Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to A model of conterfactual attack/defense communication (Aix 2016)
Similar to A model of conterfactual attack/defense communication (Aix 2016) (10)
More from PatriziaCatellani
More from PatriziaCatellani (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
A model of conterfactual attack/defense communication (Aix 2016)
- 1. A model of counterfactual attack/defense communication Patrizia Catellani & Mauro Bertolotti Aix-en-Provence, 1-4 June 2016
- 2. Patrizia Catellani Time past and time future What might have been and what has been Point to one end, which is always present. T.S. Eliot Burnt Norton, Four Quartets
- 3. Patrizia Catellani Overview • CF Communication • CF Attack Defense Model (CADM) • The Effects of CF Attacks • The Effects of CF Defenses • Conclusion
- 4. Patrizia Catellani Counterfactual Communication Catellani & Covelli, JLSP, 2013
- 5. Patrizia Catellani Counterfactual Communication “If you had taken a firm stance on the situation of the national budget, things would be better now.” "If the opposition had accepted our proposal, things would have been better.”
- 6. Patrizia Catellani Information Relation Counterfactual Attack/Defense Model (CADM) Counterfactual Attack/Defense Social Judgment Perception of the Event Perception of the Message Social norms Specific expectations Individual differences Social norms Specific expectations Individual differences
- 7. Patrizia Catellani CADM Counterfactual Persuasion HP -> Counterfactual attacks/defenses can be more persuasive than factual attacks/defenses. Why? • Communication is persuasive when it balances informativeness and the risk of reactance. • A way to find this balance is the use of subtle and indirect communication, in order to hide its persuasive intent. • Counterfactual communication is a type of subtle communication strategy. As such, it can be more effective than factual communication.
- 8. Patrizia Catellani Are attacks effective? • Negativity effect People devote more attention to negative than to positive information regarding a target (Meffert et al. 2006). • Backlash effect Attacks, however, are often not effective. They can have more negative consequences on the source than on their target (Carraro, Gawronski, & Castelli, 2010).
- 9. Patrizia Catellani A Counterfactual Attack… HP -> … reduces the backlash effect The attacking source is perceived as less biased and more correct HP -> … is more effective than a factual attack The attacked target gets a worse evaluation
- 10. Patrizia Catellani The Effects of Factual vs. Counterfactual Attacks Can counterfactual attacks be more effective than factual attacks? “You disregarded your previous commitment about the issue of taxes.” “If you had honored your previous commitment about the issue of taxes, things would be better now.”
- 11. Patrizia Catellani * Perceived Bias of the Attacking Source * 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 Factual Counterfactual None Attack Catellani & Bertolotti, SP, 2014
- 12. Patrizia Catellani * Evaluation of the Attacked Target * 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Factual Counterfactual None Attack Catellani & Bertolotti, SP, 2014
- 13. Patrizia Catellani Mediation Effect Attack Style Perceived Bias of the Source Evaluation of the Target -.41*** .32** (-.11 ns)-.24* Catellani & Bertolotti, SP, 2014
- 14. Patrizia Catellani Target Evaluation after Manipulation of the Source’s Hostility * Catellani & Bertolotti, SP, 2014 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Neutral Hostile Source Factual Counterfactual Attack
- 15. Patrizia Catellani A Counterfactual Attack… HP -> … is more effective when it is focused on a stereotypically relevant personality dimension The message is perceived as more convincing The attacked target is perceived as more responsible and gets a worse evaluation
- 16. Patrizia Catellani Four Dimensions in Impression Formation Agency Communion Warmth MoralityCompetence Decided Resolved Tenacious Dynamic Competent Intelligent Efficacious Knowledgeable Sociable Friendly Caring Helpful Honest Loyal Trustworthy Sincere Leadership (Wojciszke & Abele, 2008; Carrier, et al., 2014; Leach, Ellemers, & Barreto, 2007)
- 17. Patrizia Catellani The Four Dimensions in Different Professional Categories Bertolotti & Catellani, submitted -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Politician Businessman Magistrate Psychologist Professor Desirability Morality Leadership Competence Sociability
- 18. Patrizia Catellani Journalist: “If you had told the truth on the financial situation of your party, things would be better now. If you had honored your previous commitment to your voters, your party would be in a better condition now. If you had refused personal advantages in return for your vote on a law proposal, today we would be in a better situation.” Attack Examples “If you had hold out against the pressure of your political allies on your policies, things would be better now. If you had taken certain and firm stances during the electoral campaign, your party would be in a better condition now. If you had shown strength in the debate with your political rivals, today we would be in a better situation.” “If you had decided to compete on emerging markets, things would be better now. If you had decided promptly to compete with other companies, your company would be in a better condition now. If you had held out against the pressure of your shareholders on marketing strategies, today we would be in a better situation now. ” Journalist: “If you had shown transparency on the financial situation of your company, things would be better now. If you had respected financial norms to get control of a limited company, your company would be in a better condition now. If you had told the truth on the fiscal controversies of your company, today we would be in a better situation.” Businessman Politician MoralityLeadership Bertolotti & Catellani, submitted
- 19. Patrizia Catellani Message Convincingness *** * 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 Morality Leadership Attacked Dimension Politician 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 Morality Leadership Attacked Dimension Businessman Factual CF Bertolotti & Catellani, submitted Attack
- 20. Patrizia Catellani * * Attacked Target Responsibility 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 Morality Leadership Attacked Dimension Politician 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 Morality Leadership Attacked Dimension Businessman Factual CF Bertolotti & Catellani, submitted Attack
- 21. Patrizia Catellani * * Attacked Target Evaluation 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Morality Leadership Attacked Dimension Politician 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Morality Leadership Attacked Dimension Businessman Factual CF Bertolotti & Catellani, submitted Attack
- 22. Patrizia Catellani Perception of the Event Perception of the Message Counterfactual Attack/Defense Model (CADM) - Attack Counterfactual Attack «If only you…» Social Judgment Evaluation of the attacked target • Responsibility attributed to the target • Perceived bias of the source • Convincingness of the message Specific expectations regarding the attack source Social norm regarding the attacked target
- 23. Patrizia Catellani Four Types of Defenses Responsibility for the outcome Yes No Negativityoftheoutcome Yes Concession Excuse Acknowledging both the responsibility and the negativity of the outcome Acknowledging the negativity, but not the responsibility for the outcome No Justification Denial Acknowledging the responsibility, but not the negativity of the outcome Denying both the responsibility and the negativity of the outcome
- 24. Patrizia Catellani Responsibility for the outcome Yes No Negativityoftheoutcome Yes Concession Excuse No Justification Denial I didn’t state my position firmly enough within the coalition. I did a fair enough job in stating my position within the coalition. The opposition didn't revise its ideological stance. Counterfactual Defenses If I had insisted on our proposal, things would have been better. (Self-focused, upward CF) If the opposition had accepted our proposal, things would have been better. (Other-focused, upward CF) If I had hesitated on our proposal, things would have been worse. (Self-focused, downward CF) My conduct in this situation was irreprehensible.
- 25. Patrizia Catellani Responsibility for the outcome Yes No Negativityoftheoutcome Yes Concession Excuse No If I had insisted on our proposal, things would have been better. (Self-focused, upward CF) If the opposition had accepted our proposal, things would have been better. (Other-focused, upward CF) Concession vs Excuse
- 26. Patrizia Catellani Defendant Responsibility Catellani & Bertolotti, EJSP, 2014 Bertolotti & Catellani, in preparation Target * 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Self Other Factual Counterfactual Defense
- 27. Patrizia Catellani * * Defense Deceptiveness Catellani & Bertolotti, EJSP, 2014 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Self Other Factual Counterfactual Target Bertolotti & Catellani, in preparation Defense
- 28. Patrizia Catellani Mediation effects Catellani & Bertolotti, EJSP, 2014 Defendant Evaluation -.41*** (.14 ns) -.58*** Defense Deceptiveness Counterfactual Defence Target .38* Bertolotti & Catellani, in preparation
- 29. Patrizia Catellani ** Defendant Evaluation after Manipulation of the Defendant’s Trustworthiness 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Self Other Bertolotti & Catellani, in preparation 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Self Other Defense Target Defense Target Trustworthy Defendant Untrustworthy Defendant Defense Factual Counterfactual
- 30. Patrizia Catellani Bertolotti & Catellani, in preparation Defense Deceptiveness as a function of Recipient Sophistication 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 Other Self -1 SD Recipient Sophistication +1 SD Target
- 31. Patrizia Catellani Bertolotti & Catellani, in preparation Defendant Future Intention as a function of Recipient Sophistication 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Other Self -1 SD Recipient Sophistication +1 SD Target
- 32. Patrizia Catellani Perception of the Event Perception of the Message Counterfactual Attack/Defense Model (CADM) - Defense Counterfactual Defense «If only I…» Social Judgment Evaluation of the defendant • Responsibility attributed to the defendant • Defense deceptiveness • Defendant future intention Specific expectations on the defendant Individual difference in sophistication
- 33. Patrizia Catellani So what? o Counterfactual attacks and defences are more effective than factual attacks and defenses. o Their persuasiveness is rooted on: • The way the event is reconstructed • The way the message source and the message itself are perceived o Individual differences (e.g., recipients’ sophistication) moderate the effects of counterfactual attacks/defenses. Future research should investigate why.
Editor's Notes
- 7
- “a psychological state in which perceivers actively weigh the possibility that a target’s behavior is genuine against the possibility that it is contrived” (Hilton, Fein, & Miller, 1993)
- “a psychological state in which perceivers actively weigh the possibility that a target’s behavior is genuine against the possibility that it is contrived” (Hilton, Fein, & Miller, 1993)
- We measured the attribution of a set of traits pertaining to four dimensions (morality, leadership, competence and sociability) to generic members of five different professional categories: politicians, businessmen, magistrates, psychologists and university professors. We then asked participants to indicate how desirable were the same dimensions for each kind of professional Results showed that usually the most typical dimension, that is the dimension that defines the members of a certain professional category, is also the most desirable ones: for instance, businessmen are seen as typically very resolute, dynamic, strong-minded (high leadership),and these are the same traits that are considered most desirable in a businnesman. Similarly, judges are seen as typically very honest, reliable and sincere, and morality is their more desirable dimension. Psychologists are seen as warm, helpful, etc, and sociability is the most desired dimension for them. When we analysed the case of politicians, however, we found that although politicians are seen as the least moral category among those we analysed, morality is a highly desirable dimension for them. Therefore, compared to other professionals, their weakest dimension is the most valued one.
- Finally, we analysed the effects of different kinds of attacks on the evaluation of the attack itself and of the journalist making the attack. In this case, we found that counterfactual attacks were generally better than factual ones, an effect which can be attributed to their indirect style rather than their specific content (leadership/morality) or their target (politician/businessman).
- Similarly, responsibility for the negative events described in the interview scenario is attributed more strongly to the politician after a counterfactual attack against morality, and to the businessman after a counterfactual attack against leadership. Therefore, the responsibility for a negative outcome is attributed to a greater extent to a target when he/she is presented as deviating from the standard that defines the acceptable behaviour for his/her category.
- We can see that the evaluation of the target, either the politician or the businessman, is more strongly affected by counterfactual attacks on the respective most relevant dimension: morality for the politician and leadership for the businnessman. So a counterfactual attack against the morality of the politician is more effective than a factual attack (and also than attacks against the politician's leadership). This was not the case for the businessman: a counterfactual attack against morality was not more effective than a factual one, whereas a counterfactual attack against leadership was more effective than the factual one. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Nel grafico emerge in modo evidente la differente efficacia dell’attacco controfattuale sul giudizio sul politico e sull’imprenditore sul tratto desiderabile di ciascuno. L’attacco controfattuale alla moralità del politico è più efficace nel minare il giudizio sul politico stesso (M = 1,97) rispetto a quello fattuale (M = 3,53), perché è indiretto, ripara da effetti backlash verso colui che attacca e rende maggiormente saliente la norma morale violata dal politico (essere affidabile, leale, onesto) Invece l’attacco fattuale alla leadership del politico (M = 3,24) sembra essere leggermente più efficace di quello controfattuale (M = 3,53). L’attacco controfattuale alla leadership dell’imprenditore (M = 2,65) è più efficace di quello fattuale (M = 3,49) nell’influenzare il giudizio sull’imprenditore – anche in questo caso, l’attacco implicito sortisce più effetto negativo sulla dimensione più desiderabile per quella determinata categoria sociale perché rende rilevante lo standard di comportamento normativo violato (non essere morale ma essere forte). Inoltre, l’attacco controfattuale alla moralità (M = 3,57) risulta essere maggiormente efficace nell’influire sul giudizio sull’imprenditore rispetto a quello fattuale (M = 3,73).
- CHIARIRE GUARDANDO I DATI SE I MODERATORI MODERANO LA PARTE DI INFORMAZIONE O QUELLA DI RELAZIONE O ENTRAMBE
- Schema ripreso da libro Cortina (vedi anche diapo successiva); prima solo le due dimensioni e le 4 categorie; poi si aggiunge in un altro colore l’esempio di controfattuale
- CHIARIRE GUARDANDO I DATI SE I MODERATORI MODERANO LA PARTE DI INFORMAZIONE O QUELLA DI RELAZIONE O ENTRAMBE