Persuasion
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Outline




Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
McGuire’s Attitude Change Model
Yale Programme
Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
Fear Appeals
Persuasion

Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Persuasion: Changing attitude and
behavior based on exposure to
information about the attitude
McGuire’s Model of Attitude
Change (1968)
Attention
Comprehension
Acceptance
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Yale Conditions for Successful
Persuasion



Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Audience: Who is object of
persuasion
Source: Who is persuading
Message Factors
Yale Programme

Audience




Source





Expertise
Trustworthiness
Likeability
Attractiveness
Message


Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Need for cognition
Ability
Motivation
Organization
Content
Audience: Need for Cognition

Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Need for Cognition: Extent which
people enjoy effortful cognitive
activities
Audience: Need for Cognition
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
I would prefer complex to simple problems.
Thinking is not my idea of fun.
I would rather do something that requires
little thought that something that is sure to
challenge my thinking abilities.
I like to have the responsibility of handling a
situation that requires a lot of thinking.
I prefer my life to be filled with puzzles that I
must solve.
I only think as hard as I have to.
Audience: Need for Cognition
(Cacioppo, Petty, & Morris 1983)
Persuasion
.
7
6
5
4
Strong arguments
3
Weak arguments
2
1
0
Low
High
Need for Cognition
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Source Credibility
(Hovland & Weiss, 1951)
.
0.4
Percent Change
0.3
0.2
High Credibility
Low Credibility
0.1
0
-0.1
Medicine
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Atomic
submarines
Steel shortage
Movie theaters
Source Credibility
Persuasion
.
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
Persuasive Message
No Message
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
Immediately
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
After 4 weeks
Source Credibility: Sleeper Effect
(Reardon, 1981)
Persuasion
.
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
High Credibility
Low Credibility
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
Immediately
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
After 4 weeks
Source Credibility: Sleeper Effect


Sleeper Effect: Persuasive message with a
discounting cue results in higher persuasion
over time
Three necessary conditions for Sleeper
Effect:




Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Message itself is persuasive
Discounting cue initially suppresses attitude
change
Discounting cue must become dissociated from
the message over time
Sleeper Effect disappears if audience is
reminded of the source
Source Attractiveness
(Chaiken, 1979)
40
Signed Petition
Percent of People who
45
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Attractive
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Less Attractive
Message

Organization


Introduction: Implicit
Main body




Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
One sided: Only give pros
Two sided: Give pros, cons, and evidence
against cons
Conclusion: Explicit
Content
Message: Number and Quality of
Arguments
(Petty & Cacioppo, 1984)
.
12
Persuasiveness
10
8
High Involvement
6
Low Involvement
4
2
0
3
Weak Quality
9
3
Strong Quality
Number of Arguments
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
9
Yale Programme
Source
Attention
Message
Comprehension
Acceptance
Receiver
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Attitude
Change
+
Behavior
Change
Yale Programme

Strength: Identify factors that
influence persuasion


Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Much research confirmed conclusion
Weakness: Does not explain how
persuasion (acceptance) actually
occurs
Educational Implications


Source: Ensure you portray the
following: expertise, trustworthiness,
likeability
Message:


Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Keep your lessons organized
Provide quality and many examples for
your course content
Elaboration Likelihood Model
(Petty & Cacioppo, 1980)

Elaboration: Think about a message


Two Routes to Change Attitudes



Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
More elaboration, less superficial cues influence
attitude
Central Route: Think carefully about an issue
Peripheral Route: Attitudes changed by
superficial cues
Attitudes changed through central route
have different outcomes than attitudes
changed from peripheral route
Elaboration Likelihood Model
(Petty & Cacioppo, 1980)

Central Route:


Attitudes change based on quality of
argument
Attitudinal Outcomes




Greater persistence
Greater prediction of behavior
Greater resistance to counter-persuasion
Boomerang effect: Negative opinions of
message

Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Possible if arguments are weak or false information
Elaboration Likelihood Model
(Petty & Cacioppo, 1980)

Peripheral Route: Attitudes changed
by superficial cues



Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Attractiveness
Expert Endorsement
Number of Arguments
Elaboration Likelihood Model

Motivational Factors



Ability Factors:



Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Personal relevance of message
Need for cognition
Availability of cognitive resources
Relevant knowledge
High Motivation and Ability leads to
central route
Elaboration Likelihood Model


Strength: Identify conditions to
determine what influences processing
of persuasive message
Weakness: Processing of message is
not exclusively central or peripheral

Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Elaboration continuum: Low elaboration
(low thought) to high elaboration (high
thought)
Educational Implications

Ensure students process information
through the central route.


Motivation: Make lessons personally
relevant
Ability


Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Reduce distractions
Ensure students have relevant background
knowledge
Fear Appeals
(Janis & Feshbach, 1953)
.
0.7
Percent Worried
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Low
Moderate
Fear in Appeal
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
High
Fear Appeals
Percent Behavior Change
.
(Janis & Feshbach, 1953)
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Low
Medium
Fear in Appeal
Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
High
Fear Appeals





Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Consequences of not taking action are
severe, but not exaggerated
Problem is relevant to audience
Suggest a specific action that can be taken
to prevent the portrayed consequence
Audience believes the proposed solution is
effective
Solution is easy
Bias Assimilation
(Lord et al., 1979)




Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Participants: Strong beliefs about capital
punishment as deterrent against homicide
Procedure: Read summary of two
“authentic” research studies – one that
supported and one did not. Also read a
critique of each study.
Findings: Students thought studies with
same viewpoint were more convincing and
better conducted than the opposing view
Conclusion: After reading evidence on both
sides, more convinced of correctness of
initial position than at the beginning of study
Bias Assimilation

Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Bias Assimilation: After examining
data on both sides of an issue people
believe evidence on own side more
compelling
Revision


According to McGuire’s Model of Attitude Change,
what are the three steps in persuasion?
According to the Yale Programme, what are the
three major factors that influence persuasion?



Dr. K. A. Korb
University of Jos
Describe a few ways that determine the effectiveness of
each factor.
According to the Elaboration Likelihood Model, what
determines whether a message will be processed
through the Central or Peripheral route?
What will make a fear appeal effective?