As demonstrated by Warwick University’s recent student
elections, it is common place for candidate’s names and pictures to be seen
everywhere during a campaign. While colourful and eye-catching, such posters generally
include very limited information about the individual or their policies (often
just a picture is used and even names are sometimes omitted, as shown above). Despite
the fact that they have little means of creating long term changes to voter’s attitudes
(there is no argument to process or scrutinise), poster campaigns of this
nature can be highly successful.
The effectiveness of poster campaigns as persuasive tools during
an election can be explained by the Mere Exposure Effect. Most basically, this
effect asserts that the more an individual sees something, the more they come
to like it. Zajonc (1968) illustrated this phenomenon by demonstrating that familiar
stimuli were rated more positively by participants than comparable stimuli that
the participant had not yet been presented with. This research supports the
idea that familiarity breeds liking, a process that Zajonc claims is automatic
and takes place without conscious cognition. It can therefore be argued that
campaign posters are effective means of improving attitudes towards a candidate
by using the mere exposure effect to increase familiarity and subsequent
liking. In line with this, Olivola and Todorov (2010) found a positive
correlation between perceived familiarity of political candidates and the amount
of votes they received in Senate elections in the USA.
Olivola, C. Y., & Todorov, A. (2010). Elected in 100
milliseconds: Appearance-based trait inferences and voting. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 34,
83–110.
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposures.
Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 9, 1–27.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.