Persuasion techniques and psychological principles

Reasoned Action

A recent event in the world of business and politics brings home the idea of reasoned action in regards to fixing problems, even on a national level. The event that took place was that American citizens reelected a President that had no economic sense whatsoever, and had wasted trillions of dollars on projects that proved very foolhardy, all in an attempt to jumpstart an economy that has been in the doldrums since 2008.

As one recent article espoused "the kind of social behavior that often serves as a dependent variable in studies of attitudes and behavior is one that is shaped by social forces, not only private preferences" (Manstead, 2011, p. 367). Hence, the private preferences of many American citizens could have been a reflection of personal standards, or could be viewed as a strong display of social influence.

Managing to convince enough citizens to vote for him, even with his abysmal track record, is a feat that can easily be attributed to reasoned action on the part of those citizens. The distinct differences in philosophies espoused by the President and his opponent could be considered as motivating factors for choosing one or the other of the candidates. Peter Chance wrote a book on behaviors in the nineties that states that humans have no instinctive, or fixed action patterns that are innate, especially in regards to motivation. Chance wrote that fixed actions "resemble reflexes in that they are innate, display little variability from individual to individual, of from day-to-day in the same individual, and often are reliably elicited by a particular kind of event" (Chance, 1994, p. 8).

The particular event in this case was a show towards the end of the campaign by the President regarding his handling of a major catastrophic storm. His measured and calm response provided the citizens with a reflective opportunity on how well the President would handle certain situations. Was this the only event to influence the voters? Probably not, but it was a major event that was timed at just the right moment to elicit a reasoned action by those same voters.

The President was able to manage the situation in such a way, that the voters could easily view him as the person in charge. The voter's behavior likely stemmed from the attitude that a choice needed to be made, and that someone who could take charge and handle events such as these, would likely be good enough to handle other problems as well. That his opponent had no such opportunity to show the same care and understanding was not really at issue. Voter's attitudes seemed to reflect the idea that they would have voted for the incumbent no matter how wise and able the opponent appeared.