extremely harmful: 1 2 3 4 5 SUSC 10. It is possible that I will get HIV/AIDS: 1 2 3 4 5 SUSC 11. I am at risk for getting HIV/AIDS: 1 2 3 4 5 SUSC 12. It is likely that I will get HIV/AIDS: 1 2 3 4 5 SThr_____

  27. On-The-Spot Theoretically Based Messages

  28. Message Design Strategies

  29. Develop High Threat/High Efficacy Message • A high threat message is: • personalistic • vivid (language and pictures) • A high efficacy message: • explains how to do the recommended response • addresses barriers to recommended response • gives evidence of recommended response’s effectiveness • may role play recommended response

  30. Give Explicit Recommended Response

  31. Low Threat Picture High Threat Picture

  32. Target population: White, heterosexual young adults (18-22), living in Orange County, California. Low Threat Moderate Threat High Threat

  33. Example

  34. Evaluation

  35. Summary • High Threat messages Work, as long as Perceived Efficacy is High too • There are many kinds of Threats • Integrated Theoretically-Based Research/Program Works!

  36. Looking ahead Next Week: Review, Synthesis, GRADUATION!

  37. The End

  38. Example of Logos Appeal Logical or Rational Appeals Deduction -- reasoning from general to specific Induction -- reasoning from specific to general Syllogism is deductive reasoning. For example, Major Premise If all A is B, and Minor Premise if all C is A, then Conclusion all C is B

  39. Example of Ethos Appeal • Credibility • Trustworthiness • Competence • Dynamism • Liking • Physical Attractiveness • Similarity • Disliked communicators when have choice

More Related