“The Big Lie” was a
propaganda technique used by Adolf Hitler. It involves repeating a big lie over
and over again, in spite of all the arguments or evidence to the contrary,
until people believed it. Hitler explained his Big Lie technique in “Mein
Kampf” – a 1925 autobiographical manifesto by the Nazi leader: “ In the big lie
there is always a certain force of credibility…minds more readily fall victims
to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies
in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehood”. Joseph
Goebbels, the Nazi Propaganda Minister, later refined the technique in 1930s: “
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come
to believe it” (Camenker, 2015).
There are various
studies that have demonstrated how message repetition might work as a powerful
tool to convince and persuade others of one’s argument, perhaps this
correlation can be explained by increased statement credibility. According to
Koch and Zerback’s study (2013), there is a positive relationship between moderate repetition of a persuasive message
and statement credibility –known as the “truth effect”. However, this truth
effect has also been suggested to vanish or reverse if the message is repeated
too frequently. The researchers have found that in such cases, people tend to
perceive the repeated message as a persuasive attempt.
Koch and Zerback’s
study (2013) consisted a total of 167 participants, who were instructed to read
a newspaper article of about 600 words in length. The article was about
microcredit loans that were given to poorer population segments in emerging
nations, serving as a start-up capital for microenterprises. One section of the
article consisted of an interview with Mr. Yunas – the founder of the
microcredit loan system in which the statement “microcredits reduced poverty in
emerging nations” (independent variable) was presented. Five versions of the
interview was produced, which were identical expect for the message frequency.
Conditions
|
Number of times the statement “microcredits reduced poverty in
emerging countries” was presented to participants
|
Control Group (CG)
|
Did not receive the
statement
|
EG1
|
1
|
EG2
|
3
|
EG3
|
5
|
EG4
|
7
|
After reading the
article, the researchers measured the participants’ assessment of statement credibility,
by asking the participants to judge whether they believed 3 claims regarding
the effect of microcredit loans on poverty to either be right or wrong. This was
done on a 5-point Likert scale. Similarly, Koch and Zerback (2013) also assessed
whether the participants realised that they were exposed to an attempt at
persuasion by instructing them to rate the following items on a 5-point Likert
scale:
1. “I had the feeling
that Mr. Yunus wanted to convince the reader of his standpoint”
2. “Mr. Yunus wanted to
convince me of his views”
(Please not that there were also other variables, which were investigated in this study – for example: reactance and communicator credibility – but for the purposes of this blog I have chosen to only focus on the following variables: statement credibility, perceived intent to persuade and the number of times the statement was presented)
(Please not that there were also other variables, which were investigated in this study – for example: reactance and communicator credibility – but for the purposes of this blog I have chosen to only focus on the following variables: statement credibility, perceived intent to persuade and the number of times the statement was presented)
As a result, statement
repetition frequency yielded a positive effect on perceived statement
credibility (β = .17, p
< .05). Thus, the more
often the participants read the statement “microcredit loans have reduced
poverty in emerging nations” in the newspaper article, the more likely they were
to believe it. However, in contrast, participants who were presented with the
statement very often were significantly likely to identify the stimulus
material as an attempt to persuade,
(β = .29, p < .001). So in
fact, an indirect and negative effect was identified when repetition of the
message was taken too far, thus participants started to doubt the overall
credibility of the message. These
results are illustrated in the causal diagram below:
From this study, it
can be concluded that Hitler’s Big Lie Propaganda technique would probably
work, but only to an extent. The credibility of a statement increases if it is
repeated, but weakens or even reverses with more frequent repetition.
References:
Camenker, B. (2015). The Big Lie and the
propaganda war. Massresistance.org. Retrieved 21 January 2015, from http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/the_big_lie.
html
html
Koch, T., & Zerback, T. (2013). Helpful or
Harmful? How Frequent Repetition Affects Perceived Statement Credibility. Journal
Of Communication, 63(6), 993-1010.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.