Chapter Eight - My Illinois State
Short Description
Download Chapter Eight - My Illinois State...
Description
Chapter Eight Theories of Message Processing
Classic Models of Persuasion: Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Developed by Festinger Individuals have a need for consistency between attitudes and behaviors When we behave in inconsistent ways, we feel discomfort Thus, if we behave in an inconsistent way, we might change our attitudes to match behavior
Classic Models of Persuasion: Theory of Reasoned Action
Developed by Fishbein and Ajzen Argues that best predictor of behavior is behavioral intention (BI) BI is predicted by attitude (sum of weighted beliefs: pos. & neg.) and by subjective norms (influence of others in the social environment)
Extension of Reasoned Action:
Theory of Planned Behavior
Attitude Subjective Norms Perc’d Beh. Control
Behavioral Intention
Behavior
Classic Models of Persuasion: Social Judgment Theory
Developed by M. Sherif, C. Sherif, and colleagues Proposes that statements about a particular “attitude object” can be arrayed to include latitudes of acceptance, rejection, and noncommitment Attitude change will be influenced by how new messages fit among these “latitudes”
Example
In Illinois, “It is unlawful to carry or possess any firearm on any public street or other public lands within the corporate limits of a city, village, or incorporated town, except law enforcement officers...”
This law should be changed.
What is your latitude of acceptance? What is your latitude of rejection? What is your latitude of noncommitment?
Acceptance
non-com
Rejection
Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Developed by Petty and Cacioppo Two routes to persuasion-Central route involves careful scrutiny of message logic and arguments Peripheral route involves consideration of cues in the message environment such as source credibility and message design
Which Route Do We Take?
ELM proposes that people will take the central or peripheral route based on several factors Motivation. If people see the message as relevant, they will be motivated to process centrally Ability. People must have the ability and be in a situation where central processing is possible
Outcomes of the Two Routes
Messages processed through the central route lead to attitude change that is “relatively enduring, resistant, and predictive of behavior.” Messages processed through the peripheral route lead to attitude change that will be “relatively temporary, susceptible [to change], and unpredictive of behavior.”
ELM: Critiques of the Model
There has been a great deal of research stemming from ELM ELM has also been criticized: First, many critics point out that it is possible to take both routes to persuasion Second, many critics believe the ELM is difficult to falsify
Heuristic-Systematic Model
Developed by Chaiken Another dual processing model Systematic processing (like central route in ELM) Heuristic processing (simple decision rules—not much effort in processing)
Experts can be trusted Consensus implies correctness
When consistent, additive effects When inconsistent, systematic supercedes, when person is highly motivated
Inoculation Theory:
Originally proposed by McGuire, has been developed by Pfau and Burgoon Inoculation Theory is a theory of resistance to persuasion based on the analogy of biological inoculation against disease
Components of the Process
Threat: A forewarning that a challenge to existing attitudes is possible or likely Refutational preemption: A message in which specific challenges to existing attitudes are raised and refuted Booster Messages are sometimes included in the inoculation process as well
The Process and Tests
Inoculation Theory proposes that when you are presented with a warning and weak arguments against one of your beliefs, you will be able to fight off that attack and subsequent attacks Tests of the theory provide some support, but only in limited circumstances (e.g., adolescent smoking behavior)
Problematic Integration Theory
Problematic Integration Theory (PIT) proposed by Babrow as a more general theory of how individuals receive, process, and make sense of messages PIT has most often been applied to healthrelated messages, but it has wide possible application in communication
What is being Integrated?
PIT proposes two kinds of judgments about events and issues in our lives Probabilistic judgments involve an assessment of how likely something is to occur Evaluative judgments involve an assessment of the relative good/bad outcome of a state of affairs Not independent assessments
When is Integration Problematic?
The integration of some judgments is not problematic (e.g., high likelihood of a positive event or low likelihood of negative event) Four forms of integration are proposed as problematic: Divergence, uncertainty, ambivalence, and impossibility
Problematic Integration (Table 8.1)
Divergence—Discrepancy between probability & evaluative judgments
Uncertainty—Unknowns so can’t make judgments
Example?
Ambivalence—Mutually exclusive alternatives (similar evaluation or different)
Example?
Example?
Impossibility—an event will not happen
Example?
PIT & Communication
Communication serves as a medium and a resource for problematic integration (language constitutes problematic and evaluative judgments) Comm. is a channel through which perceptions and beliefs about problematic integration flow. Communication helps resolve the problems
Applications
Health communication
Social support groups—e.g., may be good to increase uncertainty about prognosis of breast cancer if original diagnosis was bad End-of-life decisions—Information to help patients cope rather than to make “informed” choices.
Applications: PSAs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-Elr5K2Vuo (I learned it by…) http://adgallery.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/medi a/p/339.aspx (Shoulders) http://adgallery.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/medi a/p/324.aspx (Fiction) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBtgjIwiFvI &feature=related (I’m trying it …) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPuW06ZMgg&feature=relmfu (just once) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YaO4PMBrJ I (shower)
View more...
Comments
