Resistance and persuasion

Eric S. Knowles Jay A. Linn

 Resistance is an initial condition for

persuasion.
It is the resistance that requires
persuasion.

DEFINITIONS OF
RESISTANCE
The term has been used to refer to the:
1. noncompliance with a directive,
2. a desire to counteract someone elses
attempt to limit ones choices,
3. unwillingness to achieve insight about
the real nature of ones thoughts or feelings,
4. avoidance of unpleasant or dangerous
feelings
Or
5. the feeling of ambivalence about change

Resistance as Attitude
One model of attitude structure
distinguishes three components:
affective, cognitive, and behavioral.
This tripartite model applies to
resistance as well.
I dont like it!, I dont believe
it!, and I wont do it! are the
affective, cognitive, and behavioral
components of resistance, respectively.

Source of Resistance
Although resistance is a response to
pressures for change, the source of
resistance is sometimes attributed
more to the person, and sometimes it
is attributed more to the situation.

 When a person senses that someone

else is limiting his or her freedom to
choose or act, an uncomfortable
state of reactance results, creating
motivation to reassert that freedom.

Two sets of factors determine

the
amount of reactance

One set concerns the freedoms that are

threatened. The more numerous and
important the freedoms, the greater the
reactance to losing them.

A second set of factors concerns the nature

of the threat. Arbitrary, blatant, direct, and
demanding requests will create more
reactance than legitimate, subtle, indirect,
and delicate requests.

1.
2.
3.
4.

FOUR FACES OF
RESISTANCE:

REACTANCE,
DISTRUST,
SCRUTINY, AND
INERTIA

Reactance
One face of resistance is the reactance.
This face of resistance recognizes the
influence attempt as an integral element
of resistance.
Reactance is initiated only when the
influence is directly perceived and when it
threatens a persons choice alternatives.
This view of resistance also emphasizes
the affective (I dont like it!) and
motivational (I wont do it!) sides of
resistance.

Distrust
Another face of resistance spotlights the target of
change, and it reveals a general distrust of proposals.
People become guarded and wary when faced with a
proposal, offer, or message to change.

They wonder what the motive behind the proposal

might be, what the true facts are.

This face of resistance underlies both affective (I dont

like it!) and cognitive (I dont believe it!) reactions to
influence.

We chose to describe this face as distrust rather than

paranoia because some degree of this wariness seems
legitimate. The persuaders goals may be divergent from
the targets goals and may, in fact, be exploitive.

Scrutiny
A third face of resistance is a general scrutiny that
influence, offers, or requests create. When people
become aware that they are the target of an influence
attempt, a natural reaction is to attend more carefully
and thoughtfully to every aspect of the situation.
This is a form of resistance that puts emphasis on the
proposal itself. The careful scrutiny of the proposal
means that each point is examined more carefully and
questioned more thoroughly.
The strengths of an argument are appreciated and
accepted, and to that extent the proposal is believed.

But, the weaknesses of an argument are exposed,

evaluated, and countered, and to that extent, the
proposal is rejected.

Inertia
A fourth face of resistance might be called inertia.
This is a face that is not reactant to the proposer or
the proposal, and it doesnt necessarily lead to
greater scrutiny, distrust, or reactance. Inertia is a
quality that focuses more on staying put than on
resisting change.

It is one face of the great equilibrium motive that

attempts to keep the attitude system in balance. To
the extent that a request, an offer, or a persuasive
message asks for change in affect, behavior, or
belief, the inertia of personality and attitude
frustrates that change.
However, this form of resistance has more in
common with the drag of an anchor than with the
antagonism of the provoked.

 attempts at persuasion might often benefit

from techniques aimed at addressing the
resistance forces working against
acceptance of a persuasive appeal.
For example, young smokers often resist
messages aimed at getting them to stop
smoking, preferring to believe that the
highly publicized health risks are
exaggerated or do not apply to them

 If one were able to convince young

smokers that the risks do apply to
them or that the risks are greater
than they currently believe, this
would certainly increase the
effectiveness of an appeal that rests
on these reasons not to smoke.

 Addressing resistance can also be

substantially less direct. For example,
increased the effectiveness of a persuasive
appeal by simply acknowledging that the
message recipient would probably want to
disagree with the message .
Somewhat paradoxically, allowing people the
freedom to resist appears to undermine the
motivation to do so, consistent with what
might be expected from reactance theory.

 While youth had varying points of view,

there was incredible consensus around their
distaste for social marketing and antitobacco efforts that pass judgment on
tobacco users.
Across the board, youth told us that they did
not want to be told what to do. They wanted
the facts and then to be left to make their
own educated decision. If we were to be
successful, truth could not preach. Truth
needed a message other than don't.

THE ATTITUDE STRENGTH

BACKDROP
Attitude strength can be defined in terms of
the:
1. persistence of the attitude over time
(withstanding the force of time),
2. the resistance of the attitude to attack
(withstanding the force of opposing
persuasive appeals), and
3. the ability of the attitude to guide related
thoughts and behavior (creating a force that
guides cognition and action;

Many properties of attitudes

have been identified as
increasing attitude
strength.

1. attitudes are more likely to guide

behavior when they are accessible
(i.e., when they come to mind quickly
upon encountering the attitude object)
2. when they are based on high levels
of attitude-relevant knowledge
3. on beliefs that are consistent with
the overall evaluation.

 4. Attitudes based on high, rather

than low, levels of elaboration have
been found to persist longer over
time, to resist the opposing
persuasive messages better, and to
predict more accurately future
behavior

ALTERNATIVE WAYS
TO DEFINE RESISTANCE
Page 17