Questions for Week 7

1. In the beginning of chapter 6, entitled, “The Psychology of Persuasion,” Woodward and Denton discuss three hypothetical constructs that serve as cognitive elements of persuasion: beliefs, attitudes, and values. A “belief” is defined as something we personally know to be true or false, “our convictions – even if others disagree” (page 133). However, the authors later mention that our ranking of beliefs change over time, giving the example of one’s view on abortion possibly changing after encountering a rape victim or becoming a parent. Do you think that knowledge gives us reason to believe? Or perhaps that personal experience or encounter cause one to believe? When talking about beliefs, I automatically think of words like, “religion,” “faith,” and “God.” Does more knowledge necessarily cause one to believe more or less in something? Or does it go beyond facts and figures, and perhaps “blind faith,” as some religious people may label it, to fully have belief in something?

2. The stimulus-response theory is described on page 139 by offering a behavioral model for persuasion. Woodward and Denton explain that, “the most famous example of this theory is Pavlov’s dog: each time the dog received food, a bell would ring. Soon, the sound of the bell alone was sufficient to make the animal salivate.” Is it true to you that you only learn what is right and what is wrong by hearing from someone who states that it is or is not? When do you know that you have not experienced a “conditioned outcome?” When we are constantly told that we are “good, beautiful, or smart (page 139)” by someone, is this really the only means of how we “learn” what behavior is acceptable and what is not? Lastly, is there perhaps another means to knowing how we come about what we agree and disagree with, or does it only come through others' attitudes and behaviors that trigger us to think the same way?

3. It is true that most audiences are attracted to the rich and famous, and to advertisements with their favorite celebrity as a spokesperson. The series of examples Woodward and Denton give on page 140 of their book regarding the Michelob advertisements and the painting by Smith and the painting by Picasso all serve as solid statements as to why these ads and the concept of “conditioning” work. However, do you think these ads are effective in that they not only attract audiences, but follow through in producing consumers in the end? We can give a round of applause to the creative directors for coming up with catchy phrases and appealing images, but just how effective are they? Do they perhaps, detract us away from these products because of the need to feel “unique” and go against the grain instead of with the crowd? It seems like, especially in today’s world, that people are striving for a sense of individuality. Do these advertisements using the concept of conditioning appeal to you, or, do they seem like just another advertorial or advertisement trying to suck you in to their strategy?