Persuasion Theory.

The channel through which a message is to be delivered will also affect the outcome. Channels are the various mediums that can be used. Apart from press, radio and TV, these can include staff newsletters, staff meetings, intercom announcements or closed-circuit TV. Audio or visual, or a combination of both, can be used.

Assuming the message has successfully been delivered, and that an audience’s knowledge has been increased, the third phase is to change attitude (or beliefs) – possibly the most difficult task. “The more a person is emotionally involved in his or her beliefs, the harder it is to change those beliefs by mere information or argument. People who are less interested in an issue hold weaker opinions and beliefs and thus are more likely to change their minds”. (Cutlip, Center, & Broom, 1985).  It could be argued that most people these days take an interest in the environment, or at least are more aware of the issues than they were 15 years ago. Thus, the success of Greenpeace’s Brent Spar campaign was aided by the fact that its audience was already partially won-over, in that they were emotionally receptive and their beliefs and attitudes did not have to change much to affect their behaviour (i.e., they stopped buying Shell petrol in Germany, with sales dropping 30 per cent). On the other hand, Greenpeace may battle to convince its publics to change their minds about the location of Australia’s only nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights, Sydney, as this facility is used foe medical products and is known to have only low level of radioactive waste. Recent protests there were counteracted by articles saying nuclear medicine (radio isotopes) supplies were affected, and as far afield as Perth.

Attitude has been defined as “a stable, long-lasting, learned predisposition to respond to certain things in a certain way. The concept has a cognitive (belief) aspect, and affective (feeling) aspect and a cognitive (action) aspect” (Statt, 1990).

Our attitudes are also affected by the groups we associate with: family, friends, informal work groups and clubs and organisations we may belong to. “Group influence and pressure become particularly apparent during controversy” (Newsom, VanSlyke Turk, Kruckenberg, p215, 1996). This only demonstrates the many variables that can interfere with the persuasion process in the stages of the Domino model. It is also recognised that attitudes are formed over long periods of time. Conversely, attitudes can be changed quickly. (You could build up an affinity of using a particular brand of running shoes, but your attitude – and years of conditioning – could change instantly if the new pair you buy cause discomfort). Marketers spend a lot of money on psychological surveys in trying to determine what shapes peoples’ attitudes. Research has taken three forms in recent years: 1. mere exposure, 2. cognitive dissonance and 3. persuasive communication. I will deal with the latter.

According to DeVito (1991) there are three principal means of persuasion – reasoning and evidence, motivating appeals and credibility appeals. The success in changing an audience’s attitude or beliefs, and moving target groups to action, depends on many factors, including the four principles of persuasion (as cited in Bettinghaus & Cody, 1987; Littlejohn & Jabusch, 1987; Smith 1982). The four principles are:

1. Selective Exposure
2. Audience participation
3. Inoculation
4. Magnitude of Change

Other factors which come into play include the length of time an attitude has been formed, how it was formed (i.e., was it from second-hand information, or by direct experience?).  Clearly, there are many factors which influence the way in which attitudes are formed and how strongly-held they are.

Inoculation Theory in itself is interesting. It depends on: 1. issuing a warning, 2. mounting a weak attack, 3. presenting an active defence. Anti-smoking campaigns targeted at teenagers are an example of this. Most teens already know that smoking is harmful and that they should not start. Thus, they already have existing attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors that are “correct.” The problem is these attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors are not strong enough to keep all kids from starting smoking. Therefore, they have to be “inoculated”. This is done through TV ads, but also through the introduction of literature and video in health classes.

But because everyone is different, attitudes will vary. It would be impossible to predict how each individual will react to a certain piece of information, so researchers (mostly advertising-based)  have used groups to best narrow the field. Today, research methods such as the VALS2 (Values and Lifestyle) technique for assessing and grouping target publics allows marketers to identify groups with what could be a collection of common beliefs/attitudes and/or lifestyle. The company which developed this method is the Total Research Corporation. It categorized people into the following groups:

1. Intellectual
2. Conformist
3. Popularity-seekers
4. Pragmatists
5. Active
6. Relief-seekers
7. Sentimentalists

The method certainly allows for message to be critically targeted. However, it would be illogical to suggest that each of these groups would react the same way to the Domino Theory, as each group would have different views and reactions on whatever message they were being given. The way they would process information would vary markedly.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Human Needs is an early model adopted by behavioural scientists to explain in the most general way why human beings behave as they do. As our basic needs for food and shelter are satisfied we move up the hierarchy to the peak of self-actualisation where, because we have everything we need, we get satisfaction from giving to society. Maslow argued that individuals are motivated depending on the extent to which their needs have been fulfilled. The theory was that messages should be targeted to groups according to the level to which their needs had been met. The theory may only be relevant to Western cultures, however, as Eastern cultures, tend to place family (belonginess) on a different level.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs. Ref: Lecture, Kevin Smith, Week 3. Graphic: Greg Smith

Personality trait tests recognise people's differences and try to understand their particular traits, with some predictions made about their future. Personal Style indicators are used in marketing to help define target markets more closely than merely by income and place of residence.

Psychologists have put forward many other models. One with relevance is fear arousal, one of five “psychological appeals” put forward as persuasive tactics by DeVito (1991), who argues that “we are motivated in great part by a desire to avoid fear. We fear the loss of money, family, friends, love, health, job and just about everything we have and value. We also fear punishment, rejection and failure” (p410). Examples of fear tactics include anti-smoking and drink-driving campaigns. Politicians use fear tactics regularly, particularly during elections. The Liberals played to our fear of being over-run by boat people; the Labor Party played to our fears over higher taxes with the GST. “Moderate amount of fear work best. With low levels the audience is not motivated sufficiently to act. With high levels they become too frightened and tune out” (DeVito, p410). Other psychological appeal factors put forward by DeVito include: power, control and influence; self-esteem and approval; achievement and financial gain.

“Fear as an attitude and behavior change mechanism is a risky choice. Putting a student in fear of bad grades may motivate the student to work harder. But it may also have the reverse effect of causing the student to give up in expectation of failure” (Curran and Takata, 2002). Minimal fear has been found to be the most effective. A study by Janis and Feshbach on getting students to follow dental hygene using different levels of fear persuasion showed that minimal fear appeal was the most effective (Severin and Tankard, 1992). Therefore it could be said that local road safety campaigns, including drink-driving and speed kills themes, have largely been unsuccessful due to the high fear factor.

But do attitudes have any actual relations to behaviour? Severin and Tankard (1992) sited a study made by social scientist Richard La Piere in the 1930s, in which he traveled the US with a Chinese couple.  Nt of restaurOf the 251 visits they made to hotels and restaurant they were only refused service once. Yet when surveyed, more than 90 per cent of restaurants and hotels said they would not serve Chinese. The study shows that attitudes may not be a good way of predicting behaviour. This in itself points to a flaw in the Domino model.

A more modern, and perhaps most effective, method of persuasion is Grunig’s. two-way symmetrical (two-way) model of communication (1984). Grunig and Hunt initially developed four models of public relations:

1. manipulation or press agentry,
2. public information,
3. two-way asymmetric and
4. two-way symmetric.

The two-way system between an organisation and its publics allows for the public to influence the organisation to change attitudes and beliefs, just the same way as the organisation tries to change the its publics’ beliefs. This worked well for the Olympic Co-ordination Authority during the construction phase of the 2000 Games. The OCA would regularly consult local community groups about projects (mostly with an environmental agenda). The residents felt part of the process and were able to provide less aggressive feedback, as the OCA gained respect for just listening; even if it didn’t always follow through with locals’ recommendations. In this way all parties were working to gather to find common solutions to problems, and so avoid the OCA from having to react to negative media articles.

Grunig also tested three categories for the identification of publics:

1. Latent public – a group faces an indeterminate situation but does not recognise it as a problem
2. Aware public – the group recognises a problem  (what is missing in the situation) and becomes aware
3. Active public  – the group organises to discuss and do something about the problem.”  (Rhodes, 1999)

“It is important to note, however, that organizations do not always fit into only one model. They may practice different models at different times and at varying degrees” (Hill, 1992).

The model used in the delivery of a message will determine the outcome. The two-way symmetric model, is relevant in this essay, as it is more ethically-acceptable, relying on the exchange of information between the messenger and the receiver and because it seeks to achieve persuasion and understanding, rather than simply telling an audience something (i.e., press agentry).

American Dr Robert Cialdi, known for his research in advertising, spent three years studying various organizations that relied on influence tactics (persuasion) to achieve their goal. Although he found thousands of different tactics that compliance practitioners employed to produce 'yes' responses, most of them fell within only six basic categories. Each of these categories is governed by a fundamental psychological principle that directs human behavior and gives these tactics their power. The six principles are:

• consistency,
• reciprocation,
• social proof,
• authority,
• liking
• scarcity

Whether we study persuasion in communications or advertising, the theories could hold, as both are forms of communication and both rely on persuasion to push a message. One challenge to the notion that change in attitudes precedes a change in behaviour came from research Herbert Krugman, who worked for General Electric. As cited in Severin & Tankard (1992) his theory (1965, 72, 77) said people process message in print and television differently. TV relied on the right hemisphere (low involvement), and print on the left (high involvement). TV relies on repetition, then a trigger to spark behavioural action. But it has also been found that too much repetition has a negative effect (Caciopppo and Petty, 1979).

One of the most deeply-debated, and researched, models of persuasion is the ELM (Elaboration Likelihood Model). Developed by Petty and Cacioppo (1981 to 1986). Based on cognitive processes, it “portrays receivers as active participants in the persuasion process. Receivers produce cognitions (thoughts, elaborations) in response to the stimulus of persuasive discourse” (Stephenson; Benoit; Tschida; 2001). Petty and Cacioppo argue there are two "routes" to persuasion: central and peripheral. The central route to persuasion consists of thoughtful consideration of the arguments (ideas, content) in the message, and occurs only when a receiver possesses both the motivation and ability to think about the message and topic. The peripheral route occurs when the receiver lacks ability and/or motivation to engage in much thought on the issue. Using the peripheral route, the listener decides whether to agree with the message based on other cues besides the strength of the arguments in the message, such as whether the source is credible or attractive, the number (but not the quality) of arguments in the message, or length of the message.”

Petty and Cacioppo argue that subjects produce more favorable cognitive responses to

messages with strong than weak arguments. Mitigating factors include source credibility, the state of the recipient’s thinking when the message is received, and method and medium used to deliver the message (i.e., verbal or written; print or electronic), There is a considerable body of work, both pro and against the ELM. However, from the literature it seems we are once again left with the thought that the processes involved have yet to be rigorously tested as they relate to communication theory, let alone their effect on the Domino Model. “There have been relatively few rigorous tests of this assumption via path analysis or structural equation modeling” (Stephenson, Benoit, Tschida).

American graphic designer Katherine McCoy suggests that persuasion might be considered more than just trying to convince an audience of the sender’s intention “The receiver’s motivation might also be an important factor. We know persuasion is necessary for distracted, unmotivated users. But it can also increase productivity for motivated users, for instance, through the use of prompts and cues for accurate use of spreadsheet software. In product design, persuasion/seduction can clarify operation sequences for smart products and enrich the user’s product experience. Persuasion provides motivation for those unmotivated through disinterest, unfamiliarity with the content, or lack of competence for a software tool or a product’s operation. There is a complex interaction between the sender’s intentions, message content, the audience/receiver’s motivations and the communications context. Here, the receiver’s motivation is paramount” (McCoy, 2000). But how accurately can we predict motivation? An airport monitor would seem to be purely informational. A traveler hurrying to catch a plane is highly motivated and will make full use of the flight monitor – no need to persuade this audience member. But when a driver in a hurry encounters a stop sign, that driver has a low motivation level. Although the content is informational, the driver may ignore it, making only a rolling stop. Thirdly, what happens when a junk food enthusiast encounters a food package with nutritional information? This audience member has low motivation and probably ignores message content completely.” In order to achieve persuasion, an audience has to be motivated; to want to absorb knowledge, change attitude and, in turn, have their behaviour affected.  

The American Marketing Association found that after a study of the major persuasion theories “to date, no single theory or framework that has been developed has been able to account for all the varied and sometimes conflicting persuasion findings. “Presumably, this is because the complex process of persuasion is intricately dependent on a myriad of contextual, situational, and individual difference factors, whereas the theories remain relatively simplistic and narrowly developed. The inability of existing theories to accommodate all persuasion findings need not suggest, however, that these theories are inaccurate. Rather, these theories simply may represent pieces of persuasion processes that operate in certain conditions that are not always clearly specified”.  (Meyers-Levy, 2001). For good measure, highlighting the difficult nature of this area of study, the Association added an additional strategy that people are likely to employ in processing information. a third fundamental processing strategy in response to an advertisement, referred to as an “experiential processing strategy. where “judgments are not based on thoughts prompted by message content per se but rather on sensations or feelings prompted by the very act of processing” (cited in Strack, 1992).

CONCLUSION

The Domino model is certainly simplistic, as it assumes that attitudes, and then behaviour, will be altered after information is provided. However, it doesn’t recognise that attitudes are formed early in our development and are inherently difficult to change (why is it that drink-driving, anti-smoking and domestic violence programs don’t seem to work?). So it can’t be assumed that all people will change their attitudes just because they receive information. In fact, many people may not even receive knowledge from the initial message, particularly if they already have heard the message. Given the number of persuasion theories (and they are just that: theories) it is difficult to judge with any certainty their effect on the Domino model. The simplicity of the Domino Model is probably a result of the fact that public relations is, for the most part, an inexact science – a practice that relies on the foibles of human nature. It also flawed in that what applies to a target group, does not necessarily apply to all individuals in that group. Clearly, more quantifiable research is required before either the Domino Model, or any persuasion theory can be considered exact. In fact “to date, no single theory or framework that has been developed has been able to account for all the varied and sometimes conflicting persuasion findings. Presumably, this is because the complex process of persuasion is intricately dependent on a myriad of contextual, situational, and individual difference factors, whereas the theories remain relatively simplistic and narrowly developed” (Meyers-Levy, 1999). As Carl Hovland stated: “to change attitude you have to change opinion. That requires communication”. Whether any of the above theories affect the Domino model remain to be truly tested.

REFERENCES:

Cacioppo J.T., and Petty R.E., Effect of Message Repetition and Position on cognitive responses, Recall and Persuasion, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (1979).

Cutlip, S. M., Center, A. H., & Broom, G. M. (1985). Effective public relations (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc).

Curran, Jeanne and Takata, Susan R. , Use of Fear to Persuade,  2002 (searched March 2002)

DeFleur and Ball-Rokeach, Theories of Mass Communication, Longman, 1989

DeVito, Joseph, Human Communication: The Basic Course, p402, Harper Collins, 1991, as cited in Bettinghaus & Cody, 1987; Littlejohn & Jabusch, 1987; Smith 1982),.

Grunig James E. and Hunt, Todd ,Managing Public Relations (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston)

Heimes, Scott, Bill Communications, Minneapolis; Dec 1998.

Hill, Kimberly J. , Beyond the Numbers: A Case Study of the 1990 Census Promotion Program and the Implications for Census 2000, as cited in Reagan, Sumner, & Hill, 1992

Lowery/DeFleur, Milestones in Mass Communication Research: Media Effects, Longman, 1983

Meyers-Levy, Joan , American Marketing Association, 1999.

McCoy, Katherine, High Ground Design, 2000,  (searched March 2002)

McGaan, Lee , , 2000 (searched March 2002)

Newsom, VanSlyke Turk, Kruckenberg, This Is PR, Wadsworth, 1996

O'Keefe, D. J. (1990). Persuasion: Theory and research (Vol. 2). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Osterhouse, R., & Brock, T, 1970.

Rhodes,Kelton , 1999 (searched March 2002)

Severin and Tankard, Communication Theories, Longman (1992)

Statt, David, Understanding the Consumer, p193, Macmillan, 1997, as cited in Statt, The Concise Dictionary of Psychology, Routledge, 1990),.

Strack, Fritz, The Different Routes to Social Judgments: Experiential Versus Informational Strategies in The Construction of Social Judgments, Leonard L. Martin and Abraham Tesser, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992

Stephenson, Michael T; Benoit, William; Tschida, David A; Testing the mediating role of cognitive responses in the Elaboration Likelihood Model; Communication Studies, West Lafayette, 2001.