PSY 2510 Social Psychology: The Source of a Persuasive Message

00:21:01
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX-PJGbi4s0

概要

TLDRThe video discusses how persuasion is influenced by the source of the message, emphasizing that while it's difficult to convince everyone all the time, understanding the persuasive process can increase effectiveness. Persuasive communications involve the source, message content, and audience. Source credibility, based on competence and trustworthiness, is crucial for persuasion, while likability can be enhanced by similarity and attractiveness. The 'sleeper effect' is also covered, explaining how non-credible sources can become more persuasive over time as the association with the source is forgotten. Overall, message strength and personal relevance significantly influence how a message is perceived.

収穫

  • 💡Persuasion effectiveness varies with the issue's importance and familiarity.
  • 🔑Three main factors of persuasive communication are the source, content, and audience.
  • 🧠Credible sources are both competent and trustworthy.
  • 👥Similarity and physical attractiveness boost a source's likability.
  • 🕒Over time, non-credible sources may become more persuasive due to the sleeper effect.
  • 🎯Highly involved individuals process messages more centrally, focusing on argument strength.
  • 👨‍⚕️Stereotypes significantly affect perceived trustworthiness of professions.
  • 📈Source credibility impacts persuasion more through peripheral processing.
  • 📰People often disassociate information from its source over time.
  • 🤔The relevance of the message to the individual heavily influences persuasion.

タイムライン

  • 00:00:00 - 00:05:00

    The speaker discusses the complexities of persuasion and how it's not always possible to change someone's mind, especially as the significance of an issue increases. The importance of understanding the persuasive process is highlighted, noting that persuasion consists of three main factors: the source, the content, and the audience. The focus is on the source, emphasizing the roles of credibility and likability. Credibility stems from competence and trustworthiness, and examples such as Warren Buffett and Merill Street are used to illustrate varying contexts of credibility.

  • 00:05:00 - 00:10:00

    The speaker continues discussing credibility while introducing trustworthiness as a critical component, highlighting stereotypes that impact perceptions of honesty. Bernie Sanders is used as an example of a credible politician perceived as trustworthy due to fighting for common interests. The topic shifts to likability, defined by similarity and physical attractiveness, explaining how people tend to find similar or attractive sources more persuasive. The way social connections and attractiveness affect persuasion is explored, including research showing greater persuasive success by attractive individuals.

  • 00:10:00 - 00:15:00

    Further studies on the impact of attractiveness in persuasion show that physically attractive individuals often achieve better results in obtaining agreement, demonstrating the 'what is beautiful is good' stereotype. The notion of personal involvement is introduced, explaining how it influences the processing of persuasive messages. Highly involved individuals process information centrally, less swayed by source characteristics, focusing instead on argument strength. An example study involving students and comprehensive exams illustrates how involvement changes the effects of expertise on persuasion.

  • 00:15:00 - 00:21:01

    The concept of the sleeper effect is introduced, where non-credible sources can gradually become more influential as the source of information becomes disassociated from the information itself over time. The speaker discusses how this effect occurs more often when the source of information is revealed after the message, potentially leading to greater long-term persuasion. Research supports that over time, non-credible sources may increase in persuasiveness due to the sleeper effect while credible sources may lose some persuasive impact. The session concludes, teasing further exploration of social psychology.

もっと見る

マインドマップ

Mind Map

よくある質問

  • What is the main argument presented by the speaker?

    The speaker's main argument is that while it's challenging to change people's minds and persuade them due to varying perspectives, understanding the persuasive process—including the source, message, and audience—can enhance the likelihood of effective communication.

  • What makes a source credible?

    Credibility is a combination of competency and trustworthiness. Competent sources are knowledgeable and skilled, while trustworthiness relates to the perception of honesty and absence of ulterior motives.

  • What is the 'sleeper effect'?

    The sleeper effect is a phenomenon where over time, people disassociate the source of information from the information itself, making non-credible sources more persuasive as the memory of where the information came from fades.

  • How does personal involvement affect the impact of a persuasive source?

    Personal involvement can limit source effects because highly involved individuals are likely to process information carefully, focusing on the content rather than superficial source characteristics.

  • What factors contribute to a source's likability in persuasion?

    Likability is often based on similarity and physical attractiveness. People tend to trust and listen to those who appear similar to them or who are physically attractive, creating an initial bond that enhances persuasiveness.

ビデオをもっと見る

AIを活用したYouTubeの無料動画要約に即アクセス！
字幕
en
オートスクロール:
  • 00:00:01
    [Music]
  • 00:00:10
    as we continue to talk about attitudes
  • 00:00:12
    in general and persuasion in particular
  • 00:00:16
    this time let's focus on the source of a
  • 00:00:18
    persuasive
  • 00:00:20
    communication here's a statement that's
  • 00:00:22
    probably not going to shock you we can't
  • 00:00:24
    change all people's minds all the time
  • 00:00:28
    and I guess that has some good points in
  • 00:00:30
    some bad points I mean it would be nice
  • 00:00:32
    if we had that type of power but keep in
  • 00:00:35
    mind if that type of power existed
  • 00:00:37
    people would wield that power against us
  • 00:00:39
    and we wouldn't want that I guess my
  • 00:00:41
    general point that I wanted to make is
  • 00:00:43
    that we're all unique people who come to
  • 00:00:46
    the table with our own unique
  • 00:00:47
    perspectives it's not like when I try to
  • 00:00:50
    persuade you of something I'm always
  • 00:00:52
    going to be able to get through to you
  • 00:00:54
    that's an oversimplification of the
  • 00:00:56
    persuasive process and it actually
  • 00:00:58
    reminds me of a conversation that I had
  • 00:01:00
    with a colleague of mine we weren't
  • 00:01:01
    seeing eye to eye about some policy
  • 00:01:04
    issue on campus so we were discussing it
  • 00:01:06
    and he came to my office and he said to
  • 00:01:08
    me if I'm right about the way I see this
  • 00:01:11
    issue I will persuade you and if you're
  • 00:01:13
    right about the way you see this issue
  • 00:01:15
    you will persuade me and I thought to
  • 00:01:17
    myself that's not true at all we already
  • 00:01:20
    know what the other person is likely to
  • 00:01:22
    say and we've already thought of
  • 00:01:24
    counterarguments so here's a general
  • 00:01:26
    Point persuasion in general decreases as
  • 00:01:30
    the significance of an issue or the
  • 00:01:32
    importance of an issue increases and
  • 00:01:34
    also as your familiarity with that issue
  • 00:01:36
    increases and that makes sense because
  • 00:01:38
    if an issue is really important to you
  • 00:01:41
    and you're really familiar with it it's
  • 00:01:43
    likely that you've really thought it out
  • 00:01:45
    and it's also likely that you've dug in
  • 00:01:48
    you've already determined what your
  • 00:01:49
    stance is going to be on that issue you
  • 00:01:52
    but by identifying some key factors in
  • 00:01:55
    the persuasive process we can strengthen
  • 00:01:58
    the odds that some persuasive attempt is
  • 00:02:01
    going to be successful so we can't
  • 00:02:02
    always change people's minds but if we
  • 00:02:05
    understand the persuasive process we can
  • 00:02:07
    craft a message so it's more likely to
  • 00:02:09
    be persuasive so what we're going to do
  • 00:02:12
    is start picking apart the persuasive
  • 00:02:14
    process so we can better understand when
  • 00:02:16
    it's going to be successful and when
  • 00:02:17
    it's going to be less successful and in
  • 00:02:20
    general persuasive Communications
  • 00:02:22
    consist of three main factors one is the
  • 00:02:26
    source of the message another is the
  • 00:02:28
    content of the message and a third key
  • 00:02:32
    factor is the audience to whom the
  • 00:02:34
    message is being directed so persuasive
  • 00:02:37
    Communications consist of who says what
  • 00:02:40
    to whom for now we're going to focus on
  • 00:02:43
    the source of the message so in other
  • 00:02:45
    words we're going to focus on the who
  • 00:02:47
    and who says what to
  • 00:02:51
    whom in general credible likable sources
  • 00:02:55
    are more
  • 00:02:56
    persuasive so what does it mean to be a
  • 00:02:58
    credible or a liable source Source let's
  • 00:03:00
    take each one of those
  • 00:03:02
    separately credibility in general is a
  • 00:03:05
    blend of Competency and
  • 00:03:07
    trustworthiness competent sources are
  • 00:03:10
    highly able they're smart they're
  • 00:03:12
    knowledgeable they're well spoken
  • 00:03:15
    they're seen as
  • 00:03:16
    experts so why is it that experts are
  • 00:03:19
    more persuasive well experts are
  • 00:03:22
    comforting to us they're somewhat
  • 00:03:24
    disarming because we assume that they
  • 00:03:26
    know what they're talking about so we
  • 00:03:28
    pay more attention to what they have to
  • 00:03:30
    say and we're more likely to accept what
  • 00:03:32
    they have to say in other words we're
  • 00:03:34
    more likely to be persuaded by experts
  • 00:03:37
    so for example Warren Buffett is a very
  • 00:03:40
    credible Source when it comes to
  • 00:03:42
    investing advice because he's one of the
  • 00:03:44
    richest men in the world so if I see a
  • 00:03:47
    news article that says it's going to
  • 00:03:49
    discuss Warren Buffett's 10 rules for
  • 00:03:52
    investing I'm going to read that because
  • 00:03:54
    I know that he's an expert he has
  • 00:03:56
    competency which makes him credible now
  • 00:03:59
    think about this as well competency and
  • 00:04:02
    credibility vary by context so here's a
  • 00:04:05
    picture of Merill stre Merill stre is an
  • 00:04:08
    amazing actress and I think when it
  • 00:04:10
    comes to that type of field most people
  • 00:04:13
    would see her as very competent and as
  • 00:04:14
    an expert however Merill stre sometimes
  • 00:04:17
    likes to talk about political issues in
  • 00:04:20
    that realm she's not seen as an expert
  • 00:04:22
    so in that realm she's not necessarily
  • 00:04:24
    seen as competent so in that realm she's
  • 00:04:27
    not necessarily seen as credible so she
  • 00:04:29
    will be less persuasive when talking
  • 00:04:32
    about political issues even though she
  • 00:04:34
    has a huge audience like for example
  • 00:04:36
    during an awards
  • 00:04:38
    banquet now contrast that with when I
  • 00:04:41
    hear the same types of political
  • 00:04:43
    arguments or political information
  • 00:04:45
    coming from a trusted newsman like
  • 00:04:47
    Lester Hol he is seen as much more
  • 00:04:49
    competent and thus he has much more
  • 00:04:52
    credibility but as I mentioned
  • 00:04:55
    competency isn't enough in order to be
  • 00:04:58
    credible you need to be competent but
  • 00:05:00
    you also need to be trustworthy in order
  • 00:05:02
    for you to be a credible Source who
  • 00:05:05
    might persuade me I need to trust that
  • 00:05:08
    you're telling me the truth now much of
  • 00:05:11
    our assessment of trustworthiness is
  • 00:05:13
    just simply based on stereotypes so
  • 00:05:16
    stereotypically when we think about like
  • 00:05:18
    members of Congress or car salesmen we
  • 00:05:21
    don't see them as very credible we don't
  • 00:05:24
    see them as very honest and that's what
  • 00:05:26
    these numbers are that you're looking at
  • 00:05:27
    right here they're essentially honesty
  • 00:05:29
    ratings you can see like nurses medical
  • 00:05:32
    doctors they're seen as very honest
  • 00:05:33
    people so it's just kind of
  • 00:05:35
    stereotypical and it also goes along I
  • 00:05:37
    guess with with the jobs that they have
  • 00:05:39
    I mean of course car salesmen are trying
  • 00:05:41
    to persuade us to buy a car uh they have
  • 00:05:45
    an ulterior motive they want to make
  • 00:05:47
    money nurses and medical doctors they're
  • 00:05:49
    not necessarily trying to persuade us
  • 00:05:51
    about something they're just trying to
  • 00:05:53
    inform us about something our our health
  • 00:05:56
    so all I'm saying is in general based on
  • 00:05:58
    their roles and BAS based on the
  • 00:06:00
    stereotypes that exist in our culture we
  • 00:06:02
    tend to see some people as more
  • 00:06:04
    trustworthy and other people as less
  • 00:06:06
    trustworthy and the people that we see
  • 00:06:08
    as more trustworthy they tend to be more
  • 00:06:10
    credible and thus they tend to be more
  • 00:06:12
    persuasive let's continue to talk about
  • 00:06:14
    trustworthiness a little bit here's a
  • 00:06:16
    good example uh Bernie Sanders although
  • 00:06:19
    he's a member of Congress he's a Senator
  • 00:06:21
    Bernie Sanders is indeed seen as very
  • 00:06:24
    trustworthy and that's because people
  • 00:06:26
    perceive him to be fighting for the
  • 00:06:27
    common man it's almost if he's fighting
  • 00:06:30
    against his own self-interest and this
  • 00:06:33
    brings up an important Point remember
  • 00:06:35
    when I was talking about car salesmen
  • 00:06:37
    when they're telling you about a car and
  • 00:06:39
    they're trying to persuade you to buy it
  • 00:06:41
    we know that they have a self-interest
  • 00:06:43
    in this deal because if you buy that car
  • 00:06:46
    they're going to make money but when
  • 00:06:47
    Bernie Sanders speaks many people
  • 00:06:49
    perceive him to be trustworthy because
  • 00:06:52
    they're unable to see his own
  • 00:06:54
    self-interest in many of the policies
  • 00:06:56
    that he proposes let me give you an
  • 00:06:59
    example Le from the other side of the
  • 00:07:01
    spectrum this is Wilford Brimley he's
  • 00:07:03
    deceased he an actor who made a lot of
  • 00:07:06
    movies and he was he was very popular
  • 00:07:08
    people loved him people saw him as a
  • 00:07:10
    grandfather well he started endorsing a
  • 00:07:12
    lot of products so he would be selling
  • 00:07:14
    Insurance he'd be selling medical
  • 00:07:16
    equipment he was selling oatmeal and the
  • 00:07:19
    point is because he was endorsing so
  • 00:07:21
    many products and people were able to
  • 00:07:23
    see that he had some type of
  • 00:07:25
    self-interest in it they no longer
  • 00:07:27
    trusted him and in fact it became a
  • 00:07:29
    little bit bit of a joke one week on
  • 00:07:31
    Saturday Night Live they had an actor
  • 00:07:34
    portraying him and they showed a
  • 00:07:36
    commercial that started out with high
  • 00:07:38
    I'm Wilford Brimley for Tampa so I guess
  • 00:07:40
    they were just trying to make the point
  • 00:07:42
    that this particular actor would endorse
  • 00:07:44
    any product so how can we trust him to
  • 00:07:46
    tell us honestly about any one of those
  • 00:07:49
    products all right well I mentioned that
  • 00:07:51
    credible and likable sources are more
  • 00:07:53
    persuasive let's talk a little bit now
  • 00:07:55
    about what makes a source more likable
  • 00:07:58
    well in general like
  • 00:07:59
    is composed of two primary factors one
  • 00:08:02
    is similarity and the other one is
  • 00:08:04
    pretty obvious physical attractiveness
  • 00:08:06
    you might not have thought much about
  • 00:08:08
    similarity but it's really pretty
  • 00:08:10
    interesting because people who are
  • 00:08:12
    similar to us they're essentially
  • 00:08:14
    informal members of our ingroup if they
  • 00:08:17
    share some type of characteristic with
  • 00:08:19
    us then we form a a more immediate bond
  • 00:08:22
    to them it's almost unquestionable so
  • 00:08:25
    for example it's not uncommon that I get
  • 00:08:27
    calls and people are trying to raise
  • 00:08:29
    money
  • 00:08:30
    well it's also not that uncommon that I
  • 00:08:31
    will get calls from Ohio University
  • 00:08:33
    trying to raise money sometimes they're
  • 00:08:35
    really smart from a social psychological
  • 00:08:37
    perspective and they will have an OU
  • 00:08:40
    student call now when I answer the phone
  • 00:08:43
    and I find out that the person that I'm
  • 00:08:44
    talking to is an U student I kind of
  • 00:08:47
    immediately bond with that student
  • 00:08:49
    because I know that that student is like
  • 00:08:51
    me I was an U student I'm now an OU
  • 00:08:53
    Professor so this person is part of my
  • 00:08:55
    ingroup now if that person is like me
  • 00:08:58
    and that person is part of my my in
  • 00:08:59
    group that person is going to be more
  • 00:09:01
    persuasive it's simply harder for me to
  • 00:09:03
    say no to someone who I have that much
  • 00:09:05
    in common with another characteristic
  • 00:09:08
    that leads to likeability is physical
  • 00:09:10
    attractiveness and I know it doesn't
  • 00:09:12
    seem like the world should work this way
  • 00:09:13
    but it does people who are physically
  • 00:09:16
    attractive just tend to be more likable
  • 00:09:18
    at least initially and when a physically
  • 00:09:20
    attractive source is part of some type
  • 00:09:23
    of persuasive campaign like in this
  • 00:09:25
    example Sophia Vergara is selling Diet
  • 00:09:27
    Pepsi we're going to pay attention
  • 00:09:29
    attention at least men are going to pay
  • 00:09:30
    attention I know I pay attention I have
  • 00:09:33
    no intention at all of buying or
  • 00:09:35
    drinking diet Pepsi but if I see her on
  • 00:09:38
    a commercial I'm going to watch it so
  • 00:09:40
    physically attractive people are more
  • 00:09:42
    likely to get our attention they're more
  • 00:09:44
    likely to keep our attention and there's
  • 00:09:46
    also some evidence that we're more
  • 00:09:48
    likely to try to please those people so
  • 00:09:51
    for example there was a really neat
  • 00:09:53
    research study done back in the 1970s by
  • 00:09:55
    Shelley Chen she's a well-known social
  • 00:09:58
    psychologist and and what she did In
  • 00:10:00
    This research study was manipulate the
  • 00:10:03
    attractiveness level of people who were
  • 00:10:05
    asking other people these were students
  • 00:10:07
    on campus to sign a petition so some of
  • 00:10:09
    the students that were out there asking
  • 00:10:11
    to have a petition signed were very
  • 00:10:12
    physically attractive people other
  • 00:10:14
    people were more average and the
  • 00:10:16
    petition had to do with um keeping meat
  • 00:10:19
    off of the menus in the cafeteria when
  • 00:10:22
    physically attractive people approached
  • 00:10:24
    others they were successful about 41% of
  • 00:10:27
    the time about 41% of the time the
  • 00:10:30
    people sign their petition the more
  • 00:10:32
    average looking people were successful
  • 00:10:34
    only about 32% of the time so one thing
  • 00:10:37
    that we'll cover later on is called the
  • 00:10:39
    what is beautiful is good stereotype and
  • 00:10:43
    in general when we see people who are
  • 00:10:45
    beautiful we tend to think that they
  • 00:10:47
    have a lot of other good characteristics
  • 00:10:50
    and that seems to also filter down
  • 00:10:52
    through their persuasive
  • 00:10:53
    Communications so I guess the bottom
  • 00:10:55
    line is when physically attractive
  • 00:10:57
    people speak we're more likely to listen
  • 00:11:01
    we're more likely to continue paying
  • 00:11:02
    attention and there's some evidence to
  • 00:11:04
    show that we're also more likely to
  • 00:11:06
    follow through and actually act on that
  • 00:11:09
    persuasive appeal so for the reasons
  • 00:11:11
    that we just discussed the source of a
  • 00:11:13
    message is obviously very influential
  • 00:11:16
    however that's not always the case and
  • 00:11:18
    the time that that's not the case is
  • 00:11:20
    when people are very involved in some
  • 00:11:23
    type of issue so personal involvement
  • 00:11:26
    can limit Source effects when a message
  • 00:11:30
    a persuasive appeal is very personally
  • 00:11:32
    relevant people are more likely to pay
  • 00:11:34
    attention and that makes sense because
  • 00:11:36
    if the message has something to do with
  • 00:11:39
    them they're more likely to pay
  • 00:11:41
    attention to what that message is really
  • 00:11:42
    saying in other words they're more
  • 00:11:44
    likely to process that message via the
  • 00:11:46
    central route and when they do this
  • 00:11:49
    they're much less likely to be
  • 00:11:50
    influenced by Source characteristics let
  • 00:11:53
    me give you an example of a research
  • 00:11:55
    study that makes that point pretty
  • 00:11:56
    clearly during this research study
  • 00:12:00
    students were presented with a
  • 00:12:02
    persuasive communication and there were
  • 00:12:04
    a couple things that were manipulated
  • 00:12:06
    one thing was how involved those
  • 00:12:08
    students would be in that persuasive
  • 00:12:10
    communication the persuasive appeal was
  • 00:12:13
    all about implementing comprehensive
  • 00:12:14
    exams for graduating seniors some of
  • 00:12:17
    those seniors some of those students
  • 00:12:19
    listening to the persuasive appeal were
  • 00:12:22
    very involved in the issue because they
  • 00:12:24
    were told that these new exams would
  • 00:12:26
    take place next year when they were
  • 00:12:28
    graduating so they would have to take
  • 00:12:30
    the exams other students who were
  • 00:12:32
    hearing the persuasive appeal were told
  • 00:12:34
    that the new exams would not be
  • 00:12:36
    implemented for another 10 years so it
  • 00:12:38
    wouldn't affect them so some students
  • 00:12:40
    were very involved because the new exams
  • 00:12:42
    would affect them some students were not
  • 00:12:45
    involved because the new exams would not
  • 00:12:47
    affect them now another thing that was
  • 00:12:50
    manipulated was the strength of the
  • 00:12:52
    arguments sometimes the students were
  • 00:12:53
    hearing very strong Arguments for why we
  • 00:12:56
    should have these comprehensive exams
  • 00:12:58
    and sometimes the students were hearing
  • 00:12:59
    weak arguments so let's just look at the
  • 00:13:02
    results from that perspective first when
  • 00:13:05
    students were really involved in this
  • 00:13:07
    issue because they would have to take
  • 00:13:09
    the exams they were persuaded most when
  • 00:13:12
    they heard strong arguments when they
  • 00:13:14
    heard weak arguments they were not
  • 00:13:16
    persuaded much at all so that's a good
  • 00:13:18
    example of how when you are highly
  • 00:13:21
    involved in an issue you are more likely
  • 00:13:23
    to process that message via the central
  • 00:13:26
    route now look at these students these
  • 00:13:28
    students heard heard the exact same
  • 00:13:30
    messages however they knew that these
  • 00:13:32
    exams were not going to affect them so
  • 00:13:34
    they were not very involved in what was
  • 00:13:36
    going on and as you would expect they
  • 00:13:38
    processed that information via the
  • 00:13:40
    peripheral route and remember when
  • 00:13:42
    people are processing information via
  • 00:13:44
    the peripheral route they're not really
  • 00:13:46
    scrutinizing the arguments very well so
  • 00:13:48
    here we see a very small difference in
  • 00:13:51
    the people's attitudes after hearing
  • 00:13:53
    strong arguments and weak arguments in
  • 00:13:55
    general it didn't matter all that much
  • 00:13:58
    how strong the argu ments were now
  • 00:14:00
    here's where things got more interesting
  • 00:14:02
    and here's where things are tied into
  • 00:14:03
    Source characteristics or Source
  • 00:14:06
    effects some of the students in the
  • 00:14:09
    research study were hearing the message
  • 00:14:11
    from an expert Source a college
  • 00:14:13
    professor other students were hearing
  • 00:14:15
    the persuasive appeal from a non-expert
  • 00:14:18
    source a high school student when people
  • 00:14:21
    were highly involved because those
  • 00:14:23
    comprehensive exams were going to affect
  • 00:14:25
    them it did not matter how credible The
  • 00:14:28
    Source was
  • 00:14:29
    because they were processing that
  • 00:14:31
    information via the central route and
  • 00:14:33
    via the central route I don't care if
  • 00:14:34
    you're an expert or you're not an expert
  • 00:14:36
    I want to hear what you have to say and
  • 00:14:39
    in these experimental conditions the
  • 00:14:41
    only thing that was being manipulated
  • 00:14:43
    was the expertise of the source they're
  • 00:14:45
    either highly expert or not expert did
  • 00:14:48
    not matter but now for the students who
  • 00:14:52
    had a relatively low involvement in this
  • 00:14:54
    issue because the comprehensive exams
  • 00:14:56
    would not affect them they were very
  • 00:14:58
    influ infuenced by who was speaking that
  • 00:15:00
    message and that's because they're
  • 00:15:02
    processing that information via the
  • 00:15:04
    peripheral route remember when people
  • 00:15:06
    are processing via the peripheral route
  • 00:15:08
    they're not paying attention to all the
  • 00:15:10
    nitty-gritty of the message it's just
  • 00:15:12
    not that important to them so they're
  • 00:15:14
    relying on some superficial cues well
  • 00:15:17
    one superficial cue is the source
  • 00:15:19
    characteristic that someone is an expert
  • 00:15:21
    or someone's not so much an expert when
  • 00:15:24
    these people were hearing the message
  • 00:15:26
    from an expert Source they saw the
  • 00:15:29
    arguments as relatively persuasive they
  • 00:15:31
    saw the idea for comprehensive exams as
  • 00:15:34
    favorable but when these students were
  • 00:15:36
    hearing the persuasive appeal from a
  • 00:15:38
    non-expert source from a high school
  • 00:15:40
    student they were not
  • 00:15:42
    persuaded so just to sum up my point is
  • 00:15:44
    that Source characteristics are very
  • 00:15:47
    important sources that are credible and
  • 00:15:49
    likable do indeed tend to be more
  • 00:15:51
    persuasive but that's most likely to
  • 00:15:54
    occur when people are processing
  • 00:15:56
    information via the peripheral route
  • 00:15:59
    when people are very involved in an
  • 00:16:01
    issue and they're processing information
  • 00:16:03
    via the central route they are still
  • 00:16:05
    going to be persuaded based on the
  • 00:16:06
    strength of the
  • 00:16:08
    arguments let's talk about the sleeper
  • 00:16:11
    effect next it's really a very
  • 00:16:12
    interesting phenomenon that's related to
  • 00:16:15
    Source characteristics here's the basic
  • 00:16:17
    Point noncredible sources can have a
  • 00:16:20
    greater persuasive impact over
  • 00:16:23
    time let me give you an example of how
  • 00:16:25
    this could work when Hillary Clinton was
  • 00:16:28
    running for president some people
  • 00:16:31
    discussed the idea that she might have
  • 00:16:33
    been involved in a murder of a person
  • 00:16:36
    who worked for Bill Clinton back when
  • 00:16:37
    Bill Clinton was President and I know
  • 00:16:39
    that sounds crazy and that's because it
  • 00:16:41
    is crazy and it's interesting though
  • 00:16:44
    that this was actually printed you know
  • 00:16:47
    in some tabloids and it was on the
  • 00:16:49
    internet but we need to keep in mind
  • 00:16:51
    that different sources are associated
  • 00:16:53
    with different levels of credibility so
  • 00:16:56
    if we saw this story printed and
  • 00:16:59
    seriously written about in like the Wall
  • 00:17:01
    Street Journal or the New York Times or
  • 00:17:04
    the Washington Post then it would have
  • 00:17:06
    one level of credibility but if we saw
  • 00:17:09
    something like this printed in the
  • 00:17:10
    Tabloid like the national Inquirer it
  • 00:17:12
    would be associated with another level
  • 00:17:14
    of credibility much less credibility
  • 00:17:17
    well my point about the sleeper effect
  • 00:17:18
    is this when people learn information
  • 00:17:22
    like the information that you're seeing
  • 00:17:23
    right in front of you they remember that
  • 00:17:25
    information they think about that
  • 00:17:27
    information and they also associated
  • 00:17:29
    with the source that provided that
  • 00:17:31
    information but the sleeper effect says
  • 00:17:33
    that over time people often disassociate
  • 00:17:37
    the source of the information with the
  • 00:17:39
    actual information they learned so a
  • 00:17:42
    source that is not credible over time
  • 00:17:45
    can become more credible when people
  • 00:17:48
    forget where they heard the information
  • 00:17:50
    so this is the type of thing that's
  • 00:17:51
    likely to happen someone will read about
  • 00:17:54
    Hillary Clinton being involved in a
  • 00:17:56
    murder in the National Inquirer and
  • 00:17:59
    they'll probably think that's crazy this
  • 00:18:01
    is just a tabloid and then it might be
  • 00:18:03
    six months down the road and somebody
  • 00:18:05
    will be talking about it and they'll say
  • 00:18:07
    yeah I remember reading about that at
  • 00:18:08
    some point maybe there's really
  • 00:18:10
    something to that because they're no
  • 00:18:12
    longer remembering where they read it
  • 00:18:14
    they're no longer remembering that the
  • 00:18:16
    source did not have
  • 00:18:18
    credibility what's interesting is that
  • 00:18:20
    this sleeper effect is most likely to
  • 00:18:23
    occur it occurs most reliably when
  • 00:18:26
    people learn about the source of the
  • 00:18:27
    information after they've already read
  • 00:18:30
    or heard about that persuasive message
  • 00:18:32
    so think about a situation like this
  • 00:18:34
    let's say that someone comes up to you
  • 00:18:35
    and they say like hey I heard that
  • 00:18:36
    Hillary Clinton was involved in a murder
  • 00:18:38
    then you talk about it a little bit and
  • 00:18:40
    then maybe you even talk about it with
  • 00:18:41
    someone else you start spreading that
  • 00:18:43
    information and it's only later that you
  • 00:18:46
    find out that that information was
  • 00:18:47
    originally published in the National
  • 00:18:49
    Inquirer and let's say that you don't
  • 00:18:51
    really trust the national inquire like
  • 00:18:53
    most people because it's a it's a
  • 00:18:54
    tabloid so at that point you'll pretty
  • 00:18:57
    much discount that story but remember
  • 00:18:59
    what the sleeper effect is all about
  • 00:19:01
    months later down the road you might
  • 00:19:04
    forget where that information came from
  • 00:19:07
    and when you hear other people talking
  • 00:19:08
    about it you're more likely in that
  • 00:19:10
    situation to say yeah I remember hearing
  • 00:19:11
    about that and you might be more likely
  • 00:19:13
    to think there's really something to it
  • 00:19:15
    and that's what the sleeper effect is
  • 00:19:16
    all about a non-credible source in this
  • 00:19:19
    case the national inquire can have a
  • 00:19:21
    greater persuasive impact on you over
  • 00:19:24
    time when that message that you remember
  • 00:19:27
    becomes disassociated with where you
  • 00:19:29
    read it the sleeper effect has been
  • 00:19:31
    demonstrated in some research studies in
  • 00:19:34
    these studies people are presented with
  • 00:19:35
    some information a persuasive appeal and
  • 00:19:38
    they're told that it either comes from a
  • 00:19:40
    high credibility Source or a low
  • 00:19:41
    credibility
  • 00:19:42
    source of course in this situation if
  • 00:19:45
    the source has low credibility people
  • 00:19:47
    don't change their attitudes very much
  • 00:19:49
    compared to if the source has high
  • 00:19:51
    credibility however if you check their
  • 00:19:53
    attitudes again over time in this case 3
  • 00:19:55
    weeks later we can see that even when
  • 00:19:57
    there's a low cred credibility Source
  • 00:19:59
    the people's attitudes tend to increase
  • 00:20:01
    just a little bit they become a little
  • 00:20:03
    bit more persuaded and people who heard
  • 00:20:05
    that information from a high credibility
  • 00:20:06
    source that tends to lose its persuasive
  • 00:20:09
    appeal because remember they too over
  • 00:20:11
    time are disassociating where they heard
  • 00:20:14
    that information so credible sources
  • 00:20:17
    over time tend to have less persuasive
  • 00:20:19
    impact and non-credible sources over
  • 00:20:22
    time tend to have more persuasive impact
  • 00:20:25
    now if you were to measure those people
  • 00:20:27
    3 weeks later but this time remind them
  • 00:20:29
    about the source of that communication
  • 00:20:31
    you won't see any sleeper effect at
  • 00:20:33
    all all right my friends that's it for
  • 00:20:35
    this section but stay tuned because
  • 00:20:37
    there's more social psychology coming up
  • 00:20:39
    soon
  • 00:20:42
    [Music]
  • 00:20:52
    [Music]
タグ
  • persuasion
  • communication
  • credibility
  • trustworthiness
  • likability
  • sleeper effect
  • source characteristics
  • message content
  • audience
  • personal involvement