This is an old revision of the document!
예일 대학교 심리학과의 카알 호브랜드에 의해서 세계제2차대전 중 진행된 설득과 관련된 일련의 연구를 말한다. 전쟁으로 인하여 병사의 사기를 선전방법을 통해서 진작시키려는 연구에서 출발하였다. 예일그룹이라고 칭해지는 연구자들은 설득의 메시지(정보)가 받아들여지거나 거절되는 것에 대한 전반적인 틀을 짜는 연구를 하였는데, 정보원(the source of communication), 커뮤니케이션의 성격 혹은 특징, 그리고 청자의 특징 등이 중요한 요인으로 연구되었다.
The approach has a similar structure to 4th-century BC Greek philosopher Aristotle’s concept of persuasion as seen in his work Rhetoric. According to Aristotle, there are three means of persuasion: the character of the speaker, the emotional state of the listener, and logos, the argument itself. Contemporary psychologists take use both the Yale model’s psychological approach and Aristotle’s philosophical approach to examine more closely specific components of persuasion.
William McGuire was one of the first to further develop the Yale model in the late 1960s. (Interestingly, McGuire is best known for his inoculation theory in how to create resistance to persuasion.) McGuire emphasized the importance of reception, the attention and comprehension stages of the Yale group, and yielding, the anticipation and critical evaluation steps, in his study of individual differences in influenceability.[4] He predicted ability and motivational attributes to be positively related to reception. Another description of McGuire's persuasion process is through 6 steps: presentation, attention, comprehension, yielding, retention, and behavior.[5] For example, people of high intelligence have the necessary cognitive skills to comprehend the speaker’s message. Similarly, people of high self-esteem are more socially engaged and less anxious or distracted, facilitating attention to and comprehension of the message. Conversely, he found that yielding to persuasion required the opposite attributes. People of low intelligence and low self-esteem are more likely to change their opinions after receiving a message. Therefore, people of middle-range intelligence and self-esteem seemed to be the most easily persuaded as they were most likely to both receive and yield to the message.
One weakness of the approach is the nature of its individual steps, specifically the yielding step. The approach assumes the audience's attitude will change through learning of a new message, yet learning does not always result in persuasion.[6] The Elaboration likelihood model is a more contemporary approach to persuasion, stemming from the Yale Attitude Change Approach. Developed by R.E. Petty and J.T. Cacioppo in the late 1980s, this model explains two ways in which persuasive communications can cause attitude change: centrally and peripherally. The central route to persuasion occurs when people have both the ability and the motivation to listen to a message and think about the arguments. The peripheral route to persuasion occurs when people are swayed not by the argument itself, but by things secondary to the message such as the length of the communication or the attractiveness of the communicator, essentially aspects of the Yale Attitude Approach.
Martin Bauer takes a slightly different angle to the Yale approach. In 2008, Bauer argues that persuasion cannot only focus on the social influence on intersubjectivity, the sharing of subjective states by two or more individuals, but must also include the idea of inter-objectivity, the understandings that are shared between individuals about social reality. Using the idea of the 'fait accompli', a completed and irreversibly 'done deal', he explores artifacts such as nuclear power, information technology, and genetic engineering as types of social influence.