Mirror Sites:
CSUDH - Habermas - UWP - Archives

California State University, Dominguez Hills
University of Wisconsin, Parkside
Soka University Japan - Transcend Art and Peace
Created: March 22, 2003
Latest Update: March 22, 2003
jeannecurran@habermas.org
takata@uwp.edu

Classical Theory: Attitude Change and Persuasion

Site Copyright: Jeanne Curran and Susan R. Takata and Individual Authors, March 2003.
"Fair use" encouraged.

• Identification with Celebrity and Expert Communicators

  One means of persuading people that they want or need the product is to show someone famous, or successful, or popular, or whatever with the product. Attractive, thin, designer-clothed young women are shown with the car of Everyman's dream. Celebrities are shown with the must-have purse, sunglasses, jeans, etc. We acheive a kind of Pavlovian effect by linking the stimulus of admiration for the celebrity to the stimulus for the product being advertised. If the guy with the attractive haircut or the right t-shirt gets the girl, then every other guy wants that haircut or that t-shirt.

  The effect of getting consumers to want the product depends on the length of exposure to the stimulus celebrity connected with the stimulus product, and depends on the setting grabbing the consumer's attention. Over time the effect will be lost; that's called the "sleeper effect." But if the advertisements continue, the association between celebrity and product will be reinforced over time. Solomon Asch puts it like this: " an attitude object may take on certain stimulus attributes b virtue of its association with some other attitude object." ("The Communicator," Jones and Gerard, at p. 436 ff.)

  Colin Powell gained prestige as a General during the Persian Gulf War. That prestige translated into political power back in the US, leading to his present position as Secretary of State. He brought to that office the power and prestige of a celebrity recognized for a sober and moderate approach to war and an understanding of social justice. He was viewed as the most moderate of the Bush cabinet. Powell's supportive statements as we approached the actual war depended on his personal prestige and the trust citizens placed in him. Translate: if Powell says war is the only alternative, then we have some assurance that an intelligent moderate person believes the war to unavoidable, then perhaps we shouldn't oppose it.

  We often judge such attempts to identify the idea or product being proposed by looking at the perceived value system of the person who advocates the idea or product. If I believe that I agree with Powell's value system, then I am more likely to take his word for an idea or project. But if the idea later proves to be destructive, Powell stands to lose some of my trust. So it's risky, supporting other people's projects.

  We often have to take the word of and trust celebrities or experts because we have little access to adequate information to judge for ourselves. In this sense, we often judge by the values we associate with people or groups. For example, if the girl scouts are for it, it must be OK. If the Women's League of Voters says it's a good law, it mustn't be too badly written as law. If Nader says it's environmentally safe, it must be. If Powell says we must go to war, we must have to.

  Since we all rely on such associations, we each need to be fairly clear on which people and groups share the values in which we believe. Then we can count on those people and groups as representative of the stand we would be willing to take.

  This is what political endorsement and "riding on the coat tails of the President" is all about. If Sen. X, Congressman Y, and the President all say she's the best candidate, I'll take their word for it.

  In school, you've grown used to accepting the word of the textbook as authoritative and correct. I hope this section will cause you to reflect a little on the extent to which you really want to do that. One reason you're often told not to use Cliff notes, and Commercial Outlines, and such is that when you do so, you are accepting the word of the author of those notes, whose value orientation and background you don't know. If you read the material yourself, you can better judge what you want to believe. Of course, time is a constraining factor. You can't read everything in the original. But at least be aware of the fact that you're accepting what we call "received knowledge" when you substitute the knowledge of any other for your own. It pays to try to ascertain just who that Other is, and what his/her values and beliefs are.

• Use of Conformity to Persuade: the Solomon Asch Studies.

  But now let's take a look at some of the problems with relying on the celebrity or expert to judge our own position on issues. The expert or celebrity has his/her own structural context, with which he/she is interdependent. Of course, she/he has agency, meaning that she/he does have some decision-making power, but that agency is interdependent with the structural context. The Solomon Asch studies on conformity showed experimentally that when several members of a group identified a perceptual problem in a way that conflicted with what the subject actually saw, the subject tended to go along with the group's judgment, even though it contradicted his own judgment. The classic experiment was with several lines, one visibly longer than the others If the staged group announced the shorter line as longer, the subject was likely to go along with the group. (Jones and Gerard, p. 387 and ff.)

  A certain amount of conformity is required for social acceptance in a group. Without some conformity the person will be viewed as an outsider, an outlier, an Other. This is one of the explanations for conformity in the teenage culture. At a time when young people are developing and asserting their identities, they are more comfortable when accepted by the group, and are thus more likely to conform. (Jones and Gerard, p. 407 and ff.)

  Now consider the group pressure after the September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center to conform as patriotic Americans demanding either revenge or retribution for an unjustified attack. Recall the American flags that flew from car aerials. Recall the hurling of insinuations of "UnAmerican" at those who saw such conformity as oversimplifying the complex reality of the tragedy and hampering efforts to find peaceful solutions. The conformity was not "good" if you wished to stress the need for peaceful approaches. The conformity was "good" if you wished to stress the need to "teach THEM a lesson."

  Recall also at this point how well Vice President Cheney's comment on the President as "cowboy" would fit in with such conformity. No problem that the cowboy would hesitate over complexity and a long history of events leading up to the present context.

  Consider also the woman, questioned, in her car, in Westwood, on March 21, 2003, during the Peace Demonstration there. "I'm against the war," she said, "but our Armed Forces are over there now, and I don't want to appear not to support them." Complexity. Conformity. Complexity.

  Conformity leads to some aspects of social solidarity. And social solidarity is important. So also is free speech. So also is freedom of religion. So also is sovereignty, or the right of a nation-state to govern itself. So also is evil and who gets to decide what evil is and which evil is worst.

• How Conformity Shapes Want and Need in the Modern Technological Society.

  • There is a relatively new book out that questions deeply the corporate control of culture in England and the US: Privatizing Culture: Corporate Art Intervention since the 1980s. By Chin-Tao Wu. Verso. London, 2002.

    The military-industrial complex.

    The criminal justice system.

    The educational system.

• Use of Sound Bites: One-Sided and Two-Sided Arguments. (Jones and Gerard, p. 446 ff.)

  The American Soldier and persuading U.S. troops to board ships for the war in the Pacific at the close of the war in Europe in the forties.

• Use of Fear to Persuade. The Dental Studies.

Application of Theory to Lived Experience

• Application of Theory to War with Iraq:
  Use of a Spokesperson Representative of Some Trusted Value

  • March 22, 2003: Why Colin Powell Should Go By Bill Keller. New York Times. March 22, 2003. This article provides an example of how the use of a trusted representative of some value can backfire in the real world. Backup. "Where has all the reason gone? Long time passing." (For those who are too young to remember, the wording isa variation on that from a sixties' folk song.) Essay and theoreticl discussion Discussion questions included.