Attitudes and Persuasion

Attitudes and Persuasion Chapter 7

Persuasion and Attitude Change 1. A Two-Process Approach to Persuasion Elaboration-Likelihood Model Heuristic-Systematic Model Heuristic/Peripheral - the person primarily attends to superficial aspects of the message Systematic/Central - the person thinks carefully and deliberately about the content of the message

Elaboration-Likelihood Model Nonverbal cues important Message unimportant, uninteresting Heuristic processing Argument strength unimportant Peripheral Route Nonverbal cues unimportant Message important, interesting Systematic processing Argument strength important Central Route

Petty, Cacioppo & Goldman, 1981

Factors Influencing Information Processing • We tend to use systematic processing when: • we are strongly motivated • accuracy motivation • impression motivation • defensive motivation • we have a high ability to do so • We tend to use heuristic processing when: • we are unmotivated • we lack the ability to systematically process info

Persuasion and Attitude Change 2. The Who, What, and Whom of Persuasion a. source characteristics sleeper effect - occurs when messages from unreliable sources initially exert little influence but later cause individuals’ attitudes to shift b. message characteristics c. receiver characteristics

Source and Message Characteristics • Important Nonverbal Cues • Attractiveness • Credibility • expertise • trustworthiness • Speaking style • Important Message Characteristics • High quality message • Vivid information • Identifiable victim effect • if audience is skeptical- use two-sided message

Receiver Characteristics • Need for Cognition • Mood • Age

Is Resistance Futile? Audience Effects • reactance- adopting opposite attitudes • forewarning- prior knowledge of persuasion • increase arguments for and counterarguments against • selective avoidance- avoid contradictory info. • channel surf, tune out certain info. • biased assimilation- perceive information that disconfirms our views as unreliable • attitude polarization- interpret mixed evidence in ways that strengthen existing views

Summary: ELM Audience Processing Persuasion Analytical & Motivated High effort Elaborate Agree Counter- argue Strong arguments cause enduring agreement Central Route Persuasive Appeal Response Not analytical or involved Low effort: Use peripheral cues, heuristics Cues trigger liking & acceptance Peripheral Route

Behavioral Approach to Attitude Change 1. Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957) states that inconsistencies between a person’s thoughts, sentiments, and actions create an aversive emotional state (dissonance) that leads to efforts to restore consistency • Dissonance can occur in a number of ways • Selecting between two reasonably attractive alternatives • Justifying effort • Engaging in counterattitudinal behavior 2. Experiencing and Reducing Dissonance a. Decisions and Dissonance

Brehm’s Consumer Products Study Asked participants to rate a bunch of consumer products. Offered participants a choice between two items Experimental group – offered the two items participants had rated closest in attractiveness (High Dissonance). Control group – offered two items not close in attractiveness (Low Dissonance). After 20 minutes, asked participants to rate products again. Predictions?

Aronson and Mills (1959) Recruited women to participate in discussion about sex (remember it is the ’50s. 3 conditions: mild initiation, severe initiation, control. In initiation conditions, participants told they had to pass a test to be in discussion group. Mild initiation – read a list of mild words and romantic passage from novel to experimenter. Severe initiation – read a list of explicit words and pornographic passage to experimenter. All people were told they passed but the discussion had already started. They were allowed to listen in on headphones to VERY boring conversation. Who do you think liked the discussion more? Why?

Predicting Attitudes From Behavior b. Effort Justification - tendency to reduce dissonance by finding reasons for why you have devoted time, effort, or money for something that turned out to be disappointing Aronson and Mills (1959) ‘initiation experiment’ Cooper (1980) study on effort justification in psychotherapy

Gerard and Mathewson (Replication) Told participants they were signing up for a group that would discuss morals on campus. Initiation participants told they would have to pass some tests to see how inhibited they were. Tests included receiving mild or severe electric shocks (3X). Noninitiation participants went through same tests but didn’t believe they were joining group. Participants were told they had either passed the test or had to wait a few days for the results. Everyone then listened to the VERY boring conversation Here is what happened…

Cooper (1980) Hypothesized that the “suffering” involved in psychotherapy is what makes people believe in its effectiveness. Recruited women who felt they had assertiveness problems. Told they would receive $2 for participating. Upon arrival, receptionist either: Reminded them their participation was completely voluntary, or Did not remind them of their free choice. One group experienced behavioral therapy (identified problem situations and practiced being assertive). Other group exercised on treadmill (told exercise helped assertiveness). When they were finished, receptionist only paid them a dollar. Who do you think was more assertive in asking for other dollar?

Predicting Attitudes From Behavior c. Induced Compliance and Attitude Change induced (forced) compliance - subtly compelling individuals to behave in a manner that is inconsistent with their beliefs, attitudes, or values, which typically leads to dissonance and often to a change in their original attitudes or values in order to reduce their dissonance Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) experiment on forced compliance

$20 $1 Induced Compliance Study Told next person tasks were fun and interesting Asked how much they enjoyed experiment Boring Tasks Told next person tasks were fun and interesting

Fig. 8.5

Predicting Attitudes From Behavior 3. When Does Inconsistency Produce Dissonance? a. free choice b. insufficient justification c. negative consequences d. foreseeable consequences

Linder, Cooper, and Jones Had participants write counterattitudinal essays. 2X2 Design Condition 1 high vs. low choice Condition 2 high vs. low monetary incentive Experiment 1 essay topic – allowing communists on campus Experiment 2 essay topic – curfews on campus

Cooper and Worchel Used Festinger and Carlsmith procedure. In response to lie about how fun the experiment was, person being lied to said either: This experiment will probably be boring like all the others. Or I’m glad this one will be fun. I’m looking forward to it. Which participants will show most attitude change?

Reducing Cognitive Dissonance • Ways to reduce dissonance • Direct methods • change attitude to be consistent with behavior • “diets don’t really work anyway” • acquire supporting information • “many overweight people live long healthy lives” • trivialize the behaviors in question • “looking thin is not all that important” • Indirect methods • restore positive self-evaluations • “I like the way I look, regardless of my weight” • distractions

Study Smarter: Student Website • http://www.wwnorton.com/socialpsych Chapter Reviews Diagnostic Quizzes Vocabulary Flashcards Apply It! Exercises

Attitudes and Persuasion