Persuasion Theories Research Paper

Persuasion theories

The theory of cognitive dissonance, introduced by Leon Festinger, suggests that human beings have a natural drive to reduce the dissonance between two cognitions in order to keep our attitudes and beliefs in harmony. A cognitive dissonance is psychologically uncomfortable; it can be caused by two different beliefs, or by discrepancy between what is already known or believed. For instance, one may experience cognitive dissonance when trying to make a difficult decision or trying to understand the right thing to do in a situation. One may also feel cognitive dissonance when internalizing complex and controversial issues, such as abortion, gun control, and the like.

According to Festinger, there are two basic hypotheses in the theory. The first one is the existence of psychologically uncomfortable dissonance, it will motivate the person to try to reduce the dissonance and achieve consonance (harmony). The second one is that people will actively avoid situations and information which would likely to increase the dissonance. If two elements are dissonance of the elements, the magnitude of the dissonance will be a function of the importance of the elements. Under this kind of circumstances, person may try to change one or more of the beliefs, opinions, or behaviors involved in the dissonance; to acquire new information or beliefs that will increase the existing consonance and thus cause the total dissonance to be reduced; or to forget or reduce the importance of those cognitions that are in a dissonant relationship.

The theory of cognitive dissonance is essentially a theory of sense-making: how people try to make sense out of their beliefs, their environment, and their behavior - and thus try to lead lives that are reasonable, sensible, and meaningful.

To explain its scientific usage, I found two articles associated with the theory of cognitive dissonance. One of these articles talk about the relationship between cognitive dissonance and impulse buying. In this study conducted by two professors of the University of Southern Mississippi, it was found that impulse buying leads to higher cognitive dissonance than more planned purchases. Involved individuals, those making planned purchases, are likely to be more stable in their preconceived cognitions that led to the purchase. Impulse buyers, on the other hand,—due to having less involvement—are more likely to go wrong do to their less informed purchases. Another article explaining its scientific usage is titled “Cognitive Dissonance in Behavior Therapy: Some Basic Treatment Strategies” The article basically explains that cognitive dissonance isn’t always bad—cognitive dissonance has been successfully used in the past to help people change their unhealthy attitudes and behaviors. The study mentions that by cognitive dissonance makes a person more aware and constantly challenging his attitudes and behaviors.

Critiques of the cognitive dissonance theory comes from the understanding of both Dissonance and Self-perception theory. It was said in the past that both theories compete against each other; however, researchers discovered that both theories shouldn’t be regarded as “competing” formulation but as complementary ones. The study suggests that one theory deals with the relationship of various cognition, and the other theory deals with passive inference of attitudinal dispositions from behavior.

Another persuasive theory I want to talk about is the Balance theory. This theory, which was originated by Fritz Heider, aims to show how people develop their relationship with other people and with things (objects) in their environment. The Balance theory is made up of a triangle that consists of 3 elements. The relationship of these 3 elements is known as sentiment relations. The first element is P, the second element is O and the third element is O. If the results of the multiplication of the positive and negative signs of any 2 elements yield a positive result, then the consistency in the triad is maintained (balanced) and vice versa. If we feel we are “out of balance,” then we are motivated to change this to a position of balance. The discomfort that one might experience will increase the strength of the attitude and interest in the matter. For example, if person X likes a musician and the musician likes a product, but person X originally disliked the product, then person X is likely to end up increasing his enjoyment of the product or decreasing his liking of the musician or both.

To explain its scientific usage, I found two articles associated with the Balance theory. In this first article, the Balance theory was applied to the study of service quality in organizations. It stated that since experts were primarily interested on product manufacturing, theoretical frameworks for examining what quality meant in organizations were lacking.  To fill the gap, the balance theory is applied to explain how service organization, service provider, and consumer interrelations influence service quality. The research mentions that by applying the triangle framework, an organization can enhance its understanding of quality service delivery and guide future efforts in its continuous improvement. On a similar note, another study was conducted by examining the applications of balance theory to faculty effectiveness. In this study, the goal was to understand the role of balance theory and student liking of instructors as tools for marketing professors in assisting student learning. The article suggests that one area that it hasn’t been fully explored is peer influence through marketing tactics. Researchers suggests that balance theory provides an opportunity to understand this issue. The study concluded that balance theory possess constructive ramifications for marketing professors, as means of enhancing student learning. The study suggests that educators direct some degree of attention to peer influence.

Criticism of the balance theory comes from James D. Montgomery, where he states that the empirical results of the balance theory have been mixed, and thus, he questions whether the standard formalization of the theory is adequate. Due to this, he reformulated the balance theory by allowing actors to possess incomplete awareness of the evaluation held by other actors, achieving balance closure as an equilibrium concept.

Next, I would like to talk about the Elaboration Likelihood Model. ELM tries to explain the conflicting theories in persuasive communications by suggesting a number of ways in which a source, message and other contextual variables impact attitude change. The ELM is based on the idea that attitudes are important because attitudes guide decisions and other behaviors. While attitudes can result from a number of things, persuasion is a primary source. The model features two routes of persuasive influence: central and peripheral. The central route to persuasion consists of thoughtful consideration of the arguments (ideas, content) of the message. When a receiver is doing central processing, he or she is being an active participant in the process of persuasion. An example of central processing occurs when a speaker is giving a speech or lecture, and one person of the audience is carefully listening to the message. On the other hand, the peripheral route to persuasion occurs when the listener decides whether to agree with the message based on other cues besides the strength of the arguments or ideas in the message. For example, a listener may decide to agree with a message because the source appears to be an expert, or is attractive (not what it is being said). The key variable in the ELM process is involvement, the extent to which an individual is willing and able to ‘think’ thoroughly about the position advocated and its supporting ideas.