Measuring Social Persuasion: Bases, Scales, and Methods
This paper examines the concept of social persuasion, drawing primarily on Kaptein's (2012) definition and the foundational work of French and Raven (1959). It outlines six bases of social power — reward, coercive power, reference, legitimacy, expertise, and informational influence — and explores how each determines the degree of influence one individual can exert over another. The paper then evaluates several operationalization methods used to measure social persuasion as a psychological construct, including IRT rating scales, single-item measures, semantic differential scales, and even- and odd-numbered Likert scales. Each method is assessed for its strengths, weaknesses, validity, and reliability. The paper concludes by proposing an odd-numbered Likert scale model validated through a four-stage criterion process.
- Defining Social Persuasion: Kaptein's definition and theoretical foundations explained
- The Six Bases of Social Persuasion: Six power bases: reward, coercion, reference, legitimacy, expertise, information
- Operationalizing Social Persuasion: Overview of methods used to measure social persuasion
- The IRT Rating Scale: IRT method applied to measure persuasion bases
- Single-Item and Likert Scale Measures: Single-item, semantic differential, and Likert scale critiques
- Conclusion and Proposed Model: Proposed four-stage odd-numbered Likert scale model
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds abstract concepts in a clear theoretical framework (French & Raven, 1959; Kaptein, 2012) before moving to measurement, giving the argument a logical foundation.
- Systematically evaluates each measurement instrument by weighing both strengths and weaknesses, demonstrating critical rather than merely descriptive engagement with the literature.
- Uses a simple mathematical formula to illustrate the relational dynamic of persuasion, making a social-psychological concept accessible and concrete.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper exemplifies comparative instrument critique — a technique common in psychology and social science research methods writing. Rather than endorsing a single measurement tool, the author surveys multiple operationalization strategies (IRT, single-item, semantic differential, even- and odd-numbered Likert scales), evaluating each against consistent standards of validity, reliability, and practical utility. This approach signals methodological literacy and is especially effective in papers that culminate in a proposed research design.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized in two main phases. The first phase (roughly half the paper) establishes the theoretical context: defining social persuasion and detailing the six bases of social power. The second phase shifts to methodology, reviewing and critiquing four types of measurement instruments. The paper closes with a brief proposal for the author's own preferred instrument and validation process, connecting theory back to measurement practice.
Defining Social Persuasion
The term social persuasion has been defined differently by various researchers and scholars across different fields of study. For the purposes of this paper, however, Kaptein's (2012) definition and scope will be adopted. Social persuasion is thus defined as the symbolic ability "to convince other people to change their attitudes or behaviors regarding an issue, through the transmission of a message in an atmosphere of free choice" (Kaptein, 2012, p. 1). In other words, it is the art of getting a target to change their attitude or opinion about something and to consequently adopt a different viewpoint.
This conceptualization draws from the early works of Cartwright (1959) and Kurt Lewin (1951), both of whom held the view that an individual's behavior and attitude is the product of a range of forces or tensions within their life space, and their ability or inability to resist those forces. Towards this end, an individual's (call him individual A) ability to influence the attitudes or beliefs of another individual (B) is dependent upon the amount of influence A has over B, and the amount of resistance B puts up against that influence (French & Raven, 1959). Mathematically, this relationship could be represented as:
Effective persuasion = f (influence A, B, resistance B)
References
Bearden, W., Hardesty, D. M., & Rose, R. L. (2001). Consumer self-confidence: Refinements in conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 121–134.
French, J. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The basis of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power. Institute for Social Research.
Fuchs, C. (2009). Using single-item measures for construct measurement in management research. DBW, 69(2), 195–210.
Kaptein, M. C. (2012). Personalized persuasion in ambient intelligence. Eindhoven University of Technology Library.
Liu, O. L., & Wilson, M. (2010). Sources of self-efficacy belief: Development and validation of two scales. Journal of Applied Measurement, 11(1), 24–37.
Schwenk, G. (2009). Evaluating social influence relations: An item-response modeling approach. Metodoloski Zvezki, 6(1), 27–50.
Swasy, J. L. (1979). Measuring the bases of social power. In W. L. Wilkie (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research (Vol. 6, pp. 340–346). Association for Consumer Research.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.