COMMUNICATION IN HEALTH EDUCATION

 The message-learning approach

SKILLS LEARNING AS A MODEL OF PERSUASION
COMMUNICATION THEORY:
 Yale communication and Attitude Change program:
 It is the approach by Yale university based on Carl Hovland and his
colleagues.
 Hovland, Janis and Kelly never proposed a formal theory of attitude change
rather they were guided by working assumptions.
 They suggest that persuasive communication should gain:
i. Person attention
ii. Must be comprehended
 The person must be mentally rehearse the message arguments and
conclusion that lead to establish memory trace since in Yale researchers
communication had to be remembered to be persuasive.
 Yale communication and Attitude Change program:
 Hovland and his colleagues asked : “ who says what to whom with what effect?” and
studied three general variables in persuasion:
1. The source “ communicator “ WHO
2. The message “ communication” WHAT
3. The recipient “ audience “ WHOM

 Yale approach specifies four kinds of processes that determine the extent to which a
person will be persuaded by communication so the attitude will be changed:
1. Attention
2. Comprehension
3. Yielding
4. retention
 Yale communication and Attitude Change program:
The four internal mediating processes “ fundamental processes:
1. Attention : one must first succeed at acquiring the attention of the intended audience.

2. Comprehension : the intended audience must understand the argument or the message
presented.
 Yale communication and Attitude Change program:
3. Yielding : the intended audience must accept the arguments which based on the
rewards presented in the message.

4. Retention : the message MUST be remembered and have staying power

• Hovland and his colleagues believed that attitude change will occur only if the
incentive for the new attitudinal position outweighed those associated with the initial
attitude.
 Yale communication and Attitude Change program:
 The Yale approach identifies four variables that
influence the acceptance of the arguments :
1. Source : what characteristic of the person “speaker”
affect the persuasion?
2. Message “ communication “ : what aspects of the
message will have the most impact.
3. Recipient “ audience “ : how persuadable is the
individual in the audience?
4. Channel
SOURCE FACTORS
 The source could be person, group, institution and so forth who is involved in
communicating a marketing message directly or indirectly.
 A direct source : is a spokesperson who delivers a message and/or demonstrates a
product or service.
 An indirect source, say, a model, doesn’t actually deliver a message but draws
attention to and/or enhances the appearance of the ad.
 The typical method to study source effects is :
everyone receives the same communication, but different subsets of people are given
different sources to which to attribute the message.
 components of the source variable:
 Why might attitude change be different among group of people if only the source of
the message and NOT the message itself differ?
 According to the message-learning approach INCENTIVES which are one of the
final links in the events toward attitude change AFFECTED BY source factors.
 Hovland and his colleagues (1953) speculated about three source factors that would
influence incentives:
1. Holding a correct attitude was associated with rewards in the past, Expertise (more
knowledge more correct) .
2. Trustworthy as Hovland noticed that if the recipient thought the communication was
untrustworthy or had suspicious about sources persuasive intent, show less attitude
change .
3. Social approval is rewarding and similarity since people seek approval of similar
people.
COMMUNICATOR CREDIBILITY
 High credibility source is more persuasive when attitude was measured immediately
after the message. For example lincolin and lenin 1936
 Hovland and his colleagues suggested that low credibility source cues that conclusion
is not to be believed.
i. Study: practicality of building an atomic-power submarine ( Robert oppenhiemer vs
Pravda ) 1951
ii. Study : listening to a message in which more lenient treatment to juvenile delinquents
(attributed to juvenile court judge vs. drug pudddler). 1953
 High credibility source was more persuasive after immediate measurement of attitude.
 Later research has shown that High credibility source NOT always more persuasive,
LCS more persuasive (approached by less attractive person)
COMMUNICATOR CREDIBILITY
 Sometimes, Accept or reject occurs immediately following presentation on the basis of
source cues rather than the basis of content message, especially likely when:
i. Source clearly has High or Low credibility so that recipient need NOT carefully
attend to know how to react to the message
ii. Communication pertains to issue that is NOT personally relevant to recipient so
there is little reason to devote much attention to the message.
COMMUNICATOR CREDIBILITY
 Aspects of credibility:
1. Expertise : do you know what are you talking about? “more knowledge is more
often right”
I. Expertise is Important in inducing attitude change especially when the advocated
position was quite different from the recipient initial attitude
II. Study : sleeping hours (physiologist vs. YMCA), both trustworthy (no apparent
motive). (bochner and insko) 1966
COMMUNICATOR CREDIBILITY
2. Trustworthiness : are you being honest?
i. Hovland and his colleagues initially believed that greater trustworthiness produces
more attitude change.
ii. Study : Devaluing the US currency (Economist vs. head of import firm) both expert
but latter is untrustworthy
iii. This study suggests that communicators arguing for their vested interest can
sometimes be as persuasive as those who have nothing to gain or lose.
iv. . No difference in attitude change. Because issue is not personally relevant.
 So, TRUST is important when:
1.Topic is personally relevant
2.When they deliver their massege through medium that highlights source
characteristics (TV. More attention Vs. print)
3.Source argue against his vested interest (violates our expectations)
INTENT TO PERSUADE
 Trustworthiness examined by varying whether recipients were told that the source
wants to persuade them.
 Assumption: source of persuasive intent is less trustworthy.
 Research results differed between negative and no effect. ( FLURRY CONFLICTING
RESULTS)
 However, it was found that the effect of persuasive intent on the attitude is dependent
on the personal importance of the issue to recipient, For personally involving issues,
PI reduced the effectiveness of the message (like source argue for his vested interest).
(Papa georgis 1968)
INTENT TO PERSUADE
i. Study: students and changing of college regulations.
ii. Findings :
1. forewarning of Persuasive intent inhibited attitude change in personally relevant issues.
2. Persuasive intent has no effect on the number of message arguments that subjects recall.
COMMUNICATOR ATTRACTIVENESS
 Positive in attitude change.

i. Physical appearance
ii. Style of speaking
iii. mannerisms
 Attractive individuals are more persuasion as shown in the study below.
i. Chaiken study 1979 : source delivered standard persuasive communication to
undergraduates.
COMMUNICATOR SIMILARITY
 Source may be liked by audience for:
i. similarity,
ii. physical appearance,
iii. familiarity
That increase a person’s likability and persuasiveness.
 Study: painter who tried both types once (Novice) (similar) vs. who bought 20 times
the paint the customer had chosen (professional) (dissimilar).
• Similarity counts when the issue deals primarily with opinions or values where there is
no verifiable correct answer. E.g. criteria for what makes a person physically attractive
vs. Queen’s height
COMMUNICATOR POWER
 Affect the apparent attitude but not the deep feeling.
 Powerful communicator means:
i. Recipient do believe that source can indeed administer reward or punishment.
ii. Recipient must decide that the source will use these rewards or punishment to bring
about their compliance.
iii. Recipient must believe that the source will find out whether or not they comply
 All three of these conditions must be met for communicator power to produce and
maintain the compliance.
Thank you