Choose Your Poison: Effects of Lay Beliefs About Mental Processes on Attitude Change

Abstract

Lay theories about persuasive messages were expected to lead to unwanted changes in attitudes that people were trying to protect. In Study 1 , students opposed to the legalization of marijuana chose to watch either a pro-legalization speech or a pro-legalization subliminal message, with instructions to choose the tape that would influence them the least. A significant proportion of people chose the speech. Among these participants and those randomly assigned to watch the tapes, however, the speech caused significant attitude change in a pro-legalization direction whereas the subliminal messages did not. Studies 2-4 showed that people were generally unwilling to change their attitudes, that they mistakenly believed they could generate effective counterarguments against the pro-legalization speech, and that even after watching the speech they underestimated the degree that their attitudes had changed. The implications of these findings for the effects of advertising are discussed.In the late 1950s, James Vicary claimed that he had increased concession sales by inserting subliminal messages into a commercial film. He sup posedly flashed the phrases, "Drink Coke" and "Eat Popcorn" at speeds too quick to be consciously perceived and these messages reportedly led to a dramatic increase in sales of soda and popcorn. Despite the debunk ing of this and other claims about subliminal advertising (Moore, 1982;Weir, 1984), there is a widespread belief among the public that such techniques are both common and powerful. Wilson, Brekke, Etling, and Houston (1992), for example, found that nearly 80% of a sample of college students preferred not to receive a subliminal message because they were afraid the message might influence them in an undesirable

The Relationship Between the Perceived and Actual Effectiveness of Persuasive Messages: A Meta-Analysis With Implications for Formative Campaign Research

“…One, with which we readily concur, is that lay theories of the effectiveness of suasory appeals may bear little correspondence to what is actually persuasive. Asking individuals to judge message effectiveness may prompt evaluations based on simplistic or erroneous beliefs about message impact (Wilson, Houston, & Meyers, 1998).…”

Third‐person perception and purchase behavior in response to various selling methods

“…As previous researchers have argued (Henrikson & Flora, 1999), perhaps skepticism about being influenced by persuasion attempts might actually make people more vulnerable to these tactics. Customers who dismiss the ability of selling methods to influence them might be less alert to persuasion attempts or might not make an effort to avoid being exposed to these attempts and thus are more susceptible to their influence (e.g., Wilson, Houston, & Meyers, 1998). However, it might also be suggested that an accepting attitude toward persuasion attempts makes people more susceptible to their influence (Tal-Or, 2007).…”

TARGET ARTICLE: The Message Is the Method: Celebrating and Exporting the Experimental Approach

“…If participants complain that the intervention was a waste of time or worse, insulting and demeaning, the designers of that intervention should obviously take note. But, it is a near truism in social psychology that participants are not always the best authority to assess how much their attitudes and beliefs have changed (Bem & McConnell, 1970;Goethals & Reckman, 1973;Wilson, Houston, & Meyers, 1998). Further, because an intervention made people feel uncomfortable or bored does not necessarily mean it failed to change their attitudes and beliefs.…”