The primary
persuasion technique here is to use guilt. The feeling of responsibility for a
transgression (leaving the light on) induces the desire to make restitution in
order to mend the self-image that we are not unfeeling human beings. It has
been well researched that this emotional “tactic” of guilt sells is
particularly effective and even induces positive attitudes, especially if the
advertisement are not overtly manipulative (Cotte, Coulter, & Moore, 2005).
In this case, WWF has made sure not to use too explicit images which can lead
to scepticism and over arousal which has a counterintuitive effect.
Simultaneously,
the successful execution of this guilt tactic is the vivid image that sits in the
backdrop of this advertisement. The subtlety of polar bears and ice bergs
steals the limelight from the centrepiece of the lamp. This is a form of vivid
appeal which is emotionally interesting; concrete and image provoking; and
immediate (Nisbett & Ross, 1980). Along with the caption of “you’re not the
only one who pays”, this advertisement induces, provides and encourages the
audience to generate their arguments and subsequent course of action
(Pratkanis, 2007). What is important here is that the situation has to be
subtle and omnipresent such that audience ends up believing and internalising
the generated attitude (Miller & Woznlak, 2001). This is known as
self-generated persuasion which is one of the most effective means of influence
(Pratkanis, 2007). The audience cannot help but be overwhelmed with guilt, and
the urge to engage in restorative processes, whereby the most immediate and
practical solution which is very doable would be to: switch off the light.
As
such, this advertisement can also be considered to us the creativity template
of extreme consequences (Goldenberg, Mazursky, & Solomon, 1999). The simple
act of not switching the lights off (a situation set) is seen to directly lead
to a paramount consequence of global warming and the earth (animals and nature)
suffering. When put into perspectives, the amount of electricity or natural
resources used to fuel that light (the actual consequence set) is probably
infinitesimal to cause such damage. However, the familiarity of the consequence
makes it not unreasonable. Coupled with guilt, and the self-generated persuasion
process of vivid images to complement, this extreme consequences template usage
is effective and persuasive.
Cotte,
J., Coulter, R. A., & Moore, M. (2005). Enhancing or disrupting guilt: The
role of ad credibility and perceived manipulative intent. Journal of
Business Research, 58(3), 361-368.
Goldenberg,
J., Mazursky, D., & Solomon, S. (1999). The fundamental templates of
quality ads. Marketing Science, 18 (3),
333 – 351.
Miller,
R. L., & Woznlak, W. (2001). Counter-attitudinal advocacy: Effort vs.
self-generation of arguments. Current
Research in Social Psychology, 6 (4), 46 – 57.
Nisbett,
R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human
Inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Pratkanis,
A. R. (2007). The science of social influence: Advances and future
progress. New York: Psychology Press.
Li Ying Fong
Good.
ReplyDelete