Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Student CM 380 Cognitive Dissonance

Receiver
by

Patrice Oppliger

on 8 October 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Student CM 380 Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive Dissonance
Elaboration Likelihood Model
Social Judgment Theory
When an individual holds two inconsistent cognitions
= that individual experiences discomfort
motivated to reduce discomfort
Expenditure of Effort
The extent to which an individual engages in message-relevant thinking.
Ways to elaborate:
Central route: strength of argument
Peripheral route: heuristics or scripts
Motivation to elaborate:
involvement level (high = central, low = peripheral)
need for cognition
Ability to elaborate: trait or state
Additional keys to ELM:
match message to processing
persistence of persuasion
How individuals compare a message (i.e., position) to their beliefs/attitudes/values (i.e., anchor)
Source's positions fall within a receiver's:
Latitude of acceptance
Noncommitment
Latitude of rejection
Judgment Distortions
Assimilation
Contrast
Lat of Accept Noncom Lat of Reject
0-$9,000 $9,001-$9,999 $10,000
Car dealership: attempt to maximize position (price) while appealing to the buyer's anchor
Sam Adams vs. Bud
Effectiveness of Boot Camp, Hazing, etc.
Assessments made "after the fact"
3:30
Gun Control Debate
*incremental changes rather than gun/no gun debate
Factors:
Attitude change
Ego involvement
Implications for communicators
Message must fall within latitude of acceptance/latitude of noncommitment
(beware boomerang effect)
Politician vagueness
Ways to reduce dissonance:
Denial
Rationalize
Change attitude or behavior
Full transcript