Hi, I Want This Answer About This Question From This Book.

Hii Want This Answer About This Questions From This Book Chapter 67

Discuss the concept that attitude and opinion change were considered to be measures of personal. This was because they were assumed to be enduring. Is this assumption still applicable today? Why and how? (chapter 8)

In the past, attitudes and opinions were seen as lasting personal traits. This was because researchers believed that once formed, they would remain stable over time, reflecting deep-seated personal beliefs. This assumption suggested that measuring attitude and opinion change was an effective way to gauge personal transformations and the impact of media or social influences. However, today this idea is no longer as valid. Modern research shows that attitudes and opinions can be quite fluid, influenced by context, social interactions, and new information. Instead of being fixed, they are often temporary and susceptible to change. This shift in understanding is due to the recognition that human perceptions are dynamic, and that psychological and societal factors can quickly alter personal viewpoints, making the old assumption less applicable.

Paper For Above instruction

The concept that attitudes and opinions serve as measures of personal characteristics has historically been rooted in the belief that these mental states are stable and enduring. This perspective, particularly prevalent in early mass communication research, equated attitudinal stability with the intrinsic qualities of individuals. Researchers assumed that once formed, opinions would not change easily, enabling them to serve as reliable indicators of a person's core beliefs and values. Nonetheless, contemporary research challenges this assumption, highlighting that attitudes and opinions are often more malleable than previously thought. Factors such as social context, persuasive communication, media exposure, and personal experiences can lead to rapid changes in an individual’s perspectives. For example, studies on persuasion and message framing demonstrate that attitudes can be shaped dynamically, especially in response to new information or social pressures. Consequently, the old view that attitudes directly measure enduring personal traits is now largely considered outdated and overly simplistic. Today, scholars recognize the importance of understanding attitudes as fluid, context-dependent, and susceptible to various influences, reflecting a more accurate depiction of human psychology and social interaction.

In the realm of mass communication, the idea of a “minimal effects” theory has gained prominence, primarily through research such as the “Two-Step Flow” model and studies like Project Revere. Originally, the media was believed to have a strong, direct influence on audiences; however, evidence shows that this influence is often limited. The minimal effects theory posits that media messages do not directly shape the public’s opinions or behaviors as once thought. Instead, media effects are generally mediated through trusted sources, such as opinion leaders, and are influenced heavily by individual differences, existing attitudes, and social networks. The “Two-Step Flow” model (chapter 9) emphasizes that opinion leaders receive messages from media first and then interpret and pass them on to others, acting as intermediaries rather than passive recipients. Project Revere, which aims to understand how information propagates through social networks, further supports the idea that influence is subtle and indirect. External literature corroborates this, suggesting that factors such as selective exposure, reinforcement, and social context diminish the power of mass media, making the effects modest rather than revolutionary. Therefore, the “minimal effects” theory remains relevant in understanding the nuanced, complex ways in which media influences individuals and society today.

Persuasive communication involves the interplay of four key components: the communicator, the message, the audience, and the audience’s response. Each element plays a crucial role in shaping effectiveness. The communicator's credibility, attractiveness, and expertise influence how the message is received. For example, Hovland’s studies highlighted that trustworthy and likable sources tend to be more persuasive. The message itself must be clear, logical, and tailored to the audience’s values and beliefs to be convincing. Content framing, emotional appeals, and the use of evidence are essential factors. The audience's predispositions, prior attitudes, and social context determine their receptivity. A receptive audience is more likely to accept the message, leading to attitude change or reinforcement. Audience responses can include compliance, resistance, or active engagement. Understanding these factors helps explain why some messages succeed while others fail, emphasizing the importance of tailoring communication strategies to specific audiences for maximum impact.

Adoption of new ideas into established social groups is often difficult due to the existing social norms, traditions, and resistance to change. These groups tend to follow protocols—sets of unspoken rules and behavioral norms—that sustain social cohesion. New ideas threaten these norms, prompting hesitation or rejection. They are protected by social barriers like conformity pressures and the need for social acceptance. Protocols act as social safeguards, fostering stability. They ensure that any innovation or change is introduced gradually, through logical progression involving key subgroups within the society. For example, early adopters or opinion leaders are critical because they influence others and help legitimize new ideas. By moving through these protocols, new ideas are less likely to face outright rejection or chaos, and become integrated more smoothly into the social fabric.

Negative appeals in persuasion can have complex effects. Drawing from Hovland and colleagues’ research, negative appeals—those emphasizing consequences of non-compliance or threats—tend to produce mixed reactions. While some individuals are motivated to act to avoid undesirable outcomes, others may resist or become defensive. Negative appeals can trigger fear, anxiety, or discomfort, which might prompt behavior change if accompanied by clear solutions. However, excessive negativity can backfire, causing resistance or message rejection. For instance, fear appeals are effective when perceived as credible and when they present actionable steps. Conversely, if perceived as exaggerated or manipulative, they may diminish trust. Overall, the efficacy of negative appeals depends on context, audience characteristics, and the way messages are framed.

Message diffusion through society involves the spread of ideas, information, or innovations over time. This process depends on communication channels, social networks, and individual receptiveness. The diffusion process generally follows a pattern: awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption. Key players in this process include innovators, early adopters, and opinion leaders, who facilitate spread within social groups. The initial communication medium, whether print, broadcast, or digital, can influence diffusion speed and reach. For example, digital media allows rapid dissemination, but the message’s success also depends on social credibility and relevance. If the medium is perceived as trustworthy and accessible, it may accelerate diffusion; if not, it can hinder the process. Therefore, while the medium influences how quickly information spreads, the content and social context ultimately determine its diffusion success.

The articles “Communication Research and the Concept of the Mass” and “Demassifying the Media” approach mass communication from different angles. The first emphasizes redefining mass communication’s scope, arguing that it is not just mass media serving large audiences, but also includes targeted and niche communication via digital platforms. The second discusses how digital media threaten traditional mass media's dominance, enabling more personalized, interactive communication. Both articles agree that media are evolving from a unified mass to diverse, decentralized platforms that allow for individualization and participation. This shift challenges traditional notions of the passive mass audience, leading to more active, engaged, and fragmented audiences, which influences how research approaches media effects and communication strategies.

Uses and Gratifications theory explores why audiences actively select specific media to satisfy personal needs such as information, entertainment, social interaction, or escapism. This approach shifts focus from media effects to audience agency. People use media based on their motives, and their media choices are influenced by individual preferences, social context, and experiences. For example, someone seeking social connection may engage with social media, while another seeking relaxation may prefer watching television. Recognizing this, researchers study how different media fulfill various needs, shaping consumption patterns and audience behaviors. This perspective emphasizes active participation, empowering audiences as agents rather than passive recipients, and highlights the importance of understanding personal motives in media effects studies.

Propaganda involves systematic efforts to influence opinions and behaviors using biased, often emotionally charged messages. It employs techniques such as loading language, appeals to emotion, and selective information to advance specific agendas. Its functions include shaping public opinion, mobilizing support, and controlling perceptions. Propaganda’s significance lies in its capacity to manipulate masses and evade countermeasures, making understanding it crucial in media effects research. Researchers examine propaganda to uncover methods of influence, counteract misleading messages, and promote media literacy. Recognizing propaganda also involves understanding its historical, political, and social contexts, which helps in developing strategies to identify and resist manipulation, thus safeguarding democratic processes and informed decision-making.

References

• Lowery, S., & DeFleur, M. (2022). Milestones in Mass Communication Research: Media Research (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and Persuasion. Yale University Press.
• Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1948). The People's Choice. Columbia University Press.
• McLuhan, Marshall. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. McGraw-Hill.
• Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
• Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications. Free Press.
• Gerbner, G., & Gross, L. (1976). Living with Television: The Violence Profile. Journal of Communication.
• McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and Attitude Change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 233-346). Random House.
• Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and Simulation. University of Michigan Press.
• Jowett, G. S., & O'Donnell, V. (2018). Propaganda & Persuasion (7th ed.). Sage Publications.