Vote For Central Rather Than Peripheral

During our country’s elections, what factors influence us to side with a certain candidate? Is it the promises that they make, the investment in our country, or innovative thinking? Are our votes based on factual evidence? In my opinion, the majority of the votes are influenced by mere persuasion techniques. Aronson (2012) divides persuasion into two routes. The central route to persuasion involves weighing arguments in a systematic manner to reach a conclusion. The opposing route is the peripheral route of persuasion, which is when a person responds to simple and often irrelevant stimuli without giving it much thought (Aronson, 2012). I understand the importance and meaning behind a vote, and I am motivated to make my decision concentrating on the central route to persuasion rather than the peripheral route to persuasion. Here are some examples of peripheral persuasion techniques used in Todd Akin’s advertisement for US Senate.

            Todd Akin's advertisement first proposes that “our liberty is under attack, our freedom is being undermined, our future is uncertain, and the American Dream is slipping away.” He claims that President Obama takes freedoms and the foundation of our country away. This persuasion technique relies on the fact that when our freedom is taken away, people want to get it back! Laurin et al. did a study on reactance, and found that “when there is a chance…that the restriction will not come into effect, people respond negatively to it and exaggerate the importance they attach to the restricted freedom” (Laurin, Kay & Fitzsimons, 2012). The restriction of our freedom is not yet certain because we are able to make a change with our votes. Therefore, according to Laurin et al., we cling to the importance of the freedom that is being taken away. Akin uses this reactance technique to persuade us to vote for him in order to get our freedom back.

            According to this political advertisement, our freedom and our values have been undermined, and our economy has been ransacked. The American people are purposefully instilled with fear because “the more frightened a person is by communication the more likely he or she is to take positive preventive action” (Aronson, 2012). Akin uses this advertisement to steer us away from our fear by offering direction. Akin proposes he will help us reclaim our God given rights of life and liberty. The use of the Fear + Direction persuasion technique influences us to run away from the fears enforced by President Obama, and instead follow Akin’s direction by voting for him.

            Conditioning has been used for centuries to control human behavior. This technique pairs stimuli with either a positive or negative conditioned stimulus that eventually elicits a changed behavioral response without the unconditioned stimulus. Pavlov used conditioning to make his dogs salivate whenever they heard the ringing of a bell. In this commercial, Akin uses Pavlov’s technique and hopes to elicit a negative response when pairing President Obama’s name with negative stimuli. Negative words and actions like “tyranny,” “looted the treasury,” “spent us into poverty,” and “crushed us with debt” are examples of this negative paired stimulus. In contrast, Akin hopes to elicit a positive response when pairing his name with positive words and actions such as “leading the fight for our freedom,” “successful businessman,” “protecting hard working families,” and “rebuilding the American dream.” After this commercial, people are persuaded to have negative feeling towards President Obama, and positive feelings towards Akin.

             Identification is another persuasive technique that is used in this commercial. Identification is when a person can relate and identify with another individual or party, and they are persuaded to do what pleases them. Rigio (2008) examined the relationships between political parts, the strength of a person’s party identification, and accurate knowledge of the candidates. The findings suggested that when the social meaning of a group is clear and indisputably positive, individuals that are strongly identified with that group ignore well-argued and high quality messages about the opposing candidate. In Akin’s commercial, he greatly separates the liberals from the conservatives, and focuses on his conservative beliefs. This creates a focused and clear social meaning in the advertisement for people to identify with.

            When Akin was referencing President Obama, he had vivid image of a foreclosure sign that is paralleled to the American dream slipping away. Aronson describes this persuasive technique; “the more vivid examples are, the greater their persuasive power” (2012). These vivid images far surpass statistical data and influence you to vote for Akin.

            Finally, Akin ends his advertisement with a catchy rhyming phrase, “liberty and prosperity.” People can be influenced by the way things are phrased when evaluating the quality of an argument (Aronson, 2012). During the O.J. Simpson trial in 1995, the attorney Johnnie Cochran repeatedly said, “if it doesn’t fit, you must acquit” (Aronson, 2012). This was a persuasive statement, not because of the logic (a person with a tight-fitted glove can still commit murder), but because of the rhyming and persuasive peripheral cue. Similarly, Akin uses this catchy phrase to persuade people to vote for him.

            There are so many ways in which someone can be persuaded. We are encompassed by all of these persuasive techniques, especially during the election period. I have learned that although these persuasive techniques are useful, knowledge and education is more purposeful. As a young voter, I am not going to make my decision based on reactance, conditioning, or meaningless rhyming phrases. Rather I am going to concentrate on what the candidates personally promise. I understand that we cannot escape the peripheral persuasion route, but I am determined to make my vote count by relying on truth and reason to guide my decision. 

Genevieve Miller

gfaithem@yahoo.com

References

Aronson, E., & Aronson, J. ). (2012). The social animal. (11 ed.). Worth Pub.

Kristin Laurin. , Aaron Kay, , & Gavan Fitsimons, (2012). Psychological science. Reactance versus socialization; Divergent responses to policies that constrain freedom, 23(2), doi: 10.1177/0956797611429468

Heidi Rigio. (2008). Journal of applied social psychology. Political Party, Strength of Identification, and Knowledge and Evaluation of Bush v. Gore, 38(1), 234-279. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.dml.regis.edu/doi/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00304.x/abstract;jsessionid=6539AE81A5EE6943F6A7BBC0A08E06B5.d03t04

Donahoe, J. W., & Vegas, R. (2011). Respondent (Pavlovian) conditioning. In W. W. Fisher, C. C. Piazza, H. S. Roane (Eds.) , Handbook of applied behavior analysis (pp. 17-33). New York, NY US: Guilford Press.