Change my mind
How to turn the art of persuasion into the science of persuasion
Walter Lippmann and Edward Bernays were influential figures in journalism and public relations in the early 20th century. They both had important insights into how human nature affects the way people perceive and respond to information and persuasion.
Lippmann argued that people often rely on stereotypes and biases to form their opinions, rather than on rational and objective analysis of facts. He called this phenomenon the "pseudo-environment" that shapes the "public mind.” Lippmann proposed that elites needed to inform public policy and educate the public because they couldn’t possibly figure out life’s important riddles on their own. He observed how governments and corporations manipulate public opinion, something that Edward Bernays took to extraordinary levels.
Bernays was a nephew of Sigmund Freud, and is regarded as the father of public relations. He applied the insights of psychoanalysis and social psychology to the practice of persuasion and influence. He claimed that people are driven by unconscious desires and emotions, rather than by reason and logic. He argued that public relations is a necessary and beneficial tool for shaping public opinion and behavior, as well as for promoting the interests of clients and causes. He also acknowledged that public relations can be used for good or evil purposes, depending on the values and motives of the practitioners.
The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) was developed by Richard E. Petty and John T. Cacioppo in the 1980s, and builds on the work of Lippmann, Bernays, and other theories of persuasion and social psychology. The ELM is a way of explaining how people can be persuaded by different kinds of messages.
It's important because it affects how much people change their minds and how long they hold new opinions. The model explains how people process information differently depending on their motivation and ability to think critically.
"Elaboration" refers to the mental processing or thinking effort invested when considering a persuasive message: central route elaboration and peripheral route elaboration.
The central route involves careful evaluation of the message based on its logic, evidence, and arguments. The peripheral route involves superficial cues, such as the attractiveness of the source, the length of the message, or the presence of endorsements. The central route leads to more durable and resistant attitude change, while the peripheral route leads to more temporary and susceptible attitude change.
Choosing a mobile phone
Central route: Researching specifications, reading reviews, and comparing features to make a well-informed decision based on the phone's capabilities and your specific needs.
Peripheral route: Your circle of friends buys this brand.
Choosing a movie on Netflix
Central route: Reading reviews, watching trailers, and considering the genre or director. Extra levels of calculations if you’re watching with kids or a significant other.
Peripheral route: This thumbnail image is a winner.
Choosing a political candidate
Central route: Investigating policy positions, watching their long-form discussions, reading their work, and researching their financial supporters and lobbyist connections.
Peripheral route: This one has the correct letter beside their name.
Choosing a street design
Central route: Analyzing the surrounding land use, comparing traffic safety features, and studying the outcomes of similar designs in other places.
Peripheral route: This one has bike lanes.
The elaboration likelihood model incorporates some of the insights of Lippmann and Bernays, but extends and challenges them. For example:
People can use both rational and emotional factors to form their opinions, depending on the situation and their personal involvement.
People can vary in their level of elaboration, or the extent to which they think deeply about the message, rather than being fixed in their cognitive style.
Persuasion is not a one-way process, but a dynamic and interactive one, influenced by the source, the message, and the audience factors.
ELM is useful for understanding and even predicting how people respond to persuasive communication in different contexts. There’s probably an instinct to judge anyone who would dare make decisions based on superficial inputs, but we all do it all the time. ELM isn’t about this thinking is right, that thinking is wrong. It’s a way of understanding how our brains tend to work.
For public infrastructure projects, the goal of community engagement is sometimes education, and other times persuasion. Sometimes you want to teach an audience why Vision Zero matters so much, and other times you want them to pick between two intersection safety improvements. The central route and peripheral route each play a role. The central route will result in more lasting and consistent attitude change, while the peripheral route will result in a quick (but possibly short-lived) attitude change.
For any type of messaging—central or peripheral route—you’ve got to include storytelling.
Central route storytelling:
Make information memorable with vivid mental images. Tap into emotions to connect with an audience’s experiences. You’re the dot-connector for them.
Clarify complex subject matter in digestible talking points. Be able to relate as an expert to varying levels of knowledge.
Peripheral route storytelling:
Capture attention. You don’t have to be an extrovert, or even loud, but presence is important.
Enhance your credibility for people who don’t know planning and engineering inside and out.
Some people tune out these psych topics, and that’s fine. I’m fascinated by how we form, hold, and change attitudes. If you’re intrigued by ELM, watch this 20-minute interview with one of the model’s creators.