Psyc 3007 Influence And Persuasion: People Who Join The Help

Psyc 3007 Influence And Persuasionpeople Who Join The Helping Profess

Psyc 3007: Influence And Persuasion People who join the helping professions, such as teaching, counseling, and crisis work, often speak about their passion to serve others. If you have ever been in a class or a work environment where you stood for others without a voice or for a cause you believed was right, you can be considered a social advocate. Social advocacy is one way as a Walden student and beyond that you can forward social change and fulfill the Walden University outcome to facilitate positive social change. The persuasion theories and strategies that you are studying this week can add to your bank of knowledge and research to support you taking action as an advocate. This Assignment is an opportunity for you to practice use motivation and compliance strategies in your efforts to bring groups together to change minds and hearts.

For this Assignment, you will respond to the following scenario: You are a social advocate for a group of individuals in your community who feel disconnected from the community because of their distinguishing characteristic(s) (e.g., language, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, beliefs) and have experienced discrimination. Members of this group want to use a room at the local community center for a much-needed program (e.g., language classes, an after-school program, a support group, etc). However, the individuals who run the community center, known as The Board, have a reputation of denying proposals from minority groups. As this group’s advocate, you believe that if you can get the two groups together, understanding and an agreement might be reached.

To prepare: Review the Week 5 Learning Resources. Fill in the details of this scenario. Choose a group that you would advocate for based on your experience or interests, and identify a focus of their proposal based on a realistic need. Consider that The Board’s funding contract has a clause about serving the whole community. Consider which strategy you learned about this week - either the “foot-in-the-door” strategy or the “door-in-the-face” compliance strategy - would be more effective in working with The Board; the goal is to get The Board to the meeting to hear your group’s proposal.

Consider how to use cognitive-dissonance theory to persuade a change in view by The Board in your scenario. By Day 7 Submit a 3- to 5-page paper that includes the following: Using either the foot-in-the-door strategy or the door-in-the-face strategy, explain how you will get The Board to attend an information meeting about the group’s proposal. Explain in enough detail to demonstrate that you understand the strategy, and why you believe the strategy you chose will work to motivate The Board to come to the meeting. Assume your strategy worked and The Board is now at the meeting where your group is going to present their proposal. Your next goal is to get the board to feel dissonance.

Explain why you want the Board to experience dissonance. Next, based on your readings, discuss the specific activity that will believe will induce these feelings and why you chose this activity. Based on the techniques to relieve dissonance discussed in Chapter 11, describe an activity you will provide at the meeting to help The Board relieve their feelings of dissonance, and explain why your activity will be effective in helping them to relieve their dissonance. Why will relieving the Board’s dissonance be an important part of your meeting with them? Evaluate the ethics of using these compliance strategies and explain your reasoning based on specific ethical guidelines.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Advocacy plays a vital role in fostering social inclusion and promoting positive change within communities. When marginalized groups seek access to resources or platforms for their voices, strategic influence techniques become essential. This paper explores a scenario where an advocate attempts to persuade a community board to support a proposal from a minority group. It focuses on employing the 'foot-in-the-door' strategy, inducing cognitive dissonance, and ethical considerations related to compliance tactics.

Choosing the Persuasion Strategy: Foot-in-the-Door Technique

The 'foot-in-the-door' strategy involves initiating compliance by securing agreement to small requests, which progressively lead to larger commitments. In this scenario, the advocate first requests the Board's attendance at a preliminary meeting focused on community concerns. By demonstrating respect and understanding, the advocate seeks to harness the reciprocity and consistency principles inherent to this tactic.

This approach is likely to be effective because, according to Freedman and Fraser (1966), individuals who comply with small initial requests tend to develop a sense of commitment, making them more receptive to larger demands later. Moreover, this method aligns with the idea that the Board might be willing to engage initially if the request appears modest and emphasizes community benefit, paving the way for persuading them about the specific proposal.

Using Cognitive Dissonance to Promote Change

Once the Board agrees to attend the meeting, inducing cognitive dissonance aims to challenge their perceptions regarding minority groups and community inclusivity. Cognitive dissonance occurs when individuals hold conflicting beliefs or attitudes, leading to psychological discomfort. The advocate's goal is to create a situation where the Board recognizes inconsistency between their community-serving obligations and past rejection of proposals from minority groups.

To evoke dissonance, the advocate might present compelling stories and data illustrating the positive impact of inclusive programs—highlighting how denying such proposals contradicts their contractual obligation to serve the whole community. This confrontation can spark discomfort and motivate the Board to reconcile their beliefs with their actions, encouraging support for the proposal.

Activities to Induce and Relieve Dissonance

At the meeting, a tailored activity such as a shared testimonial from community members affected by discrimination can induce dissonance. Hearing personal stories emphasizes the real-world implications of exclusion, prompting the Board to reflect on their stance. To help relieve this discomfort, the advocate can facilitate a reflection session where Board members consider their values versus their previous decisions.

This activity is effective because it promotes self-awareness and aligns with Festinger's (1957) theories on dissonance reduction—people tend to resolve dissonance by adjusting attitudes or behaviors to restore harmony. In this context, the activity encourages the Board to see the proposal as congruent with their community-focused mission, easing their discomfort and fostering support.

Importance of Relieving Dissonance & Ethical Considerations

Relieving dissonance is critical because it sustains the motivation for behavioral change and promotes authentic support for inclusive initiatives. Pressuring individuals into compliance without addressing underlying discomfort risks superficial agreement and potential resentment. Ethically, using dissonance and compliance strategies must adhere to principles such as respect, honesty, and beneficence.

According to the American Psychological Association (APA, 2017), ethical persuasion involves transparency and respecting individuals' autonomy. The activities proposed aim to foster genuine understanding rather than manipulation. Careful consideration ensures that the advocacy respects moral boundaries and upholds professional standards.

Conclusion

Strategic persuasion, including the 'foot-in-the-door' technique and inducing cognitive dissonance, can effectively influence decision-makers towards supporting marginalized groups' proposals. When ethically applied, these methods promote social justice and community well-being by aligning attitudes with actions. Advocacy that emphasizes respect, honesty, and understanding can lead to sustainable positive change.

References

• American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. APA.
• Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(2), 195–202.
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
• Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Influence: Science and practice (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
• Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123–205.
• Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (2019). Social Psychology (10th ed.). Pearson.
• McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social Psychology (3rd ed., pp. 233–346). Addison-Wesley.
• Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory. In Yearbook of social psychology (pp. 175–208).
• Gadlin, H. (2003). Ethical considerations in persuasion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 232–238.
• Leary, M. R., & Tangney, J. P. (2012). Handbook of self and identity. Guilford Press.