Opinion Science

Robin Nabi is a professor of communication at the University of California-Santa Barbara. She studies how emotional appeals can (and cannot) lead people to change their thoughts and behaviors. She’s published important research on the effects of anger, humor, and guilt, and she’s also developed integrated theories about how emotions can work together in the persuasion process. We talk about all this and more!

When we talk about humor and persuasion, we briefly mention Dannagal Young’s prior appearance on the show. To listen to that check out: Episode 19: Political Humor as Persuasion with Danna Young

 
Some things that come up in our conversation:

• Sarah McLaclan’s powers of emotional manipulation (ASPCA)
• Aristotle’s treatise on Rhetoric, including ethos (Miyawaki, 2017), logos (Trebing, 2017), and pathos (Tollefson, 2017).
• Robin has a nice summary of work in this area in a chapter for The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects (Nabi, 2017)
• Emotion is not as irrational as we may believe (e.g., Clore, 2011; Mull, 2019)
• Emotions can help frame an issue (Nabi, 2003)
• “Emotional flow” or the sequence of emotions in a message (Nabi, 2015)

Some sound effects sourced from freesfx.co.uk

For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/persuasion-via-emotion-with-robin-nabi/

Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.

Linda Skitka is a distinguished professor of psychology at the University of Illinois at Chicago. She's been studying people's moral convictions--the opinions that we connect to our core sense of moral right and wrong. Two people might agree about universal healthcare, for example, but they might disagree about how much their positions on this issue are drawn from their personal moral compass. Over the years, Linda and her colleagues have found that our opinions take on a different character if we've attached a feeling of moral significance to them.

 A few things than come up in this episode:

• Bernie Sanders’ 2016 speech urging people to treat inequality as a moral issue.
• In the opening, I discuss some research I did on how the mere perception of moral relevance makes opinions harder to change (Luttrell et al., 2016)
• For a summary of the research on moral conviction, Linda and her colleagues recently published a great overview in Annual Review of Psychology (Skitka et al., 2021)
• The early days of distinguishing moral conviction from other characteristics (Skitka et al., 2005)
• People resist conformity when they hold a morally convicted attitude (Aramovich et al., 2012)
• The question of how emotion plays a role in moralized opinions (Brandt et al., 2015; Skitka & Wisneski, 2011; Skitka et al., 2018; Wisneski & Skitka, 2016)

For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/moral-conviction-with-linda-skitka/

Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.

Adam Hahn spends a lot of time thinking about how well people know their own biases. Sure, people often refer to "implicit bias" as social biases that exist unconsciously. But do they really? How strongly can we claim we're unaware of these attitudes and is there any reason to think people can readily tell you what their gut reactions are when they encounter people of different racial, gender, and religious identities? Adam's a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Psychology at the University of Bath.

A few things that come up in our conversation:

• In the intro, I talk about the work of Russ Fazio (e.g., Fazio et al., 1986) and John Bargh (e.g., Bargh et al., 1992) looking into the automatic activation of attitudes. I also highlight Greenwald and Banaji's (1995) presentation of "implicit social cognition." (The quote about using "implicit" to refer to processes outside of awareness is from a 2001 chapter by Banaji and Tesser.) Also, big tip of the hat to Adam Hahn for helping me organize the structure of the introduction.
• You can take the Implicit Association Test (IAT) at "Project Implicit"
• Whether implicit bias is unconscious depends on how you define "unconscious" (Hahn & Goedderz, 2020)
• People can predict their scores on the IAT (Hahn et al., 2014; Hahn & Gawronski, 2019)
• People's predictions of their IAT performance is predictable (Rivera & Hahn, 2019)
• For details on some of the newer (unpublished as of yet) work that Adam talks about, you might enjoy this 2021 talk he gave at Université Grenoble Alpes.

News clips at the top of the show were sourced from the following: NPR [1] [2], 5News, CBSNews, Devex, Christian Science Monitor, CNN, & The Young Turks.

For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/unconscious-bias-with-adam-hahn/

Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.

Mark Brandt studies a bunch of things. He’s an assistant professor of psychology at Michigan State University. These days, he’s been exploring how we can think about belief systems as a network of interconnected opinions. Using mathematical simulations that specify how people’s opinions can be connected, Mark and his team have been able to establish a core model that explains a bunch of findings from political psychology.

Mark also co-organizes a free online seminar, the Minority Politics Online Seminar Series (MPOSS). Check it out for a bunch of great presentations by researchers who are studying a range of important topics. 

A few things that come up in our conversation:

• We focus on a recent summary of the idea that networks can help explain belief systems (Brandt & Sleegers, 2021)
• Using network analysis, we can identify which opinions are central to a belief system (Brandt et al., 2019)
• It is difficult to quantify an individual person’s network of opinions (Brandt & Morgan, 2022; Brandt, 2022)

For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/belief-systems-with-mark-brandt/

Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.

David McRaney is an author and host of the podcast You Are Not So Smart. In June, he’s releasing a new book—How Minds Change: The Surprising Science of Belief, Opinion, and Persuasion (you can pre-order it now). In the book, David goes on a wild journey to understand the mechanics of persuasion. He combines research in psychology with stories of persuasion on the ground to arrive at an understanding of when and why people end up changing their opinions. In our conversation, David shares how he got wrapped up in reporting on social science research, why he wanted to learn more about persuasion, and what he’s learned about how minds change.

Also at the top of the episode is a look at some brand new research by Adam Mastroiannion how public opinion in the United States has changed over the years…and how people are generally ignorant about what these changes have been. For details, check out the paper (Mastroianni & Danas, 2022), which came out last week in PNAS. (You should also check out Adam’s blog, Experimental History.)

Music in this episode by Blue Dot Sessions.

For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/how-minds-change-with-david-mcraney/

Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.

Sohad Murrar studies how media and norms affect people's opinions about social groups. Does media representation matter? Can infotainment aimed at reducing misconceptions really work? In this episode, Sohad gives us a glimpse into what the research says, her own experiences consulting with Hollywood creatives, and how conveying social norms can be a potent way of addressing prejudice.

Also at the top of the show, you'll hear about a radio program from the 1930s: "Americans All--Immigrants All." You can listen to most episodes of that show at WNYC's archives. Many of the details about the program and how it responded to anti-immigrant prejudice at the time is thanks to a wonderful book by Susan Herbst: A Troubled Birth: The 1930s and American Public Opinion.

Some of the research Sohad and I talk about includes:

• Thoughtfully produced infotainment can lead to reduced prejudice in viewers (Murrary & Brauer, 2018)
• How stories can foster more positive attitudes toward social groups (Murrar & Brauer, 2019)
• Conveying pro-diversity social norms serves to increase tolerance and inclusion (Murrar, Campbell, & Brauer, 2020)

For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/media-norms-social-change-with-sohad-murrar/

Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."

Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.

Julia Minson studies the psychology of disagreement. In particular, she's been working to understand what sorts of people are receptive to other opinions and how our perceptions of other people's receptiveness can improve conversations. Dr. Minson is an Associate Professor of Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of government.

Some things that come up in this episode:

• StoryCorps and the One Small Step initiative (the clip at the beginning of the episode is from "Family Politics")
• For a big overview of the kinds of things we discuss, check out a recent review article about receptiveness by Julia and her colleague, Frances Chen (Minson & Chen, in press)
• The effects of asking questions on receptiveness (Chen, Minson, & Tormala, 2010)
• Eye contact can foster resistance to persuasion (Chen, Minson, Schöne, & Heinrichs, 2013)
• Measuring receptiveness to opposing views as a personal trait (Minson, Chen, & Tinsley, 2019)
• Developing an algorithm to detect receptiveness using language (Yeomans, Minson, et al., 2020)

For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/receptiveness-with-julia-minson/

Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."

Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.

Chris Petsko studies which stereotypes come to mind in a given moment. He's a social psychologist and postdoctoral scholar at Duke University. I talk with Chris about his "lens-based account of intersectional stereotyping," which argues that we can only pay attention to one social identity at a time. As a result, the stereotypes that come to mind depend on the one lens through which we're seeing someone at the moment.

Things we mention in this episode:

• Walter Lippman's 1922 book "Public Opinion"
• Testing a lens-based account of intersectional stereotyping (Petsko, Rosette, & Bodenhausen, 2022)
• An early summary of a lens-based theory of categorization and stereotyping (Petkso & Bodenhausen, 2020)
• Sexual orientation and racial identity interact to predict relevant outcomes (Petsko & Bodenhausen, 2019)

For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/stereotypes-at-the-intersection-with-chris-petsko/

Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."

Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.

Zoe Chance is an assistant professor of marketing at the Yale School of Management. Prior to Yale, she managed a $200 million segment of the Barbie brand at Mattel. In February, she's releasing her first book: Influence Is Your Superpower.

In this episode, we talk about Zoe's winding road to becoming a business school professor, the class she teaches at Yale on influence and persuasion, and the insights she shares in her upcoming book.

For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/influence-is-your-superpower-with-zoe-chance/

Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."

Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.

Another year in the books! Sure, there was a lot of wild stuff in 2021--an insurrection, COVID vaccine rollouts, a new president, another installment in the Tiger King franchise...and my daughter was born!

But through it all, we had Opinion Science. This year saw a bunch of new listeners, amazing guests, and some ambitious episodes. Your support has meant a lot.

So even though I'm a couple weeks behind on this, I wanted put together another "best of" episode, featuring notable moments from the podcast in 2021. As I said in the 2020 "best of" episode, it’s not truly a “best of” per se because I really am attached to every episode. S eriously, there's something in every episode of the show that has stuck with me. So instead, I’ve chosen some particularly meaningful episodes for me, fan favorites, and moments that highlight what this show is all about.

If you’re new to the show, this is a great place to start! And if you’ve been listening since the beginning, join me on some fun memories from this year.

-Andy

Featured 2021 episodes:

• Episode 30: “Us vs. Them” with Jay Van Bavel
• Episode 32: Moralizing and Attention with Ana Gantman
• Episode 35: Ambivalence with Iris Schneider
• Episode 36: Negotiation with Kwame Christian
• Episode 37: Influence with Robert Cialdini
• Episode 44: The Contact Hypothesis
• Episode 47: Moral Foundations & Political Opinion with Jesse Graham

Join me over at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/OpinionScience

Learn more about Opinion Science and catch up on all the episodes at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/.