The Utility of Exemplars in Persuasive Communications

Media accounts typically employ two types of information: (a) general statements about the range or importance of a problem (base-rate information), and (b) illustrative individual cases (exemplars) that are less valid but more vivid. A review of the psychological literature on judgments leads to the general hypothesis that the perception of a problem is influenced primarily by the quality and distribution of exemplars. In a series of five experiments, the researchers varied the number and quality of exemplars and their consistency with the base-rate information for several journalistic stories. The results indicate that base-rate information had almost no impact whereas exemplars had a strong effect on the perceived distribution of public opinion about story problems. Exemplars also had a moderate impact on subjects' personal opinions about the problem. Implications for communication research and journalistic practice are discussed.

[1]  T. K. Srull,et al.  Human cognition in its social context. , 1986, Psychological review.

[2]  Shelly Chaiken,et al.  Attitudes and Attitude Change , 1987 .

[3]  I. Gavanski,et al.  Representativeness and conjoint probability. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[4]  S. Chaiken.  Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. , 1980 .

[5]  T. K. Srull,et al.  Handbook of Social Cognition , 1993 .

[6]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability , 1973 .

[7]  M. Bar-Hillel.  The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments. , 1980 .

[8]  Jeffrey C. Alexander,et al.  Media, Audience, and Social Structure , 1986 .

[9]  Darrell Huff,et al.  How to Take a Chance , 1964 .

[10]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Communication modality as a determinant of message persuasiveness and message comprehensibility. , 1976 .

[11]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Insensitivity to sample bias: Generalizing from atypical cases , 1980 .

[12]  Shanto Iyengar,et al.  THE ACCESSIBILITY BIAS IN POLITICS: TELEVISION NEWS AND PUBLIC OPINION , 1990 .

[13]  D. Reisberg,et al.  Vivid memories of emotional events: The accuracy of remembered minutiae , 1990, Memory & cognition.

[14]  P. Meehl,et al.  Antecedent probability and the efficiency of psychometric signs, patterns, or cutting scores. , 1955, Psychological bulletin.

[15]  Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann,et al.  Die Schweigespirale : öffentliche Meinung, unsere soziale Haut , 1980 .

[16]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Judged frequency of lethal events , 1978 .

[17]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Point of view and perceptions of causality. , 1975 .

[18]  Rebecca L. Collins,et al.  The vividness effect: Elusive or illusory? , 1988 .

[19]  Hans-Bernd Brosius,et al.  The Effects of Emotional Pictures in Television News , 1993 .

[20]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Impression-formation effects of printed news varying in descriptive precision and exemplifications. , 1992 .

[21]  A. Tversky,et al.  On the psychology of prediction , 1973 .

[22]  M. Haller.  Die Reportage :ein Handbuch für Journalisten , 1990 .

[23]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Communication and persuasion , 1986 .

[24]  Marie Wilson,et al.  Information competition and vividness effects in on-line judgments , 1989 .

[25]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Stalking the elusive "vividness" effect. , 1982 .

[26]  J. Bargh,et al.  Social cognition and social perception. , 1987, Annual review of psychology.

[27]  D. Winterfeldt,et al.  Cognitive Components of Risk Ratings , 1981 .

[28]  S. Iyengar.  Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. , 1991 .