The Realm of Communication L8 PDF

Corvinus University of Budapest The Realm of Communication 8th lecture Alexandra Nagy-Béni, PhD  Agenda C OMMU NIC ATION AND INFLU ENC E Key terms and definitions of persuasion Characteristics of persuasion...

Corvinus University of Budapest The Realm of Communication 8th lecture Alexandra Nagy-Béni, PhD  Agenda C OMMU NIC ATION AND INFLU ENC E Key terms and definitions of persuasion Characteristics of persuasion Social Judgement Theory Types of persuasion Creating a persuasive message Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)  Communication and influence Presentation of group projects CommVille Written test 1. 12 Roadmap 8 6 11 7 9 10 5 Nonverbal Dimensions of 3 Written test 2. 2 communication interpersonal relationships Mass (media) 1 Introduction to communication & 4 mass (media) Mass media Introduction to communication & effects II. interpersonal Mass media Overview communication Interpersonal effects I. of the communication Models and semester and culture theories of interpersonal communication Persuasion W HAT LEAPS TO MIND? "To just invent something and have a great idea is a lot of work, but it is not enough. You need to know how to get the people excited" LA RRY PA G E  Selling ideas Ancient times: one of the most critical subjects an educated person could learn Humans wonder just how they come to be influenced by others Mass media: is it capable of influencing?  How rational are you? A. Basically, I'm thinking rationally. B. In general, I’m thinking rationally, but sometimes I make irrational decisions. C. In some topics I am able to think rationally, but usually not. D. I behave irrationally quite often. E. Normally I base my decisions on scarce, irreliable information, trusting my emotions and trying to make not very bad decisions. F. Beneath the surface of rationality, all my decisions are emotional.  How rational are others? A. Basically, people think rationally. B. People usually think rationally, but sometimes they make irrational decisions. C. In some topics, people are able to think rationally, but usually not. D. People very often behave irrationally. E. Normally people base their decisions on scarce, irreliable information, trusting their emotions and trying to make not very bad decisions. F. Beneath the surface of rationality, all their decisions are emotional.  ATTRIBUTIONS SITUATIONAL – An assumption or “story” we make DISPOSITIONAL about another person’s personality, ATTRIBUTION behaviour, or motivation Dispositional attribution is the tendency to overlook the situations FUNDAMENTAL that people are in, and judge their ATTRIBUTION ERROR behavior based on what we assume is their personality The tendency to assume bad behaviour is due to character (ACTOR-OBSERVER instead of circumstance DISTORTION)  N UM BER OF M ESSAGES S PEED A N D BREVITY CON D UCTED V I A I N S TITUTIONS A N D ORG A N IZ ATIONS SUBTLETY COM PLEX I TY A N D M EDIATION D I G I TI Z A TI ON EXCHANGE AMONG MILLIONS Key ways in which OF S T RA NG ERS today’s persuasion differs from EXPOSURE TO BIAS - previous eras CON FI RM I N G I N FORMATION  Some key terms I N F LUENCE: T HE A GEN T SHA LL I N DUCE CHA N GES I N T HE SO CIA L WORLD THROUGH CHA N GING T HE O T HER’S MEN TA L ST A TE A CCO R DING T O T HEIR W I LL Subtypes: convincing, manipulation, forcing Usually they appear in a mixed form  Some key terms CO N VINCING: T HE T A RGET I S A W A RE O F T HE I N TENTION O F I N F LUENCING A N D T HE I N TENTIONAL CO N VINCING SI T UATION FORCING: WHEN THE TARGET IS AWARE OF THE GOAL OF INFLUENCING, DOESN’T AGREE WITH IT, BUT STILL CONFORMS ("I HAD BETTER OBEY")  Some key terms MA N IPULATION: I F THE T A RGET DO ESN’T RECO GNISE T HE I N TENTION O F I N F LUENCING BUT T HE CO MMUNICATOR CA N MO ST P R O B A B LY EX P ECT T HEM T O A CT A CCO RDING LY Used when influencing would give the agent away and forcing is restricted Cons: the target can get immune to all convincing Pros: quick and increases the success in the short run  Some key terms MA N IPULATION: I F THE T A RGET DO ESN’T RECO GNISE T HE I N TENTION O F I N F LUENCING BUT T HE CO MMUNICATOR CA N MO ST P R O B A B LY EX P ECT HI M/HER T O A CT A CCO RDING LY Pejorative connotation: the goals of influencing are bad for the target VS: manipulation by goodwill (e.g., activists) Even if the target IS aware of the influencing intention and means, he/she might not be aware of the psychological mechanisms Influencing vs. persuading GOOD PERS UA S I ON S KI LLS H ELP YOU TO I NFLUENCE OTHERS TO ACHIEVE YOUR G OA LS KEY DIFFEREN CES : A PPROA CH , AW ARENES S , TI M EFRA M E Persuasion TH E PROCES S OF M OTI V A TI N G S OM EON E, TH ROUGH COM M UN I CA TI ON , TO CHANGE A PA RTI CULA R BELI EF, A TTI TUD E, OR BEHAVIOUR  Characteristics of persuasion PERS UA S I ON I S NOT COERCIVE Lasting results cannot be achieved by coercion/forcing PERS UA S I ON IS INTERACTIVE It is not something you do to audience members but rather something you do with them  Characteristics of persuasion PERS UA S I ON CAN BE ETHICAL Many people are uncomfortable with the idea of persuasive speaking (because of unethical speakers) It is through ethical persuasion that we influence others’ lives in worthwhile ways PERS UA S I ON IS INCREMENTAL Persuasion is a process which succeeds over time Demonstrated by the Social Judgement Theory Social Judgement Theory MUZ AFER SHE RIF People compare persuasive appeals to anchors (opinions that they already hold) Around the anchor: latitude of acceptance, latitude of noncommitment, latitude of rejection Importance of an issue, caring strongly about sg. = ego-involvement We don't respond to appeals that are either too close to our anchor (assimilation), or fall within our latitude of rejection (contrast) Attitudes can be changed if the argument falls within either the latitude of noncommitment (middle ground), or latitude of acceptance (further from the anchor)  Bradford, B. (2020). How to Be More Persuasive. Medium. https://mbbrad4d.medium.com/rants-dont-change-minds-6bd6cca9c6f9 E.g., Facebook post stating that wearing a mask was wrong, and why people who wore them were “stupid” Agreement = latitude of acceptance Disagreement = latitude of rejection Logical arguments, reputable research = latitude of non-commitment (potentially) P R O P O S I TIO N S O F F A C TS Issues in which there are two or more sides with conflicting evidence E.g., Caffeine is/is not addictive P R O P O S I TIO N S O F V A L U E Explore the worth of some idea, person, or object E.g., The use of laboratory animals for scientific experiments is/is not cruel and immoral P R O P O S I TIO N S O F P O L I C Y Types of They recommend a specific course of action persuasion E.g., Genetic engineering of plants and By types of livestock is/is not an appropriate way to proposition increase the food supply CON V I N CI N G When you set about to convince an audience, you want to change the way its members think A CTUA TI N G When you set about to actuate an audience, you want to move its Types of members to a specific behaviour persuasion By desired outcome D I RECT PERS UA S I ON The speaker makes his or her purpose clear, usually by stating it outright early in the speech I N D I RECT PERS UA S I ON More implicit, but still easy to spot sometimes e.g., television Types of commercials, political oratory persuasion By directness of approach Creating a persuasive message 1 ) S ET A CLEAR , P ER SUASIVE G OAL When convincing, we stress an attitude: After listening to my speech, my audience members will agree that steps should be taken to save whales from extinction When actuating, we stress a behaviour: After listening to my speech, my audience members will sign my petition 2 ) S T R UCTURE T HE M ES SAGE C A R EFULLY 3) US E S OLID EVID ENCE Factual evidence that strongly supports your claim and/or emotional evidence Emotional evidence is an ethical fault only when it is used to obscure the truth 4 ) A D A PT T O T HE A UD I ENC E 5 ) A V OI D F A LLA C I ES Fallacy= "false", an error in logic 5.1) Ad hominem: attack on the person instead of the argument The speaker attacks the integrity of a person in order to weaken the argument E.g., “How can you argue your case for vegetarianism when you are enjoying that steak?” 5.2) Reductio ad absurdum: reduction to the absurd Unfairly attacks an argument by extending it to such extreme lengths that it looks ridiculous E.g.,“If we allow the administration to raise tuition this year, soon they will be raising it every year, and before we know it only the wealthiest students will be able to go to school here.” 5.3) Either-or Sets up false alternatives, suggesting that if the inferior one must be rejected, then the other must be accepted E.g.,“Either we outlaw alcohol in city parks, or there will be no way to get rid of drunks” 5 ) AV OID F ALLACIES Fallacy= "false", an error in logic 5.4) Post hoc ergo propter hoc: false cause Mistakenly assumes that one event causes another because they occur sequentially E.g., “Every time I wash my car, it rains” 5.5) Argumentum ad verecundiam: appeal to authority Involves relying on the testimony of someone who is not an authority in the case being argued E.g., A movie star promoting a political candidate or an athlete telling us why we should buy a certain kind of automobile 5.6) Argumentum ad populum: bandwagon appeal Based on the often dubious notion that, just because many people favor an idea, you should, too When faced with an idea, don’t just follow the crowd LOGICAL FALLACIES AS TOLD BY THE SIMPSONS (AND SHELDON) Colburn Classroom. (2019, November 29). Simpsons Logical Fallacies: Ad Hominem [video]. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnMmXTVOjBY veero25. (2010, January 7). The Big Bang Theory - Reductio ad Absurdum - YES SHELDON IS WRONG, RELAX SMARTASS! [video]. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytWGiOuzpe4 Colburn Classroom. (2019, November 29). Simpsons Logical Fallacies: Either/Or Fallacy (False Choice) [video]. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q25fApNZI0 Colburn Classroom. (2019, November 29). Simpsons Logical Fallacies: Post Hoc Fallacy [video]. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N9KvaCr1Fk Colburn Classroom. (2019, November 29). Simpsons Logical Fallacies: Appeal to Doubtful Authority [video]. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu1ecw1I7y0&t=55s Colburn Classroom. (2019, November 29). Simpsons Logical Fallacies: Bandwagon Fallacy [video]. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oulJ9DpLa-w Some companies claim to be in favor of protecting the environment, Find the but you can’t trust them. Businesses fallacy exist to make a profit, and the cost ad hominem/ ad absurdum/ of saving the earth is just another either-or/ false cause/ expense to be cut. appeal to authority/ bandwagon appeal Take it from me, imported cars are much better than domestics. I used to buy only American, but the cars made here are all junk. Rap music ought to be boycotted. After all, the number of assaults on police officers went up right after rap became popular. Carpooling to cut down on the Find the parking problem is a stupid idea. fallacy Look around— nobody carpools! ad hominem/ ad absurdum/ I know that staying in the sun can either-or/ false cause/ cause cancer, but if I start worrying appeal to authority/ about every environmental risk I’ll bandwagon appeal have to stay inside a bomb shelter breathing filtered air, never drive a car or ride my bike, and I won’t be able to eat anything. Don't listen to his argument on climate change; he's just a high school dropout. Elaboration Likelihood Model by Richard Petty & John Cacioppo What do we do when we are faced with a persuasive appeal? Two cognitive processes: the central route and the peripheral route Elaboration CENTRAL ROU TE Likelihood Model Involves message elaboration (ELM) Elaboration is “the extent to which a person carefully thinks about issue-relevant arguments contained in a persuasive communication” It requires high levels of cognitive effort People using the central route carefully scrutinize the ideas, try to figure out if they have true merit, and wonder about their implications Elaboration PERI PHERAL ROU TE Likelihood Model (ELM) Offers a mental shortcut path to accepting or rejecting a message “without any active thinking about the attributes of the issue or the object of consideration” Recipients rely on a variety of cues that allow them to make quick decisions E.g., Cialdini's principles Motivation for elaboration People are motivated to hold correct attitudes - we aren't always logical, but we make good effort But our capacities are limited - we have a large-mesh mental filter that allows items we regard as less important to flow through without being processed very carefully (relevant items get trapped and tested) Further determinants: biased/objective elaboration, quality of arguments, source credibility, speaker's character and competence Gist: only a few listeners are motivated and able to do the mental work required for a major shift in attitude What is an attitude? MENTAL STATES INCLUDE A VARIETY OF MENTAL CONTENTS (ATTITUDES) DI MENSIONS OF ATTITUDES Knowledge, beliefs Emotions Skills, willingness to act They are linked to each other and refer to a specific attitude object (people, places, objects, events) A T T ITUDE I S......a cognitive representation which summarises our (cognitive, emotive, conative) evaluations related to the attitude object. Attitudes have a certain direction (positive, neutral, negative) and intensity (strong, weak) The communicator’s goal then is to achieve the change of attitude in the target WE CAN CHANGE: The intensity of the attitude The direction of the attitude Create a new attitude in the target WAYS OF ACHIEVING THE ATTITUDE CHANGE: Cognitive Emotive There are two ways of cognitive attitude changes, which is in line with what Petty & Cacioppo put forth in 1980 (heuristic~peripheral and systematic~central)  Thank you for the attention! [email protected] Sources: Adler, R. B., Rodman, G. R., & Sévigny, A. (2006). Understanding human communication (Vol. 10). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Griffin, E. M. (2006). A first look at communication theory. McGraw-hill. Perloff, R. M. (2017). The dynamics of persuasion: communication and attitudes in the 21st century. Routledge Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Communication and persuasion (pp. 1-24). Springer, New York, NY.