Resistance and persuasion

Eric S. Knowles • Jay A. Linn

• Resistance is an initial condition for persuasion.

• It is the resistance that requires persuasion.

DEFINITIONS OF RESISTANCE

• The term has been used to refer to the:• 1. noncompliance with a directive, • 2. a desire to counteract someone else’s attempt

to limit one’s choices,• 3. unwillingness to achieve insight about the real

nature of one’s thoughts or feelings,• 4. avoidance of unpleasant or dangerous feelings• Or• 5. the feeling of ambivalence about change

Resistance as Attitude

• One model of attitude structure distinguishes three components:

• affective, cognitive, and behavioral.• This tripartite model applies to resistance as

well.• “I don’t like it!”, “I don’t believe it!”, and “I

won’t do it!” are the affective, cognitive, and behavioral components of resistance, respectively.

Source of Resistance

• Although resistance is a response to pressures for change, the source of resistance is sometimes attributed more to the person, and sometimes it is attributed more to the situation.

• When a person senses that someone else is limiting his or her freedom to choose or act, an uncomfortable state of reactance results, creating motivation to reassert that freedom.

Two sets of factors determine theamount of reactance

• One set concerns the freedoms that are threatened. The more numerous and important the freedoms, the greater the reactance to losing them.

• A second set of factors concerns the nature of the threat. Arbitrary, blatant, direct, and demanding requests will create more reactance than legitimate, subtle, indirect, and delicate requests.

FOUR FACES OF RESISTANCE:• 1. REACTANCE,• 2. DISTRUST,• 3. SCRUTINY, AND • 4. INERTIA

Reactance

• One face of resistance is the reactance. This face of resistance recognizes the influence attempt as an integral element of resistance.

• Reactance is initiated only when the influence is directly perceived and when it threatens a person’s choice alternatives. This view of resistance also emphasizes the affective (“I don’t like it!”) and motivational (“I won’t do it!”) sides of resistance.

Distrust• Another face of resistance spotlights the target of change, and it

reveals a general distrust of proposals. • People become guarded and wary when faced with a proposal,

offer, or message to change.

• They wonder what the motive behind the proposal might be, what the true facts are.

• This face of resistance underlies both affective (“I don’t like it!”) and cognitive (“I don’t believe it!”) reactions to influence.

• We chose to describe this face as “distrust” rather than “paranoia” because some degree of this wariness seems legitimate. The persuader’s goals may be divergent from the target’s goals and may, in fact, be exploitive.

Scrutiny• A third face of resistance is a general scrutiny that influence, offers,

or requests create. When people become aware that they are the target of an influence attempt, a natural reaction is to attend more carefully and thoughtfully to every aspect of the situation.

• This is a form of resistance that puts emphasis on the proposal itself. The careful scrutiny of the proposal means that each point is examined more carefully and questioned more thoroughly.

• The strengths of an argument are appreciated and accepted, and to that extent the proposal is believed.

• But, the weaknesses of an argument are exposed, evaluated, and countered, and to that extent, the proposal is rejected.

Inertia• A fourth face of resistance might be called inertia. This is a

face that is not reactant to the proposer or the proposal, and it doesn’t necessarily lead to greater scrutiny, distrust, or reactance. Inertia is a quality that focuses more on staying put than on resisting change.

• It is one face of the great equilibrium motive that attempts to keep the attitude system in balance. To the extent that a request, an offer, or a persuasive message asks for change in affect, behavior, or belief, the inertia of personality and attitude frustrates that change.

•However, this form of resistance has more in common with the drag of an anchor than with the antagonism of the provoked.

• attempts at persuasion might often benefit from techniques aimed at addressing the “resistance” forces working against acceptance of a persuasive appeal.

• For example, young smokers often resist messages aimed at getting them to stop smoking, preferring to believe that the highly publicized health risks are exaggerated or do not apply to them

• If one were able to convince young smokers that the risks do apply to them or that the risks are greater than they currently believe, this would certainly increase the effectiveness of an appeal that rests on these reasons not to smoke.

• “Addressing resistance” can also be substantially less direct. For example, increased the effectiveness of a persuasive appeal by simply acknowledging that the message recipient would probably want to disagree with the message .

• Somewhat paradoxically, allowing people the “freedom to resist” appears to undermine the motivation to do so, consistent with what might be expected from reactance theory.

• While youth had varying points of view, there was incredible consensus around their distaste for social marketing and anti-tobacco efforts that pass judgment on tobacco users.

• Across the board, youth told us that they did not want to be told what to do. They wanted “the facts” and then to be left to make their own educated decision. If we were to be successful, “truth” could not preach. “Truth” needed a message other than “don't”.

THE ATTITUDE STRENGTH BACKDROP

• Attitude strength can be defined in terms of the:• 1. persistence of the attitude over time

(withstanding the force of time),• 2. the resistance of the attitude to attack

(withstanding the force of opposing persuasive appeals), and

• 3. the ability of the attitude to guide related thoughts and behavior (creating a force that guides cognition and action;

Many properties of attitudes have been identified as increasing attitude

strength.

• 1. attitudes are more likely to guide behavior when they are accessible (i.e., when they come to mind quickly upon encountering the attitude object)

• 2. when they are based on high levels of attitude-relevant knowledge

• 3. on beliefs that are consistent with the overall evaluation.

• 4. Attitudes based on high, rather than low, levels of elaboration have been found to persist longer over time, to resist the opposing persuasive messages better, and to predict more accurately future behavior

ALTERNATIVE WAYSTO DEFINE RESISTANCE

• Page 17