The task initially started out by assigning class members to groups, then specific jobs were chosen as to who be the facilitator Susan, the word taker Frances which the remaining two people (Catherine and Gurleen) would take part in the conversation.
Suggestions from the guidelines were briefly discussed, and specific ideas were offered from each group member, which were homelessness without any help, care leavers by Gurleen and gay marriage by Catherine and Frances. The group then made a majority decision that this issue of gay relationship would be used for the persuasive communication, as you may still find widely held values especially amidst those who feature cause, that gay relationship is wrong and really should only be endorsed for heterosexual couples. (Olson, 2006)
Following on from original conversations, the first theme recognized was from the natural perspective and the type versus nurture debate. I suggested exploring research related to if the gay gene actually is available, and also newer research on epigenetics, which suggests that homosexuality is not really a choice, then commented if credible proof could be found, those who believe gay matrimony is morally incorrect, may adjust their behaviour and Gurleen wanted to research this theme further.
The next theme was in regards to to 'Gay Bashing, as homosexuality has various negative stereotypes and stigmas fastened, such as paedophilia and transmission of HIV, therefore it was made a decision to explore incidents where homosexuals have been a sufferer of hate criminal offense or violent problems, and Gurleen decided that she'd find case studies and information in this area, that could assist the audience in attending to and possibly feel guilt for having negative behaviour towards fellow human beings.
Third main key issue, was that of legal and civil partnerships and Catherine commented that even though stigmas are attached to same sex relationship, these associations can be a lot more fulfilling and stable than so called 'sham relationships', which either face mask true sexuality, or can be exploited to be able to fulfil a small business transfer. Furthermore Catherine commented that physical, emotional and sexual abuse is common within heterosexual partnerships, and therefore questioned what would make dysfunctional relationships better than same making love ones. Evidence in this field could be utilised in the persuasive communication as a qualitative argument and Catherine decided to find information in this field.
The final theme identified was ethnical differences globally, and it was decided to research Countries which lawfully accept gay relationships, versus those that do not. Frances decided to research this area and investigate statistics on people who have been imprisoned or sentenced to loss of life in countries which still consider homosexuality to be always a crime, and this topic was considered to be another strong discussion as to why there a wide range of conflicting behaviour.
Finally, the mark audience was talked about, and it was decided that first season University student teens would be chosen, as previous studies evidenced that this age group were more persuadable and should have moderate degrees of self-esteem. (Hogg & Vaughan, 2005) Also there is consensus with regard to utilising techniques of the Elaboration Likelihood Model by Petty and Cacioppo (1986), the Heuristic Semantic Model by Eagly and Chaiken (1993), to evoke cognitive dissonance by Festinger (1957) and to understand those who will be persuaded by Community Judgement Theory, Sherif and Hovland (1961). I put myself forward to co-ordinate and make a power point presentation and also design a poster.
Word Count up: 547
Commentary of Persuasive Communication
The rationale for this persuasive communication display is the fact that gay people continue being stigmatised in many portion of society and that they do not have the same protection under the law as heterosexual lovers, thus it's important to address these issues and try to change perceptions and views in the public domain.
This communication was aimed at teenage students, who are found to become more open to persuasion relating to Viser & Krosnick (1998). Also further studies evidenced that not only years is important in frame of mind change, but inclusively moderate levels of intellect and self-esteem can affect persuasion. Thus it was predicted that first calendar year University or college students should have these elements, according with an inverted U curve hypothesis, since they had been recently accepted into higher education. (McGuire, 1968)
The persuasive communication originated, in order to take into account various models and techniques, such as the Yale methodology by Janis and Hovland (1959), the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) by Petty and Cacioppo (1986), the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) by Eagly and Chaiken, (1993), cognitive dissonance by Festiner (1957), rhetoric such as pathos and Social Judgement Theory (SJT) by Sherif and Hovland (1961).
The communication commenced with a track record Lady Gaga songs, 'Given birth to this Way', which aimed to have a priming effect on the audience, as the lyrics are well known and emphasise sexuality is set at beginning. Priming can be described as accessing heuristic pathways without an individual paying attention. For instance a haptic priming review conducted by Goldinger and Hansen (2005) discovered that when students sat of gentle chairs rather than hard wooden chairs, they were more available to persuasion.
Then the presentation began by using the Yale approach, by Janis and Hovland (1959), which there are three factors, the communicator, the communication and the audience. William McGuire (1968) attemptedto describe this Yale strategy as six steps to persuasion, which are presentation, attention, comprehension, yielding, retention and behavior. Display is the persuasive communication itself so when the audience cannot be persuaded by a message that they may ignore, it was important to get them to focus on that which was being said. This was achieved, by start the display with a brief video titled 'Sineads Side', which designed to employ the audience and also cause cognitive dissonance, as an actor repeatedly asked many strangers authorization to marry Sinead.
Cognitive Dissonance can be described as a feeling of discomfort, whenever a person simultaneously keeps several conflicting cognitions, which may stem off their beliefs or emotional reactions. In a state of dissonance, people may feel 'disequilibrium' such as guilt, humiliation or anxiety and thus would aim to remove distress, by changing their thoughts. (Festinger, 1957) Moreover, guilt has been found to impact persuasion regarding to O'Keefe, (2002).
Also it was considered important to provide both factors of the argument as the audience was relatively wise and also unsympathetic to this issue of gay matrimony, therefore this two-sided methodology briefly stated opposing ideas and then refuted or attacked them, with a series of strong arguments, which supported the topic. (Hovland et al. , 1949)
The next thing was an emotive talk, where the audience was asked to hear a love landscape that they, their friends or family could be involved in, and was designed to arouse pathos, which would cause emotions such as pity or sadness, and so participants would be involved in this issue. (Demird¶en, 2010).
After this task, it was necessary for the audience to understand the content of subject matter before their attitudes could be affected, therefore the comprehension stage followed, by explaining the nature versus nurture discussion. Recent research on Epigenetics has evidenced that homosexuality is shaped in the womb during development, and thus emphasised that homosexuality is not a choice. Also prior studies have discovered that those attribute cause to homosexuality, tend to have more negative views of gay matrimony, therefore this slide aimed to refute these values. (Wilcox and Norrander, 2002).
Another slide consisted of case studies of people who was simply victimised due to homophobia, and also offered information on innocent victims, who had been served prison and death sentences. These messages designed to cause a modest fear appeal by McGuire (1969), in that it could be one of these friends or family in this predicament. This inverted 'U' fear hypotheses as with self-esteem, state governments that only a average amount of fear will cause a change in persuasion, which means messages were not too explicit.
The next thing in the process was yielding, which may be described as approval of the subject matter which is where frame of mind change would appear, if the persuasive communication had been successful. Yielding was expected to be evidenced with a change in attitude when concluding the Behaviour towards Gay Matrimony (ATGM) questionnaire after the presentation ended. This reliable seven point Likert size questionnaire has been found in recent studies, which protected why people subject to gay relationship, such as attributing cause or strong religious values, and has been modified for this communication, in order to evaluate attitude change. (Olson, 2006)
Furthermore, it was decided not to pre-warn the audience the particular persuasive communication matter would be, as this can lessen the effects of the persuasive concept, put people on the guard and affect yielding. Therefore, the persuasive communication designed around the topic equal rights, rather than directly addressing this issue. (Benoit, 1998)
McGuire (1968) accepted that although attitudes can transform, another persuasive concept could revert this attitude back to the original standpoint. Which means next level was retention, which would be measured by asking participants to complete the ATGM questionnaire every six months for a two yr period. Lastly, McGuire considered behaviour to be the ultimate goal of persuasive discourse and was concerned with actions which would display that the persuasion got worked, which could be evidenced if individuals no longer feel uncomfortable about witnessing gay couples showing affection matching to question three of the ATGM questionnaire.
A criticism of the Yale model was that another step had not been considered, which is exactly what the audience considers the subject matter; a cognitive aspect addressed by the ELM. Also a significant weakness found that the approach discusses steps in the persuasion process, however, not how persuasion or yielding actually occurs and also will presume that any attitude change, results from learning ideas of the meaning, even though persuasion can occur when a subject matter is not discovered.
The ELM by Petty and Cacioppo (1986), attended to the Yale way shortfall and demonstrates two routes to attitude change, which will be the central and peripheral routes. For the central route to be activated, the note should be highly relevant and interesting, in order for the person to be much more likely to think or sophisticated or take into account the meaning. This central route tends to package with communication content as with content material, words or written material, and was included in case studies, quotes from famous people and the representation period, whereby participants were asked to write down their thoughts, known as the thought listing approach. (Cacioppo, Harkins and Petty, 1981)
Also the ELM claims there are several factors that influence receivers' thoughts, that are participation in the persuasion process, the grade of the argument, the quantity of arguments and reliability of the presenters. Individuals' participation was attained by asking them to engage in the communication, when they received the emotive talk and to mirror upon their thoughts. The grade of messages was included in topics mentioned such as epigenetics and case studies, also for number, several arguments were offered and the reliability element ensured that the presenters were qualified to deliver the data in an knowledgeable and knowledgeable manner.
Credibility has been found to be always a crucial factor in persuasion, which accesses both central and peripheral road. The peripheral path is utilized when the listener makes a decision whether to agree with the message predicated on other cues or source factors, alternatively than from the strength of the arguments or ideas in the communication. For example, a person may decide to agree with the message because the foundation appears to be a specialist or is of interest or when a listener notices that a communication has many quarrels, but lacks the power or motivation to take into account them singularly. (Petty, Cacioppo & Schumann, 1983).
The HSM by Eagly and Chaiken, (1993) is similar to the ELM, in that it also has two routes in persuasion procedures. The first way is the heuristic function, which is determined by cues such as speaker credibility and the second is the systematic setting which is a lot more cognitively requiring, as the recipient has to take on a crucial appraisal and take part in the message. On the other hand the HSM differs to the ELM, for the reason that it considers an connections between both the heuristic and organized routes, known as the co-occurrence hypothesis. Also the sufficiency concept, emphasises that folks use whatever work necessary to be able to realize enough confidence that they have accomplished their handling goals. (Bohner et al. , 1995)
Another theory which aspires to explain thoughts and opinions change, is the SJT by Sherif and Hovland (1961). This model addresses judgement and whether the meaning agrees or disagrees with the persons own attitude, who've their own 'anchor point' and latitudes of either popularity, non-commitment or rejection fall through this range. Most persuasion has been found that occurs in the latitude of non-commitment, therefore it was expected that those who possessed moderate scores on the ATGM, would be more susceptible to frame of mind change, than those who have scored higher.
Finally, the presentation concluded with an explicit conclusion and explained exactly what point had been made to allow understanding and retention, which includes been found to be more powerful than an implicit one, which leaves the given individual to choose for themselves. (Cruz, 1998)
WORD Count number: 1636
Evaluation Proposal
This longitudinal analysis is being designed to examine the potency of the Elaboration Probability Model (ELM), which will be utilised as part of a persuasive communication event, so that they can change negative behaviour towards same sex marriage. The ELM is described as being on the continuum of the central and peripheral route and it is predicted that by accessing the central route, you will see a confident and long-lasting transfer in favour of gay relationship, evidenced by way of a change in reactions to an Frame of mind Toward Gay Matrimony (ATGM) questionnaire. (Appendix 1)
Furthermore, this research aims to show that homosexuality is not a choice, by evidencing recent research on epigenetics, which suggests that sexual orientation is set during pregnancy by environmental factors, such as diet and hormones. Herek and Capitanio, (1995) stated an important predictor of attitude towards homosexuality, was whether individuals attributed choice as grounds why the person is gay. Also Bartkowski (2004) publicised that those who assumed homosexuality was a choice, were markedly less inclined to support gay rights, while those who attributed a natural cause, were much more supportive. Essentially, those who presumed that erotic orientation is determined at birth, are more likely to approve of gay marriage. (Wilcox and Norrander, 2002).
Method
Participants
First calendar year (N=60) University or college students will be recruited, by advertising on campus grounds, which will request for individuals to contact the researcher, who'll initially ask if they approve of gay matrimony; are indifferent or if indeed they do not approve, and the ones who approve will not be enrolled in the test. All individuals will be paid out with two free theatre tickets.
Materials
The materials which is used is a persuasive communication demonstration and the ATGM questionnaire.
Design
This longitudinal research will be a between themes design, as different participants will be randomly assigned, to either group one who will receive the presentation, which features the ELM and epigenetics video tutorial or control group two, who'll only watch a music training video. The ATGM questionnaire will be completed by all members before the event, immediately afterwards and then over periods of six months for two years. It is hypothesised that group one will illustrate a good and long-lasting change in their attitude towards gay relationship, but group two will illustrate little if any change on their attitudes towards gay marriage.
The dependent variable would be the participants' attitude, assessed by looking at overall scores from 46 ATGM questions on a 7-point Likert level, which will range from strongly agree to firmly disagree. The impartial variable would be the persuasive communication itself. Results will be statistically significant if those who objected firmly, therefore experienced high scores to ATGM questions, improved their scores which change was managed as time passes.
Procedure
Participants will be randomly designated to either group one or group two and asked to complete the ATGM questionnaire. Next, the organizations will be taken to separate University category rooms and group one will receive a ten minute persuasive communication, which will include the characteristics versus nature discussion, while the control group two will watch a music video tutorial. During the display, group one will be asked to think about their thoughts, by writing down their views, to ensure that they are engaging in the process and thus accessing the central course of the ELM.
Implications
The implications of this review could be that more education on aspect versus nurture evidence should be sent, which demonstrates that homosexuality is not a choice.
Ethical Considerations
Ethically, individuals' perspectives and any risks to their well-being, dignity or values should be anticipated and eliminated. Whenever possible, educated consent should be obtained, that will debrief members, emphasise their to withdraw and can provide them with the chance to ask any questions. Also confidentiality and anonymity will be ensured. (Francis, 1999)
