It’s sometimes been said that the way pickup someone up is to use emotional language, and there’s definitely a grain of truth in that. A lot of people (men especially) seem to solely define themselves as their job, so unless they do something exciting for a living, explaining to other people that they’re an Accountant or a Computer programmer etc. is pretty boring, unless they’re fortunately enough to meet someone enthused by that type of work.

However, I’d like to introduce a more complete idea based around the Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion, which was originally created by Richard E. Petty (Ohio State University) and John T. Cacioppo (University of Chicago). Petty and Cacioppo proposed that persuasive messages go through one of two routes to achieve persuasion: the central route, and the peripheral route.

If the communication goes via the central route, a person is more likely to be persuaded if they are able to think about the message extensively. That is, if they are motivated to think about the communication, are capable of thinking about it, and if the argument is a strong one, then they will be persuaded to act in accordance with that message.

If the communication goes via the peripheral route, i.e. they are unable to elaborate on the message extensively, then they may still be persuaded by factors which have nothing to do with the content of the communication itself. In outline, they would be drawn to act on the communication by factors that they are already familiar with, which they have positive attitudes about, and then they would associate those attitudes with the message. They would then be persuaded towards the message, albeit weakly and temporarily.

The Central Route

Any attempt to be seductive is an attempt to be persuasive, and thus to steer someone’s thinking in a desired direction. So, determining whether the communication is in reality persuasive is the core of this model. If a communication is neutral, it has failed to be persuasive and the Seducee can take it or leave it; in which case this model simply does not apply. We can therefore assume that the communication was at least a little bit persuasive, so that we can move on to the next step.

In order for the Seducee to have motivation to process the message, it must have some relevance to them, i.e. it should pertain to something they already know about, because some small amount of familiarity with the communication content will encourage them to process it. People are often very busy, and they don’t get the chance, or even want to think about every tiny detail they come across. Psychologists term this phenomenon low involvement. When a person has no or very little connection to the subject or message, they tend to have no or very little involvement with the subject or message, and thus little or no desire to learn more about it.

The flip side to this is high involvement. In this case, someone that loves theatre would more than likely love to share their knowledge and passion, whilst attending a performance with you. Or a person that enjoys a good drink would no doubt relish the excuse to join you for a libation. Alternately, someone that enjoys shopping would be glad to have someone come along with them to help them make some important purchase. If a person has a high degree of personal experience with the content conveyed in the persuasive communication, they are more likely to pay attention and get deeper into the message.

So, the Seducee has been motivated to process the content, but do they have the ability to do so? There could be numerous distractions; perhaps they have children to look after, a prior appointment with a neighbour, or they are hungry and need to eat instead. TeeVee, the internet and other people wanting the Seducee’s time are distractions. So, competition from persuasive messages can often be fierce, whilst the Seducee’s time is strictly limited. They just might not have the opportunity to process the message, at that time.

The information being conveyed might also be too complex to comprehend. Someone that enjoys arts will definitely want to learn more about the subject, but a highly technical presentation or detailed history of some artist could be likely to turn them off because they simply cannot understand the information. They will therefore not elaborate on the message.

If the Seducee can understand the message and there are no distractions, then we can go to the next stage of the model.

If the communication is a well-constructed and convincing message, the Seducee is more likely to receive it favourably. Persuasion might still happen, even if the content of the message is different to the Seducee’s initial attitude; but if it is in-keeping with the Seducee’s previous opinions, there is likely to be lasting positive persuasion. The Seducee will have been moved even more in the direction that they were already leaning, and you will thus have reinforced that particular attitude for the future. And, at this point, the Seducee’s behaviour can probably be predicted as a result of the persuasion. So, for example the person will agree to do something with you, because they were persuaded based on the strength and relevance of your communication.

If the Seducee has been involved with the communication thus far, but there is no well-argued logical point, or the communication contained false information, there is likely to be a ricochet effect. In this case, the Seducee will reject the message and form negative thoughts and feeling about the communication. This would be especially true, when the Seducee has expertise in the field you are discussing (or a lot of previous knowledge). They may disagree with the ideas put forward in a cogent argument and simply reject the message, or see flaws in the argument and dismiss it as unreliable; thereby failing to be persuaded.

The Peripheral Route

Should a communication fail to go through the central route, it may find a path to the Seducee via the peripheral route. This would happen when the Seducee is not motivated to think about the communication, if they are unable to process it, or if the argument is weak. A communication using the peripheral route attempts to persuade by focusing on issues or themes that are not directly related to the subject topic of the communication. So, the message will attempt to grab attention by making the Seducee think about something that they are already familiar with and also has positive thoughts about (i.e. money, sex or a celebrity etc.). Advertisers use this tactic frequently: An example being Gary Lineker selling packets of potato crisps. There is no apparent connection between Mr Lineker’s football skills and bags of fried potato slices, but a consumer may be persuaded to buy a packet of crisps simply because he or she likes Gary Lineker. In this example Gary Lineker is a peripheral cue.

Robert B. Cialdini (Arizona State University) has identified six types of peripheral cues: Reciprocation, Commitment & Consistency, Social proof, authority, liking and scarcity. Each of these peripheral cues has almost nothing to do with the actual contents of the communication that your Seducee would receive.

Reciprocation is the idea that the Seducee is somehow obligated to agree with the communication, because of some past experience or information; basically, this is the idea that people tend to return favours.

Commitment & Consistency is making decisions based on thoughts or decisions that were agreed with at some point in the past. So, your Seducee might reason “I felt this way before <when I took some course of action> and I feel like this now, so I should take the same action now”.

Social proof is basically peer-pressure. The actions and words of others would be likely to influence the Seducee to be persuaded by your communication.

Authority is the idea that the Seducer has some power over the Seducee; people tend to obey authority figures, or it might be that the Seducer has expertise in some subject that the Seducee could benefit from.

Liking just means that the Seducer is likeable: They could be attractive, humorous, charismatic, generous or charming etc.

Scarcity is the idea that the opportunity will only be around for a short time, and so the Seducee should act now, before the chance disappears.

Now, if the communication fails to take the central route at any step of the process (i.e. the Seducee is not motivated, doesn’t comprehend or the argument is weak) then we can ask whether there is a peripheral cue available. If there’s no peripheral cue, then the original attitude will be retained and the persuasion attempt will have failed. If there is a cue, it may produce a positive, albeit temporary attitude change.

Even though the attitude change via the peripheral route may be temporary, it could be enough to encourage the Seducee to take action. They would now have some more experience with the subject of the communication; then later on, when another persuasion attempt is made, it may have a better chance of surviving through the central route and causing a more permanently attitude change.

Tips for the would be Seducer

The two routes to persuasion appear to exist as completely separate ideas, but Petty and Cacioppo point out that in any given situation, people can be lined up along a “thinking continuum” where they can devote a certain amount of thinking to the task, ranging from considerable to very little. There are a great many factors that could account for the elaboration (or lack of elaboration) of your communication. And thus, the stages in the routes might overlap as they combine with other factors that the Seducee is dealing with. On the other hand, the two routes are distinct enough that they indicate a general direction for a Seducer to follow in attempting to be persuasive.

If a communication is to persuade via the (stronger) central route, it should be well grounded in facts and attributes of the message subject itself. These elements will be more trustworthy in the eyes of the Seducee and will form the basis for a convincing argument, and as such a communication channelled through this route will result in lasting persuasion.

The danger of attempting to employ the central route is that if the elements of the communication’s are meaningful but the argument is weak, the Seducee could form negative opinions of the Seducer and/or the communication. Likewise, a negative opinion might form if aspects of the communication are weak, even though the argument is strong. In such a case, the Seducer should use the peripheral route to persuade the Seducee.

When peripheral cues are present, positive persuasion can occur, but this change is likely to be transient. However, for it to become a more lasting change the message should be repeated over a period of time. If there are no peripheral cues, the receiver’s initial attitude (most often a neutral of slightly negative one) will be reinforced or pushed in the negative direction. The Seducer’s choice of routes is therefore one to be made carefully, and should be influenced by the content of the communication, mood and environment in which the message will be received.

Finally, the following flow chart may help summarise the above information into an easily digestible form:

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

You might also enjoy reading:-

• Influence: Part 6 – Principle of Scarcity
• Influence: Part 4 – Principle of Liking
• Seduction Hints and Tips
• Love in the Laboratory
• The errors of Rapport based seduction systems

Posted by Jonathan in Psychology, Sociology

No Comments »