Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Credibility dates back to Aristotle's theory of Rhetoric.Aristotle defines rhetoric as the ability to see what is possibly persuasive in every situation. He divided the means of persuasion into three categories, namely Ethos (the source's credibility), Pathos (the emotional or motivational appeals), and Logos (the logic used to support a claim), which he believed have the capacity to influence ...
Source credibility is "a term commonly used to imply a communicator's positive characteristics that affect the receiver's acceptance of a message." [1] Academic studies of this topic began in the 20th century and were given a special emphasis during World War II, when the US government sought to use propaganda to influence public opinion in support of the war effort.
The credibility and attractiveness of the communicator (source), the quality and sincerity of the message (nature of the communication), and the attention, intelligence and age of the audience (nature of the audience) can influence an audience's attitude change with a persuasive communication.
Social influence is a broad term that relates to many different phenomena. Listed below are some major types of social influence that are being researched in the field of social psychology. For more information, follow the main article links provided.
Some researchers in psychology indicate that the replication crisis is a foundation for a "credibility revolution", where changes in standards by which psychological science are evaluated may include emphasizing transparency and openness, preregistering research projects, and replicating research with higher standards for evidence to improve ...
Figure A: Normal Decay Figure B: Sleeper Effect. The sleeper effect is a psychological phenomenon that relates to persuasion. It is a delayed increase in the effect of a message that is accompanied by a discounting cue, typically being some negative connotation or lack of credibility in the message, while a positive message may evoke an immediate positive response which decays over time.
The responsibility to evaluate the credibility of eyewitness testimony falls on each individual juror, when such evidence is offered as testimony in a trial in the United States. [6] Research has shown that mock juries are often unable to distinguish between a false and accurate eyewitness testimony.
Studies driving the credibility revolution have made use of better quality data, and also econometric techniques such as difference in differences, instrumental variables, regression discontinuity, natural experiments, and even, when funding and opportunity permit, true randomized experiments. These techniques have made it possible (in ...