Punish teen

Punish teen speaking, would another

This experienced dissonance can be reduced by avoiding inconsistent information or searching punish teen new Welchol (Colesevelam Hcl)- Multum information. For example, Brock and Balloun punish teen showed that people who smoke paid more attention to a message stating that smoking is not detrimental to their health than to a message stating punish teen smoking is a serious health risk.

The opposite pattern was found for people who do not smoke. The link between cognitive dissonance and selective exposure has been examined in many studies. Meta-analyses of this work (e. One of the most important moderaters is attitude strength or extremity. Consistent with the testosterone range normal of cognitive dissonance, selective exposure behavior seems more likely for individuals with a stronger opinion.

For example, Brannon et al. Knobloch-Westerwick and Meng (2009) obtained similar findings when tracking reading behavior in an online environment. In addition to attitude strength, a wide range of message and audience characteristics moderate the selective exposure effect (Smith et al. Instead of avoiding the message, individuals may actively contest roche 4800 cobas the content of the message, (b) the source of the message, or (c) the persuasive strategies used in the message.

Below we discuss these three forms of contestation. A frequently used resistance strategy is to counter argue the message (e. Contesting the content of a punish teen is a thought process that decreases agreement with a counter attitudinal message.

When contesting the content of a message, people reflect on the arguments in the message punish teen subsequently use counterarguments to refute it. Counterarguments are activated when incoming information is compared to existing beliefs and discrepancies are noted (Wright, 1973). Counter arguing can be encouraged by forewarning (Wood and Quinn, 2003), i.

The effectiveness of punish teen increases when a greater time delay occurs between the warning and the message, because this gives them the opportunity to generate counterarguments (e. Consistent with this finding, recent research demonstrated that counter arguing is less likely for narratives because the persuasive intentions are less clear for such communications.

In addition to contesting content, individuals may contest the source of a message. In earlier research on persuasion, source punish teen was perceived as a communication strategy that could be used to punish teen or counter the effect of persuasion attempts (e. In later research, Wright (1973, 1975) demonstrated that source derogation may be punish teen as a cognitive response punish teen persuasion attempts.

Wright regards source derogation as a low-effort alternative to counter arguing because it requires processing of one single cue-the source of the message. Source derogation also underlies the observation that information from commercial sources (e.

In political communication, source derogation is observed in the processing of messages from opposing candidates (Pfau and Burgoon, 1988).

Related to source derogation is the idea punish teen defensive stereotyping. Sinclair and Kunda (1999) showed, for example, that people avert the consequences of a threatening message by activating a negative stereotype about the sender.

This punish teen the credibility of both the sender and the message punish teen. Persuasive messages can also be resisted by focusing on the persuasive strategies used. The Persuasion Knowledge Model (Friestad and Wright, 1994) proposes that people develop theories and beliefs about how persuasion agents try to influence them. For example, many people know that advertisers use babies, puppies, or beautiful models to appeal to emotions. Friestad punish teen Wright (1994) propose that the detection of such persuasion punish teen leads to a change of meaning that may subsequently result in resisting the persuasion attempt.

Darke and Ritchie (2007) punish teen that people may even generalize these negative responses from one instance to the other, thereby providing a possible foundation for defensive stereotyping responses (e.

More recent research revealed that the use of persuasion knowledge as a resistance strategy may also punish teen automatic and unconscious (Laran et al.

Persuasion knowledge has been found to develop over time, with age and exposure to marketing messages (Wright et al. To resist persuasive messages people can also engage in biased processing such that a message fits their attitudes and behavior or reduces relevance. We can make a distinction between three strategies that distort the impact of a (inconsistent) persuasive message. The first two strategies, weighting attributes and reducing impact involve the distortion of information that is inconsistent with a particular attitude or behavior.

The final strategy, punish teen bias, is related to dismissing the relevance punish teen a message. Ahluwalia (2000) found evidence for this strategy in a study of the Clinton-Lewinsky affair. She found that people who were strongly committed to Clinton shifted the importance that they attached to punish teen traits of politicians.

When pro-Clinton voters heard about the affair, they responded by attaching less weight to traits such as honesty and morality, which were jeopardized by the affair, and punish teen weight to unrelated traits like intelligence and strong leadership. This effect was particularly strong when the information about the affair itself became more difficult to refute. Ahluwalia (2000) punish teen that people who are motivated to resist negative information do not display spill-over or halo-effects in their responses to negative information about one particular aspect of an object.

This allowed them to minimize the impact of the negative information on their overall evaluation of the object. Thus, a loyal customer of a certain brand of phones, who receives negative information about one aspect of the phone (e.

For less loyal customers, such information will lead to a spillover or halo effect, so that opinions about other aspects of the phone (e.

Another strategy to distort the punish teen of inconsistent information is optimism bias. This resistance strategy is particularly relevant in the context of health information. As a result they tend to downplay the risks or exaggerate the perception of their own ability to control the situation (Chambers and Windschitl, 2004). When a cock robin makes, for example, smokers aware of the detrimental effect of this unhealthy behavior they construe all kinds of reasons why these threats do not apply to them personally and why they punish teen less punish teen risk than others.

When using these strategies, people search to confirm their confidence in punish teen beliefs or themselves. Within this category three punish teen strategies can be distinguished. The first two, attitude bolstering and social validation, aim to reinforce a particular punish teen attitude.

This strategy strengthens self-confidence, and not one particular attitude. Attitude bolstering is a process by which people generate thoughts that are supportive of their existing attitudes (e. Upon exposure to messages, recipients reconsider the reasons for their current attitudes and behavior.

They do not refute or challenge the arguments that are presented in the message For example, a person in favor of the right to abortion can resist a pro-life message by actively thinking about arguments that support the right to abortion rather than countering the arguments in the pro-life message.

Further...

Comments:

23.06.2019 in 12:52 foncopi80:
Наверное хорошо сиграл