• "paradigm" cases of persuasion
• What we think of when we think of persuasion
• clear-cut cases of persuasion
• ex. a presidential debate, closing attorney remark to jury
• interpersonal, intentional, symbolic, effects (gass and seiter model)
  

• closer to the boundary or periphery of what we normally think of as persuasion.
  
• Less clear-cut, more "iffy"
• Not everyone would agree that it is persuasion.
• Ex. guy on bus smells bad, (not necessarily persuading people to sit far from him)
• Intrapersonal, unintentional, nonsymbolic, coercive, no effects. (Gass and Seiter model)
  

• Intentionality (distinguishes social influence from persuasion), 
• Effects: might be effective persuasion method, but persuasion may not actually occur. OR might be an ineffective persuasion method but persuasion may occur. problem with effects is it can be viewed as linear (source to receiver) but it is simultaneous exchange. 
• Free will/Conscious awareness: vital characteristic of persuasion, or else it is coercion. coercion: rewards, incentive, flattery, threats, etc.
  
• Symbolic action: means/channel of persuasion.
  
• Interpersonal v. Intrapersonal: self or other persuasion.

• attitudes are usually evident based on your behaviors.
  
• core beliefs are strong indicators of behavior.
•  ABC (attitude-behavior consistency) Humans like to be consistent.

Psychological Reactance

(reverse psychology)

• The tendency to react defensively to perceived encroachments on our freedom (Reverse psychology)
  
• example of this is if a parent tells their daughter that they disapprove of her new boyfriend, which will make her want to rebel because she feels her freedom is being threatened, and she will like him even more.

•   jReceiver-based construct (believability exists in the eye of the beholder).
  
• Multidimensional (lots of factors make up credibility just like athleticism). Fluctuating, Situational.
  
• Expertise, Trustworthiness, Goodwill.

Sleeper Effect

(Relative and Absolute)

• delayed impact of a message may be more effective than its initial impact.
  
• High cred source’s message impact will fall over time, low cred source’s message favor increases (ABSOLUTE S.E.).
  
• RELATIVE S.E.:high cred source message loses more favor over time, lo cred source message loses less favor over time
  
• disassociation occurs when person detaches message from source. “I read somewhere...”.

• Cognitive dissonance is intrinsically motivated.
  
• value independence and the goals of the individual over the goals of a collective. View themselves consistently across situations (will respond to second similar request).
  
•  More likely to use direct requests, threats and rational persuasion.
  
• Less likely to conform.

• Cognitive disonance is socially motviated.
  
• value harmony, concern for others, and the goals of the group over the goals of the individual.
  
• Are more malleable across situations (may not respond to a second request).
  
• More likely to hint, set examples, and do favors for others to persuade.
  
• More likely to conform

• Recognize that people make associations with people and groups because they have consistent attitudes.
  
• ex. (NRA will have people in it that like to hunt, but not all in the club will be hunters)

• Consumers have grown cynical and do not trust traditional advertising, but if you get the word out by Word of Mouth (WOM) then it will be coming from real people, and probably through the friends of consumers, who they trust more than a billboard.
  
• Relies on social networks/interpersonal channels to spread positive word through social circles. 
  
• Most effective when it seems spontaneous and amongst younger audiences.  Self-perpetuating.

Law of the few: small # of influential people spread/endorse idea (uber influencers:

• MAVENS (experts),
  
• CONNECTORS (carriers, word-spreaders)
  
• SALESPEOPLE (infected by carriers, influence inner circles).

• Burke: identification occurs when people are united in substance ( i. e., when they share attitudes, activities, ideas, possessions, and so forth).
•  The more a person identifies with a group, the more power the group has to influence that person.
  
• Reference Groups: Groups that have power to influence us ( we admire/want to be like them) becomes dangerous when there is too much identification (strong cultures, ex. ethnocentrism). 
• Groupthink is when they are focused on agreeing so much that they dont disagree when they should.

• the first arguments presented have an advantage.

• works best when you hear two opposing messages, back to back, and then have to wait a while before deciding what to do about the messages.
  
• Miller and Campbell ( 1959), with time we tend to remember information we receive first. In other words, first impressions may be lasting impressions.

The later arguments presented have an advantage

Recency effect is more likely when you hear one message, wait some time before hearing the opposing message, and then decide immediately after the second message what you are going to do.

“Ask for the stars”

• perceptual contrast effect: Gives a really good speech, then you have to go after that, makes your speech look bad. second request looks much smaller than first one. 
  
• Reciprocal Concessions: we feel bad for saying no to request one, then the person asks for another request (a more reasonable offer than the first one) and we say yes because we feel bad and it sounds like a lot less. 
• Self-Presentation: we dont want to be perceived negatively.
  
• Social responsibility: internal standards of how we act.

Affect outcome:

size (not too big/small),

prosocialness,

brief time lapse,

same salesperson,

exchange-oriented people (doesnt forget who owes what to whom).

when people comply with a smaller request, it often makes them more likely to comply with a second, larger request.

Once you say yes to R1, you see yourself as a helpful person, want to be consistent with that.

• Affect Outcome:
  
• Size of request (not too small, enough to get foot in the door), prosocialness,
  
• external incentives (I did it for the shampoo...=( ),
  
• does not need to be same person
• Labeling (thank you! youre such a GOOD PERSON),
  
• Consistency (say yes to R1, must say yes to R2),
  
• Self-concept clarity (more like to change self-concept i.e. see themselves as helpful, stay consistent with that).

• Central route (focusing on the message itself, quality of arguments, etc.)
  
• peripheral route (focusing on everything but the message in-depth ex. the source’s credibility and the attractiveness of speaker, quanitity of arguments, or a catchy jingle).

Parallel processing: using both routes at once. Motivation, involvement, ability and need for cognition.

• Systematic processing: thoughtful and deliberate (central)

• Heuristic processing: mental shortcuts, applying heuristic cues (buy tv because of brand)
• can engage in simultaneous processing (systematic and heuristic processing at same time)

Sufficiency principle (people want to know only what they need to know)

• Free choice paradigm: more free choice = more dissonance (if negative outcome foreseeable).
  
• Belief disconfirmation: encounter information contrary to beliefs. 
  
• Induced Compliance (coerced or forced to do something, little choice, little dissonance).
  
• Effort justification paradigm: the more effort, the greater dissonance.

TRA

Theory of Reasoned Action

intentions guide behavior. Helmet example (parents will like it, let him go to skate park. friends wont like it, and will make fun of him).
Subjective Norm: a person’s perception of what oth-ers, especially relevant others, think about the behavior in question.

• Normative Beliefs: social pressure (peer/family pressure)
• Motivation to comply: how willing to comply with social pressures?

patient judges appropriateness of the doctors comment.

If male doctor uses positive or negative strategies, its cool.

Female doctors can only use positive strategies (taking this will make you feel better)

theory developed to teach people how to combat and resist persuasion. *works best when attacking a cultural truism (what is commonly accept as true in a culture). Process:

• Warm the person that they will be persuaded (talking to kids about drugs)
• Provide a weak argument in support of other side (you might look kind of cool)
• Refutation:
  • Passive: you tell them a better argument in support of your side (drugs are really harmful to your health, have ended the lives of many people)
  • Active: Have the person you are inoculating go research it in an effort to craft their own arguments against it.