Politically Correct?

Really another political ad! Do you ever feel that way when you tune into the radio, when there is a commercial break during your television show, or more recently when you try to watch a YouTube video! Like come on people I want to watch the hilarious "Asking All Them Questions" video not another political ad.

        

Well I guess that is the bombardment of political ads we have to put up with during campaigning season for the upcoming elections. After watching I can’t even tell you how many political ads I have watched, but after watching my fair share of them, all I can help but notice is that all the advertisements are blatantly just trying to persuade you anyway they can using different tactics and techniques to get your vote for that candidate! Take a look for your self! 

Now that I pointed it out let me guess it totally sticks out to you more. Well if it did not stand out for you let me outline a few:

            During the video you probably noticed the main speaker is Bill Clinton. He represents a figure of credibility. This campaign ad uses a credibility persuasive technique because he speaking for both political parties and he is also an expert on making hard decisions because he is an ex-president. When a highly credible source supports an argument or belief people are more likely to agree with the credible source (Jacks & Cameron, 2003). So by using Bill Clinton the ad is trying to persuade people that as president you are faced with making decisions that can have many consequences. So during this ad it reminds everyone of how President Obama was faced with the hard decision of how to go about capturing Bin Laden during his term and in the end he made the correct decision. Then at the end they challenge how Romney would have handled the situation, which leads me into my next point.

            When the campaign ad said that Obama made the right decision and then stated the question of how would Romney have handled the situation uses an emotional persuasive technique. By using a credible source to explain a problem or threat then having that credible source pose a resolution to this problem or threat by giving us the people instructions of what we should act upon next (Aronson, 91). This tactic is a formula of fear + direction = action. This advertisement shows us frightening decisions that deal with life and death missions for our soldiers in the war. Then by challenging the idea that Romney would have not made the right decision and that since President Obama is capable of making hard decisions he is more dependable to make these hard decisions so therefore people have a better sense of security. This technique shows us a problem and then gives us a solution to that problem and in this specific advertisement we are being persuaded to vote for President Obama because he will keep us safe.

            Then since President Obama is keeping us, the people, safe we should reciprocate by voting for him back into Presidency for the next term. According to Robert Cialdini, he says that it is a societal norm that as human beings we feel obliged to reciprocate when we receive anything (Cialdini, 2004). This persuasive technique is known as reciprocity. Cialdini gives an example of when the Disabled American Veterans organization mails a survey and includes free personalized mailing labels people are more likely to fill out that survey when given the labels and then when they are just given the survey (Cialdini, 2004). So in this advertisement we are shown that President Obama has given us the sense of trust in President Obama and the respect of a well thought through decision so in turn we should reciprocate this act by voting for him.

            These techniques have shown that they work for advertisements because they are able to persuade us into believing or changing our minds into what they are feeding us. I personally feel that this advertisement does a good job for the most part subtly using the persuasive techniques, but be weary to trust what you are being told because you never know who is speaking the truth. So when you are listening to the radio, watching a commercial during your favorite television shows break, or watching that entertaining YouTube video just think back to this blog and keep a critical eye open when you are exposed to these advertisements.

                                         Always,

                                            Terese Cabanting

                                            caban465@regis.edu

                                                                   References:

Aronson, E. (2011). The social animal. (eleventh ed.). New York: Worth Publishers.

Cialdini, R. B., & R. B., C. C. (2004). the SCIENCE of Persuasion. Scientific American Special             Edition, 14(1), 70-77.

Zuwerink Jacks, J., & Cameron, K. A. (2003). Strategies for Resisting Persuasion. Basic &             Applied Social Psychology, 25(2), 145-161.

Political Bias

Every presidential campaign includes ads with strategies to try and persuade us, the people, to vote for the “right” person. After watching this ad Obama promotes registering to vote, you may look past it thinking well its just another ad where one candidate attacks the other, but it’s more than that. There are many techniques that are used to subliminally have your mind think about what is really being said. These techniques are not only persuasive, but they have proven time and time again to be affective in political advertisements.

This voting ad supporting Obama uses several techniques. The first is conformity, which basically means that everybody wants to belong to one group. In the article by Bruce F. Roberson, he states,

 “The higher the energization, the greater should be the subjective desirability of a positive outcome and the subjective aversiveness of a negative outcome. Energization itself is thought to be determined — at least in part —by task engagement (i.e., effort), which in turn is believed to be a function of the difficulty of instrumental behavior" (Pg. 374) (Roberson & Wright, 1994).

 In the ad, Obama makes it clear that it is not that hard to go and register. This means the difficulty is easy which will lead to a more positive outcome just like the article says.

Another strategy used is fear + direction = action. This means that there is some sort of reliable evidence that shows effective warnings and instructions presented by a credible source (Aronson, 91).  In this ad, it informs the person watching that voting is important. It brings fear by saying if you do not vote then Romney will ban gay marriage, he opposed ending the don’t ask don’t tell law, and will end funding for planned parenthood. So by not voting, you are at risk of losing all of what is mentioned in the ad. This fear should make people want to go vote against Romney in order to keep these rights.

Finally, the last and most important strategy used was vivid example. This is when you can use images that will stick in a person’s head, in order to get the message across. For example, in this ad the words say that “Romney would ban gay marriage” and there is a male couple holding hands in the background. This image will stick in the voter’s head and will lead them to remember that Romney will get rid of this right if he is voted into power. This should help skew the votes towards Obama and away from Romney. In the article, by Ji-Woong Kim, she summarizes,

“Our findings indicate an important role of the amygdala in the processing of unpleasant emotion or self-relevance of information in the real world may also be expanded to the processing of self-directedness of unpleasant emotion in the imagined world, and thereby contribute to human higher social cognitive process. This study also suggests that deactivation of ACC may enable us to enact vivid affective responses, and thereby contribute to an effective simulation of social interaction (Kim, 2008).”

 This shows that it is a cognitive effect and that the images becomes implanted in our brain so therefore it will be easier to remember who’s better to vote for when the time comes.

As you can see, political advertisements use strategies to target as many people as possible and persuade them. Even the smallest advertisement can sway a person’s thought process and what they previously chose to believe in. It may seem like they have all the power, but at the end of the day we are the deciding factor and we must make the proper choices by not listening to everything we hear in every ad.

You stay classy San Diego,

Andre Gonzalez

lgonzalez@regis.edu

References

Aronson, E. (2011). The social animal. (eleventh ed.). New York: Worth Publishers.

Roberson, B. F., & Wright, R. A. (1994). Difficulty as a Determinant of Interpersonal Appeal: A Social-Motivational Application of Energization Theory. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 15(3), 373-388.

Kim, J. (2008). The role of amygdala during auditory verbal imagery of derogatory appraisals by others. (Master's thesis), Available from 

Shall we too be ashamed?

It’s that time of the year again, where we see a multitude of political campaigns trying to sway our vote from one candidate to another. We’re not only bombarded with presidential campaigns, but also with senate campaigns, like this one: 

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/political-ad-tracker/video/813781/texas-conservatives-fund-ted-cruz-should-be-ashamed

 According to the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) politicians are now spending more and more on advertising, as much as $2.6 billion for local TV ads. They’ve come to realize that most Americans don’t have the time or resources to become fully educated about the issues and the candidates’ stance on them. So instead they try to sway as many voters as they can in a 30-second spot, often relying on the voters’ emotions more than factual arguments. As in the ad above, they play on voters’ emotions through a number of techniques.  

One of the first things noticed in the ad, is the use of a personal connection. Sandy Fonzo looks like someone we might run into on the streets or even have as a neighbor. As she tells her story, we notice that she is distraught and we empathize with her. We can relate to her story and know that we do not want the same thing to happen to our children. Leventhal describes this as fear plus direction equals action. We do not want Ted Cruz to put a price on our children so we need to keep Cruz out of office for our children to be safe.  

Another technique used is conditioning. Makosky says that it’s not always what is being said, but how it’s being said. Sandy Fonzo’s words are paired with music that elicits sadness. In a study by Yahui Kang and Joseph N. Cappella, they found that “one’s emotional responses are in fact determined by how the event is verbally described and thus determined by the content of the message.” Fonzo’s distraught face paired with sad music reinforces the empathy we feel for what she is saying. We too think that Ted Cruz should be ashamed for putting a price on a human being.

A last technique used is that of vivid example versus statistics. We are shown an emotional testimonial of what Ted Cruz’s actions did to these children and what the effect was for Fonzo’s child in particular, but we don’t see any statistics to back this claim. Even if statistics were presented, it’s unlikely they’d have much impact alone, as we tend to remember the vivid example much more than the numbers.  

These examples demonstrate just a few of the many techniques used in political advertisements to win over voters. Facts alone don’t persuade people to vote for a candidate, so candidates must appeal to emotions such as patriotism, love of family, hope, fear, and as in the case of this anti-Ted Cruz ad- disgust. 

Rosie Mata
mata910@regis.edu

Kang, Yahui., & Cappella, Joseph. N. (2008). Emotional reactions to and perceived effectiveness of media messages: Appraisal and message sensation value. 27(1), 40-61.

Goldberg, Laura. (2012, October 02). IAB Research Shows Digital Media on the Upswing for Election 2012, Political Strategies Predict Bigger Spends in Future National Elections. Retrieved from http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2012/oct/02/iab-research-shows-digital-media-on-the-upswing/

Political Blog

          

             Persuasion is something we are introduced to in high school. We write “persuasive” essays, where we try to convince our peers that whatever we are saying is what they should agree with, or believe, etc. Then, in college we are asked to assess the techniques used to try and persuade people, and if it is not already made aware to us, we see how often others are trying to persuade us. Persuasion is most prevalent in advertisements. Advertisements have been around for as long as companies have been selling merchandise, telling us to pick their product and why it is better than the competitors. In today’s society, we see ad’s trying to persuade us everywhere: the television, billboards, in books, etc. Over the years, advertisements techniques have evolved. Every element of an advertisement can be broken down as a persuasion technique. Even though most of us know that ads are trying to persuade us, we still let them convince us to buy their product or vote in a certain direction. We are even persuaded to choose which candidate will run our country. In this blog, I would like to make aware to you how advertisements attempt to persuade you, by examining an ad from this year’s presidential elections.

            The advertisement I chose is in support for Obama, and is opposing Romney’s campaign.  This ad is targeting the working middle class. It creates, first of all, a separation between you and Romney, where Romney is the other. The ad is saying that you have to “stretch” your money to have the essentials for your family, while Romney makes millions more than you.  The ad is clearly trying to persuade you to vote for Obama.  Every aspect of this ad, though, is working together with that goal of persuasion.

            Persuasion begins, according to Aronson (2011), with two routes, peripheral or central (emotion or logic). The peripheral route is based off emotions.  Ads using this will try to connect to the audience using an emotional connection (does the ad make you happy, mad, scared?). The central route is based on logic. Ads using this route will try to connect with the audience by presenting them with facts and figures, so the ad makes you think it is the logical choice. The “Stretch” ad uses both. Aronson also states that there are three key factors that increase the persuasiveness of an ad: first, the source of the communication, second, the nature of the communication, and third, the characteristics of the audience. In the “Stretch” ad, the communicator is the president, but this could hinder persuasion as well as further it.  Some of the population dislikes the president, while others support him and therefore may believe what is being said because he is the one saying it. The nature of the communication is obvious to all, the ad is attempting to get you to vote for Obama. This hinders the persuasion because we all know now that Obama has something to gain by presenting the opposing information about Romney. The characteristics of the audience, however, further this ads persuasion, because the audience also has something to lose (according to the ad) if they do not make the right choice (voting for Obama). I found that my ad used 5 techniques to persuade the viewer.  These include: familiarity, conditioning, one vivid example vs. statistics, fear plus directions equals action, and motion and color.

            Familiarity states that we like what is familiar, and the more we are exposed to a product the more we like it.  For the “Stretch” ad, this works in the favor of the president. We are exposed to Obama all the time in the news, so we can all say we are familiar with him, but this is not what familiarity the ad is getting at. The ad is connecting us to the middle-class. Most of us are in fact middle-class Americans, and showing that Romney is not one of us makes us connect more with what Obama is stressing in the ad. We are familiar with the fact that many middle-class Americans have to stretch our dollars and what we connect with Obama because we are familiar with this situation, which is shown by pictures of workers just like us looking like they can’t afford to pay another dollar in taxes. The second technique, Conditioning, is the pairing of two stimuli, so that one stimuli will initiate the response that the pair stimuli originally had. We see conditioning used throughout psychologies history. In the ad, conditioning is seen by pairing Romney and our emotional response to paying taxes. Paying taxes already has associated with negative emotions. When we are presented with the pairing of Romney and taxes in general we begin to have negative emotions about just Romney. The third technique, of one vivid example vs. statistics, states that one vivid example is more powerful than statistics. As humans we tend to look at one example given by a friend of family member as being held in higher respects than if we saw the same information in a statistical report. This is because we are emotional creatures; emotion drives us more than logic. This ad was very persuasive in using this technique because it uses a vivid example instead of showing statistics of what Romney has paid in taxes in previous years as well. It gives you one vivid example of showing that Romney made millions but paid on 14 percent in taxes, while you paid more. You then compare the amount of money you made and how much you paid in taxes. In this case, you are the vivid example, in other words you create your situation into the example. Though these three techniques are important for the persuasion of the advertisement, they also set up a fourth technique.

            Though the previous three techniques are all part of persuading the viewer, in my opinion, Fear plus action equals direction is the most important. This technique states that if the ad can scare the viewer moderately, and give them direction on how to alleviate the fear by taking a certain action then they will be more likely to be persuaded. The ad uses this perfectly. The audience (middle- class Americans) should be frightened by the thought of having our taxes raised even more than they already are, and the ad makes it clear that Romney wants to raise the taxes for the working class, so the correct action to take in order to have one less problem to think about we should vote for Obama. Though the action is apparent, creating the emotion of fear is the hard part for the advertisement. I was curious as to how, besides just the basic information, how the advertisement could go about creating the fear emotion.  According to Lombard (2001) a new technique, motion and color, is used to help the persuasion along. Notice in every scene where Romney is present the corners of the screen are darkened, and moving in and out narrowing and our view on and off slightly. Also, all Romney shots are not in full color, there is less saturation making his scenes look dimmer. All of this works together. The darkening, moving, corners of the advertisement can elicit emotional responses better than just hearing information. The space around Romney is dark and seems to be narrowing, almost Closter phobic like, giving the emotional response of negativity. This technique is not only paired with the technique of fear, but conditioning also. Romney is paired with this darkness, over and over again, with breaks of full color in the shots of workers. Like this advertisement, many ads use many techniques, or combinations of techniques to persuade us.

            The unlimited amount of techniques used to persuade us can become confusing and complicated through all the possibilities. The important thing about this article is not to know every way in which an ad is trying to persuade us, but to just be aware that these techniques are out there and that the ultimate goal of any advertisement is not just to better you, but to better their company. Now that you are a little more informed about being persuaded, you can make more informed decisions about what product to buy, or who to vote for. Once you are aware you can even start to pick out new techniques like I did about color and motion in this ad. Being aware puts you in more control of your decisions, which is something everyone wants.

Links

One Vivid Example vs. Statistics

Motion and Color (click on the first link on this page)

Fear + Direction = Action

Familiarity

Conditioning

References

Aronson, E. (2011). The social animal. (11ed). New York: Worth Publishers.

Lombard, M., & Snyder-Duch, J. (2001). Interactive advertising and presence: A framework. Journal of interactive advertising.

The Political Agenda

The Crocodile Tears of Political Campaigning

It’s political campaign season and the presidential advertisements are clogging the regular ones while you are trying to watch television in peace. I believe these advertisements are getting more and more annoying and hopefully most people think the same as me. The reason being is that all they do is try to attack their opponent. What most people don’t realize is that it is most likely working. These advertisements are subliminally, and in some cases boldly, persuading you. As Aronson stated “Simply because we think we are immune to persuasion does not necessarily mean we are immune” (Aronson, 2011 pp 68). These advertisements induce emotion in its audience simply by following a few persuasion factors. What they know is that “when people are scared and angry, facts and figures alone are not very convincing” (Aronson, 2011 pp 71). One example would be the following advertisement that is made by Obama’s campaign to bring fear and anger towards Romney. The factors being used to persuade us are: Credibility, fear + direction= action, reactance, perspective talking, vivid examples, and identification. Let’s break each one down so we can fully understand what is going on.

Credibility

“Increasing source credibility can be done by ensuring that the source is an expert, making the source trustworthy, or increasing the similarity between the target of the message and the source” (Leding). By creating a credible source we choose to believe it because how can it be wrong if someone who is smart and important said it? In truth, most of the credible sources are not shown in commercials like these. But even so many people believe that Romney is a bad person who goes back on his word by the end of the commercial. By discrediting Romney, people will believe Obama will be the better president.

Fear + Direction= Action

This is a very common one seen in campaign advertisements. This particular advertisement targets women and middle-class citizens by showing clips of Romney saying things like he will tax everyone more and he does not agree with abortions. This causes fear in those two audiences. When Obama’s campaign makes this advertisement to show the truth, it gives direction for them to vote against Romney. This can also tie in with cognitive dissonance.  “Cognitive dissonance (an unpleasant feeling) is aroused when an individual says or does something that runs counter to his or her own beliefs, especially if this action threatens the individual’s self-concept of being a decent or rational person” (Aronson, 1999). When Romney said things like he disagrees with abortion and wants to tax everyone it goes against the belief of the audience.

Reactance

This factor builds on fear. When someone hears Romney say he will take things away or disagrees with their beliefs, it causes the feeling that their freedom is being threatened. This helps take voters away from Romney because they disagree with him.

Perspective talking

This whole advertisement is perspective talking because it is convincing us that Romney is a terrible person who goes back on his word when truthfully he may not be. This is very similar to a psychological experiment done in the 1950s by Solomon Asch. Asch conducted an experiment which showed social pressure lead to a person to do something that was incorrect. In his experiment he had a few "confederates"(people who knew what was going on) and regular participants. The experimenter would then show a piece of paper with a line on it, then show another paper with 3 lines on it and ask which one matched the first line. The confederates would say an obviously wrong answer and the participants would agree with them. This trial was repeated 18 times and in 12 of them, the participants answered wrong and said the confederate's answer. This study made Asch famous because it showed people were tricked to get convinced that the confederate was right. This connects to the commercial because Obama's campaign successfully made Romney look like a terrible person and most likely tricked many people to be convinced to not vote for him. 

Vivid examples

This is shown with the documents being flashed on the screen. Vivid examples are more powerful then statistics and do not bore the audience. By flashing a document that has highlighted words, it becomes a visual representation of what Romney stated. This helps the audience to not have to read the document and get bored with what is on the screen and also gives credible sources for them to believe.

Identification

Identification is when you can relate to what is being said. Say if you are a coal miner and you saw the presidential debate where Romney said he would help bring up the use of coal, you would be identifying yourself with him and would most likely vote for him. Identification is used in the advertisement with women and taxpayers. Just as the fear factor, this advertisement brings fear to people's freedom and they identify themselves as people who are pro-abortion and for taxing the rich. Knowing that Romney is against those issues they would rather choose another candidate to vote for, like Obama.

My belief is that advertisements that attack other groups/ organizations are not right. This advertisement blatantly tells us how terrible Romney is and is an attack against him. This is probably the most efficient way to convince people, but if you think about it, do you want a president to have won by burning his opponent to the ground (hypothetically)? I believe that presidential candidates should keep to themselves by just advertising for their own campaigns. My belief is probably one in a million and never will be considered, but it is some food for thought. These commercials are slowly becoming more and more unethical by providing us with false and misleading information. They give you small clips of certain phrases The candidates are stating and adding more to it. One must actually research what quote and what contexts the quote is coming from before actually making a decision whether or not to like it. Not only that but also most of the citations being used are very short, vague, and unknown by many. Before these citations can be accredited there must be more background information that you must look at before making a decision. Overall, campaign ads like these are very biased and should not be completely believed unless you actually do the research yourself. 

References:
Aronson, E. (1999). The power of self-persuasion. American psychologist, 54(11), 875-884. 
           doi:10.1037/h0088188

Aronson, E. (2011). The social animal. (eleventh ed.). New York: Worth Publishers.

Leding, J. K. (2012). False memories and persuasion strategies. Review of general psychology, 16(3),    
           256-268. Doi:1037/10027700

Author:
Julia Wrona
jwrona@regis.edu

Persuading the American Public

Every campaign season, each presidential candidate’s campaign digs out every strategy in the book to persuade the public that it’s candidate is best. After watching this ad endorsing President Obama as our new president, you may say, “sure persuasive, but ultimately harmless. Does not affect me.” However, that is where you would be wrong. What you may not know is, beyond the obvious persuasive message, there are multiple well-researched, and valid techniques of persuasion used in campaign marketing that are not detectable by the average viewer. Campaign ads on both sides of the presidential race use these techniques.  

   

This ad endorsing Obama uses multiple techniques. The first is the use of vivid imagery, not statistics, as a medium for conveying the despair of the American economy. People respond to vivid imagery more so than statistics (Aronson, 1972). The ad shows dismal pictures representing the economic crisis, while in the background, a narrator presents the despair and loss of jobs that resulted. The ad shifts into short news clips of Wallstreet, houses with foreclosure signs, and people picketing, while newscasts again describe the despair of the economy. After a clip showing President Obama’s inauguration, the mood of the ad lifts, and a sense of hope is portrayed with images of people with jobs and soldiers greeting their families.

Another strategy used is Ego Depletion; the idea that we only have a limited store of cognitive energy, and when that energy is depleted, our ability to resist persuasion is also depleted (Baumiester, 2008). One study found that eliciting a negative emotional response depleted participants’ cognitive energy (Schmeichel et al., 2006). Many Americans are frustrated with Obama because they believe he has not done enough to counter the economic crisis. They have probably put up defenses to resist persuasion for Obama. However, this ad begins with a reminder of the despair of the economic crisis, eliciting a negative emotional response from those affected by it. The ad then presents the argument that President Obama has significantly improved the status of the unemployed, and because of cognitive depletion, it is harder for people to resist that argument.

The next strategy, reciprocity, is the idea that we feel gratitude for someone who does something for us, and are compelled to give back (Morales,2005). This ad appeals to that desire, it argues that Obama has fulfilled the promises he made to the American people. In fact, one of the lines in the ad says, “ He believed in us, and fought for us,” and it then shows the number of jobs the Obama administration as already created for the American people coupled with the promise of more to come.

Finally, this ad also uses identification. The Obama campaign wants the viewer to identify with the “greatness” of the American people. Phrases such as “American’s greatness”, “don’t bet against the American worker”, and “we’re coming back”, elicit pride for the United States. President Obama is portrayed as a hero who will fight to continue the greatness of our nation. This identification technique could be specifically aimed at Democrats and Republicans who do not highly identify with their respective parties. Riggio (2007) found that when this population is presented with an idea that threatens an universal American ideal, in this case having a job, they will adhere that ideal rather than to party lines and vote with the candidate who will uphold the ideal.

As you can see, each campaign ad uses multiple techniques because the goal is to target and persuade as many people as possible. Knowledge is power, and in this case the power is held by marketing campaigns that are manipulating the public to believe what they tell them to believe. 

Brianna Huber

huber003@regis.edu