Deliberative and non-deliberative persuasion: Mechanisms of opinion formation in EuroPolis

From a normative vantage point, post-deliberative opinions should be linked to the quality of arguments presented during discussion. Yet, there is a dearth of research testing this claim. Our study makes a first attempt to overcome this deficiency. By analyzing a European deliberative poll on third country migration, we explore whether statements backed by reason affect opinions, which we term deliberative persuasion. We contrast deliberative persuasion to non-deliberative persuasion, whereby we explore whether the most frequently repeated position influences opinions. We find that with regard to regularization of irregular immigrants, deliberative persuasion took place. In the context of European involvement in immigration affairs, however, opinions are driven by the most frequently repeated position rather than by the quality of argumentation.

Implicit and explicit evaluations: a declaration of dependence

This section presents abstracts of three studies on how consumer choices can be influenced by the name letter effect of brands without decision makers being aware of this influence. The first paper examined whether making brand names similar to consumers' names increases the likelihood that consumers will choose the brand. One prediction is that people will prefer and be more likely to choose products or services whose names prominently feature the letters in their own first or last names. The results showed that subjects' preference rankings and evaluations of name letter matching brands were higher than those of non-name letter matching brands. The second paper tested the possibility of using subliminal priming to activate a concept that a persuasive communicator could take advantage of. To examine the idea, two experiments were presented. In the first experiment, participants' level of thirst were manipulated and then subliminally presented them with either thirst-related words or control words. While the manipulations had no effect on participants' self-reported, conscious ratings of thirst, there was a significant interactive effect of the two factors on how much of the drink provided in the taste test was consumed. In a second, follow up experiment, thirsty participants were subliminally presented with either thirst-related words or control words after which they viewed advertisements for two new sports beverages. In conclusion, the research demonstrates that under certain conditions, subliminal printing techniques can enhance persuasion. The third paper hypothesized that the lack of correlations between implicit and explicit evaluations is due to measurement error.

Strategies to increase the use and approval of gender-fair language

When masculine forms are used to refer to men and women, this causes male-biased cognitive representations and behavioral consequences, as numerous studies have shown. This effect can be avoided or reduced with the help of gender-fair language. In this talk, we will present different approaches that aim at influencing people’s use of and attitudes towards gender-fair language. Firstly, we tested the influence of gender-fair input on people’s own use of gender-fair language. Based on Irmen and Linner’s (2005) adaptation of the scenario mapping and focus approach (Sanford & Garrod, 1998), we found that after reading a text with gender-fair forms women produced more gender-fair forms than women who read gender-neutral texts or texts containing masculine generics. Men were not affected. Secondly, we examined reactions to arguments which followed the Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty &Cacioppo, 1986). We assumed that strong pros and cons would be more effective than weak arguments or control statements. The results indicated that strong pros could convince some, but not all participants, suggesting a complex interplay of diverse factors in reaction to attempts at persuasion. The influence of people’s initial characteristics will be discussed. Currently, we are investigating how self-generated refutations, in addition to arguments, may influence initial attitudes. Based on the resistance appraisal hypothesis (Tormala, 2008), we assume that individuals are encouraged in their initial attitude if they manage to refute strong counter-arguments. The results of our studies will be discussed regarding their practical implications.

Tracing the Evidence: The Use of Evaluation Results in Direct-Democratic Campaigns

Although research on direct-democratic campaigns in Switzerland has intensified in the last decade, detailed information on the use of evidence in campaigns is still lacking. Our research aims to contribute both to research on direct democracy and to research on evidence-based policy making, by analyzing how evaluation results are used in directdemocratic campaigns. In this conceptual paper, the formulation of our hypothesis is based on a model of evaluation influence that traces the different uses of evaluation results in the process of a direct-democratic campaign. We assume that the policy analytical capacity of individual members in parliament, government and administration in the (pre)-parliamentary process fosters the use of evidence in campaigns. In the course of the campaign, symbolic use of evaluation in the form of justification, persuasion or mobilization prevails. We assume that the media is an important player in making transparent how political actors use evidence to support their positions. Evidence itself often remains ambiguous and uncertain, and evaluations are influenced by the values of the evaluator. To be able to make the right decisions, therefore, citizens should learn about possible interpretations in argumentative processes. For us, the context of direct democracy in Switzerland provides the setting for such a discourse that, besides evidence, brings up different opinions, values and beliefs.

Power Games in Strategy Formation Processes – A Performative Interpretation

The article approaches an understanding of power within strategy formation processes established by verbal and bodily communication. On this note, we examined concepts of power constituted by hierarchy and developed a conceptual framework for a performative interpretation of power. In line with Austin’s (1962) and Butler’s (1990, 1993, 1997) concept of performativity as well as strategy-as-practice research (Balogun et al., 2007; Jarzabkowski & Spee, 2009) we ask: How is persuasion achieved by strategic actors during strategy formation processes? To explore verbal and bodily communication empirically we developed an experimental setting in a small high-tech company located in Germany in December, 2012. The Results indicate that (1) during critical incidents – when perspectives clash – actors use arguments to gain persuasion. (2) The data illustrates that independently of their hierarchical position within the company, strategic actors show an equal distribution of argumentative techniques.