Message
Formation
Putrevu (2010) conducted a series of experiments examining the effects of advertising style on attitude formation. The experiments looked at the attitudes that participants formed toward a fictional airline, attitudes toward the advertisements, and behavioral intentions. The baseline persuasion message was manipulated to create four versions: an attribute-framed message and a goal-framed message, with positive and negative versions of each. The study found that when the advertisement used an attribute-framed approach, the positive message led to significantly more positive attitudes toward the brand. However, when a goal-framed message was used, the negative version of the message was more effective than the positive one.
Reinforcement
Barker and Knight (2000) looked at the effects of political talk radio on listener attitudes. Using an analysis of topics that were frequently mentioned on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show and cross- sectional survey data from the 1995 American National Election Survey, Barker and Knight found that even after controlling for a host of demographic and prior ideology variables, the frequency that topics were mentioned on Limbaugh’s show predicted stronger listener agreement with Limbaugh on those topics. The researchers found that listening to this content led to significantly more conservative attitudes beyond any overall shifts in opinion in the general public, particularly for topics that were discussed frequently via this outlet. These effects reflect how media messages can generate response reinforcement.
Change
Slater, Rouner, and Long (2006) studied the influence of two television dramas on viewer attitudes. The topics of the television narratives were two controversial and well-known public issues: the death penalty and the legal rights of same-sex couples. With regards to the same-sex drama, viewers’ post-viewing attitudes did not differ significantly from the control group, but for the episode regarding the death penalty, post-viewing attitude measures indicated that the television show did in fact lead to attitude change (i.e., more favorable views of the death penalty). The death penalty drama also led to increased behavioral intentions to support the death penalty, and appeared to achieve these effects by weakening the link between prior ideology and subsequent attitudes toward the death penalty. The fact that the death penalty drama led to significant attitude shift demonstrates that in some cases narrative messages can be effective persuasive devices in producing response change (see chapter 13 by Busselle and Bilandzic in this volume).
Channel
Formation
Sundar (2000) manipulated the format in which news content was presented on a website in order to gauge the impact of various channels of information delivery on memory and attitudes toward the news stories. Participants saw one of five possible versions of a news website: text only, text stories with pictures, text stories with audio, text stories with pictures and audio, or text stories with pictures, audio, and video. Attitudes toward the website (evaluations of design and coherence) were significantly lower when the stories were presented with text, pictures, and audio together. Evaluations of the website were most favorable in the “text with pictures” condition and the “text with pictures, audio, and video” condition. With regard to news quality, attitudes were the most favorable in the text with pictures condition, and were the least favorable in the conditions with more channels: “text with pictures and audio” and “text with pictures, audio, and video.” Thus, there was a clear influence of the mix of channel presentation on a range of attitude objects with which the subjects had no prior interaction (e.g., news website, specific articles).
Reinforcement
Pfau, Holbert, Zubric, Pasha, and Lin (2000) focused their research on the influence of channel (print versus video) on the ability to confer resistance to unwanted persuasion (i.e., inoculation). This study found a direct and statistically significant effect of the channel manipulation on post-inoculation stimulus attitudes. As stated by Pfau et al., “compared to print, video inoculation treatments elicited an immediate impact, triggering resistance to attitudes at Phase 2” (2000, p. 23). Those subjects who held a specific attitude toward the topic of the message were better able to maintain that attitude at Time 2 as a result of coming into contact with the inoculation message via video rather than via a purely text-based message. There was a greater likelihood of being able to generate a reinforcement of a preexisting attitude through the use of video than through the use of text only. As a result, channel had a direct effect on response reinforcement.
Change
Overby and Barth (2009) used data from a three-wave panel survey of voters in Arkansas and Missouri to analyze political behavior concerning U.S. Senate races. The researchers were examining the phenomenon known as “media malaise,” which posits that a large amount of exposure to political ads, particularly negative ads, can lead to negative attitudes toward the American political system. The researchers found that, even after controlling for prior attitudes, radio and television had significant effects on attitudes toward our political system, but in different ways. Greater exposure to campaign ads on television led to significantly lower evaluations of the quality of election campaigns. Radio ad exposure and political e-mail exposure did not significantly affect evaluations of campaign quality. With regard to participant satisfaction with how democracy works in the United States, television and radio ads worked in opposite directions. Greater exposure to radio ads led to significantly more favorable evaluations of U.S. democracy, while greater exposure to TV ads led to significantly less favorable evaluations.
Recipient
Formation
Mass media scholars often focus their attention on how various individual-difference variables serve to form a response to a persuasive message as an object, and how then reactions to the message itself (e.g., perceived liking) generates a persuasive outcome (e.g., Nan, 2008). Stephenson and Palmgreen (2001) revealed that those individuals who were identified as high sensation seekers1 had an automatic and positive response to antidrug public service media messages that were classified as being high in sensation value (e.g., quick cuts, strobe lighting, deep base beats). The recipient characteristic of sensation seeking influenced how certain audience members responded to the antidrug messages. The Stephenson and Palmgreen (2001) study is an example of how an individual-difference recipient characteristic allows for the formation of a response to a specific message, and the indirect effects of the individual-difference variable on traditional persuasion outcomes are generated through reactions to the message itself as an object.
Reinforcement
Holbert and Hansen (2006) conducted a study on affective ambivalence (i.e., the internal consistency of affective responses to then-President George W. Bush) in reaction to the viewing of the controversial Michael Moore film, Fahrenheit 9-11. Subjects were randomly placed into either the stimulus condition (i.e., viewing the film in its entirety) or the control condition (i.e., no media material offered). These researchers reported a statistically significant two-way interaction of message condition (film, no film) by political party identification (Democrat, Republican, Independent), with a steep reduction in affective ambivalence toward President Bush for Democrats who viewed the film. Democrats already possessed relatively low levels of affective ambivalence toward Bush as attitude object prior to viewing the film, but this group developed even more internally consistent affective reactions toward Bush after having viewed the film (as hypothesized). The role of political party identification as a receiver characteristic played a key role in creating response reinforcement (i.e., increase in internal consistency of affective responses) to an attitude object through media exposure.
Change
Chang (2009) conducted an experiment examining attitudes toward smoking among high school students in Taiwan. Participants were asked to read print advertisements containing antismoking messages that focused on either the health impacts or psychological motives (e.g., tension relief) for smoking. The researcher found that among participa
nts who were smokers, the health-oriented messages led to attitude change, reducing positive attitudes towards smoking, while motives-oriented based messages were less effective. Surprisingly, for nonsmokers, the motives-oriented messages had a boomerang effect and actually led to more positive attitudes toward smoking. Thus, the recipient characteristic of being a smoker or nonsmoker impacted the outcome of attitude change.
Context
Formation
The area of science communication is on the rise (e.g., Nisbet & Scheufele, 2009). There is much discussion in this area concerning a general “deficit model” when it comes to reaching out to a public to discuss science issues (see Sturgis & Allum, 2004). The general public has little to no awareness, knowledge, or attitude toward a wide variety of science-related matters, and many of these topics are exceedingly complex and often involve long-term, indirect outcomes that are not tangible for those with little understanding. One contextual factor often focused on in this line of research is “opinion climate”—one element of opinion climate would be a general trust in science. Generalized trust levels in science and scientists influence more specific attitudes toward new science issues (e.g., biotechnology) brought to public light through media (Priest, Bonfadelli, & Rusanen, 2003). Lee, Scheufele, and Lewenstein (2005) found the contextual factor of opinion climate (e.g., trust in business leaders) to affect the formation of public attitudes toward the risks associated with specific and emerging science-related issues (e.g., nanotechnology). The general public at large had no well-defined attitudes toward these science-related issues (i.e., reflective of the deficit model). However, when presented with these issues (most often times through news reports), initial attitudes were shaped by the macrolevel contextual factors of trust in science and actors (e.g., scientists, business leaders) who are influential in how these science- or science technology–related matters play themselves out in the public arena.
Reinforcement
The context in which children watch television (e.g., alone or with others) can have a significant impact on their interpretations of television content and its subsequent impact. Nathanson (2001) found that the children in her sample watched violent and aggressive content far more with peers than with parents, and that rates of peer coviewing and peer discussion of this type of content were strongly correlated with positive attitudes and greater acceptance of this content. It has clearly been shown that those who are already aggressive gravitate toward aggressive content (Bandura, 1986), and the work of Nathanson indicates that the contextual factor of viewing aggressive content with one’s peers will serve to reinforce positive attitudes toward this content.
Change
Classic media research on the Knowledge Gap Hypothesis is another area of mass communication research that takes into account context (Tichenor, Donohue, & Olien, 1980). For instance, communities that are more diverse tend to allow for more positive presentations of social protest given the wider variance of opinion at the macrosocial level, while communities that are less pluralistic will be less receptive to social protests taking place within their limited geographic area. This lower level of palatability will be reflected in more negative news coverage of social protests in these communities as well. A recent study by McCluskey, Stein, Boyle, and McLeod (2009) found that newspapers in less pluralistic communities (1) provided less coverage of protests and (2) covered protests in ways that were more critical of those social movements. This was especially true when the social protests were directed at local government. It is clear though various experimental works that varied news coverage of social protests can produce response change in how media audience members view not only the protesters and the stances they are taking on various issues, but also the police who are responding to/seeking to control the movements (see McLeod, 1995; McLeod & Detenber, 1999). However, a broader point being made by this area of research is that these types of response change outcomes will only become evident in communities that are pluralistic.
Summary
The studies summarized represent how the study of mass communication influence, undertaken across a wide range of subfields, can be linked to a full range of persuasion outcomes. We have offered a series of works that deal with response formation, reinforcement, and change. In addition, it was revealed through these works that persuasion in its many facets has been addressed by mass communication scholarship. As a result, there is a clear case to be made that the study of media influence is well matched with the study of persuasion.
Persuasion Components in Mass Communication Theories
* * *
The previous section provided a systematic overview of individual empirical works across a wide range of mass communication-related areas that demonstrate media effects as persuasion. However, the treatment of the study of media as being in line with the study of persuasion can and should be addressed at a broader theoretical level as well. Bryant and Miron (2004) cast a wide net in terms of what they included as mass communication theory when providing an overview of the current state of theory building in the field. They identified 26 major media-oriented theories that were referenced across a sample of journals affiliated with distinct national/international scholarly associations. A handful clearly rise above the others in terms of the frequency with which they are referenced: agenda setting (McCombs & Shaw, 1972), cultivation (e.g., Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, & Signorielli, 1980), social learning (e.g., Bandura, 1973), McLuhan’s study of media form influence (e.g., McLuhan, 1964), and the diffusion of innovations (e.g., Rogers & Shoemaker, 1971). As we demonstrate, there are processes of influence within each of these theories that are representative of our understanding of persuasion.
Agenda Setting
Agenda setting as a theory of news media influence represented a shift away from the more marketing-oriented model of campaign influence that was a driving force behind the work of Lazarsfeld and colleagues (e.g., Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, 1944). McCombs and Shaw (1972) steered the attention of political communication scholarship away from the latter stages of the hierarchy of effects (i.e., attitudes and behaviors) and the high bar of defining only “change” (i.e., Miller’s response change as defined as a shift in valence) as an “effect.” Instead, an argument was put forward by McCombs and Shaw, and backed by strong empirical evidence, that media can have strong influence on the earlier stages of the hierarchy of effects (i.e., awareness and salience).
Intricately connected to the process of salience transfer (from the media to the public) detailed in agenda setting theory is the subsequent process of political media priming effects (see McCombs, 2004).2 This transfer effect has been studied at both the individual and aggregate levels (see Acapulco typology; McCombs et al., 2011). Priming is first and foremost about evaluation—what objects do people focus on when evaluating political actors and/or where they stand on particular issues? (see Scheufele, 2000). The process of salience transfer that is at the heart of agenda setting establishes the specific elements deemed to be most important within the public. If news media outlets are constantly talking about the state of the economy and jobs, then the public will be thinking about the state of the economy and jobs. In terms of priming, it would then be the case that the economy and job creation would be salient in people’s minds when they are asked to evaluate how well President Obama is doing as President of the United States (e.g., stating their attitude toward Obama on a public opinion survey). The issues of the economy and job creation, as a result of being placed prominently within the news media’s agenda, will be used disproportionately by citizens when it comes time to judge President Obama’s job performance.
It is clear from this summary of the processes of influence detailed in agenda setting and priming that a process of persuasion unfolds, leading up to citizens forming attitudes and opinions toward political actors. The notion of treating agenda setting theory as detailing a process of persuasion is legitimized further when expanding our discussion to include not just the first level of agenda set
ting (i.e., salience transfer of objects), but also the second level of agenda setting theory (i.e., salience transfer of attributes; see Ghanem, 1997). Returning to the example of President Obama, specific attributes that are constantly raised in news media about our current president include his racial/ethnic profile, his being an intellectual, a family man, and the sense of calm/reason he brings to most decision-making functions. All of these attributes, made salient through the 24-7 news cycle, work to aid in the shaping of our attitudes toward our current president and whether we plan to vote for him in the 2012 general presidential election. As a result, the salience transfer process outlined in agenda setting theory can and should be viewed as part of broader persuasive processes evident in media.
Cultivation
Gerbner’s cultivation theory reinforced the notion that media had the potential to produce moderate to large effects on individuals and society, especially over the long term (Shanahan & Morgan, 1999). Cultivation researchers argue that television, in particular, “cultivate[s] stable and common conceptions of reality” and it does so because “viewers are born into [a] symbolic world and cannot avoid exposure to its recurrent patterns” (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, Signorielli, & Shanahan, 2002, p. 45). The “symbolic world” of television presents society in a manner that does not match reality. Our constant contact with televised messages shapes how we come to see the role of violence in a social world (e.g., Gerbner & Gross, 1976), determines specific sex roles (e.g., Signorielli, 1989), and establishes our views on the environment (e.g., Shanahan & McComas, 1999). The symbolic world offered by television stems from the industrialized mass production of messages by the few for consumption by the many, and the basic influences described by Gerbner and colleagues can very much be seen as a parallel to Miller’s basic notion of response-shaping persuasion effects. Television through a process defined as “mainstreaming” leads individuals to react in similar ways to objects in the real world based on how the world is presented to us through television as a storyteller.
The SAGE Handbook of Persuasion Page 9