Utilization Ideas
Activate Open Mindedness
When running a campaign, conducting outreach, or just talking with someone about abortion, one of the easiest things you can do is activate a mindset of open mindedness. Your message will be received far better and with greater persuadability if someone is already inclined to hearing you out and potentially changing their mind.
One experiment that explores priming to promote open-mindedness was conducted by William J. McGuire in 1960, titled "A Suggested Revision of Cognitive Theory". While not explicitly focused on open-mindedness, the study demonstrates how priming can influence receptiveness to new information and perspectives.
In the experiment, participants were exposed to a persuasive communication advocating a controversial viewpoint. Before receiving the message, some participants were primed with statements encouraging an open-minded attitude, such as "Keep an open mind" or "Try to be impartial." Other participants did not receive any priming statements.
The results showed that participants who were primed with open-minded statements were more likely to consider and evaluate the arguments presented in the persuasive communication compared to those who did not receive the priming. This suggests that priming individuals with cues related to open-mindedness can increase their willingness to engage with and consider alternative viewpoints.
Some Ideas
Suggest to people that they are open minded (or should be)
Use subtle hints and clues referring to open mindedness in literature and ads
Share testimonies of mind changes or learning about new ideas
Use images that suggest flexibility and change (rubber bands, fluidity, etc) and avoid imagery that does not (sharp shapes, rocks, etc)
Use Anchoring When Asking Questions
Keep in mind, people will use anchors that you provide to make decisions or develop attitudes. If you ask if someone strongly supports abortion, they will start at that point and move backwards to their most pro-choice evaluation of themselves. On the flip side, if you ask if someone is strongly opposed to abortion, you will get the opposite result more often.
In addition, there is evidence that suggests that when a range is offered (e.g. "on a scale of 1-10 how would you rate yourself...") people tend to use the first option offered as their anchor (i.e. "1") and will give an answer closer to that anchor that if you started with the opposite scale direction.
Of course, some may point out that just changing the way we ask questions to elicit a different response doesn't actual mean anyone's opinion is different about abortion. This is not entirely true. As we will discuss later, people have an internal desire to remain consistent with their behavior and expressions. If you can get someone to verbalize a more pro-life viewpoint for the first time, they are more likely to desire to remain consistent with that expression later on than if they first verbalized a strong pro-choice viewpoint.
Door in the Face Technique
A form of anchoring relies on people desiring to move away from a anchor they perceive as too extreme. This can be leveraged using the foot in the door technique. The idea behind this is that you ask a person for an obviously too significant request. When they reject it, you come back with a smaller, more reasonable request. That second request now seems far more reasonable than it otherwise would have because it is being viewed in relation to the extreme anchor.
One way this has been used is when canvassing for pro-life causes. You may want people to sign a petition for your initiative. When talking with them, you may ask them for a significant request (e.g. "would you mind putting up a 4x8 foot sign with our message on it in your yard?"). The average person will reject that offer. If you then quickly follow it up with "I understand. How about this, signatures are very important for this effort, would you mind just signing this petition indicating your support?"
The person will see your request as far more reasonable comparatively, and will be more likely to comply and kick off a process of consistency, in addition to signing your petition.
Foot in the Door Technique
The Foot in the Door Technique is the opposite idea of the Door in the Face. Instead of having participants start with a high anchor point, you offer them a low anchor point and move them up from there.
The foot-in-the-door (FITD) technique is a persuasion tactic where an individual begins with a small request or action, and then gradually builds up to larger requests or actions. The name "foot-in-the-door" comes from the idea that once a person agrees to a small request (the foot), they are more likely to comply with a larger request later on (the door) due to their need to remain consistent with their previous actions (see congruent attitudes).
Here's how it typically works:
Small Request: The persuader starts by making a small request that is easy for the target person to agree to. This request might seem trivial or insignificant.
Compliance: The target person agrees to the small request. This creates a sense of consistency and commitment in the person's mind.
Gradual Increase: After gaining compliance with the initial small request, the persuader then makes a larger request. This request is what the persuader really wants the person to agree to.
Increased Likelihood of Compliance: Because the person has already agreed to the initial small request, they are more likely to agree to the larger request. This is due to the psychological principle of consistency, where people tend to act in ways that are consistent with their past behavior and commitments.
The effectiveness of the foot-in-the-door technique is based on the principle of cognitive dissonance, where individuals strive for consistency in their thoughts, beliefs, and actions. Once they've agreed to a small request, they may adjust their attitudes to align with their behavior, making them more likely to comply with subsequent, larger requests to maintain that consistency.
However, it's important to note that if the initial request is too big or seems manipulative, it can backfire and lead to resistance rather than compliance. Therefore, the key to successful implementation of the foot-in-the-door technique is to start with a genuinely small and reasonable request.
For pro-life work, this could look like:
Moving from petition signing to yard sign placement
Getting them to agree to one solid pro-life position (e.g. a 15 week ban), and then gradually moving them to the next threshold
Develop an activism pipeline, moving people strategically towards progressively more courageous forms of activism
Contrast
Here's a approach focusing on contrasting the pro-choice stance by framing it in a way that emphasizes its extreme aspects:
Present the Extremes of the Pro-Choice View: Begin by highlighting extreme cases where the pro-choice stance could lead to morally questionable outcomes. Emphasize scenarios such as late-term abortions or cases where abortion is used as a means of birth control. Illustrate how these extreme positions can trivialize the value of human life and lead to ethical dilemmas.
Highlight the Lack of Limits: Contrast the pro-choice view with the absence of clear boundaries or limits on abortion. Point out that in some cases, the pro-choice stance allows for abortions to be performed for reasons that many find morally objectionable, such as for sex-selective purposes or purely on the basis of convenience.
Appeal to Moral Intuition: Emphasize the discomfort that many individuals feel when confronted with the extreme aspects of the pro-choice stance. Highlight the intuitive sense that there should be limits on the practice of abortion and that there is inherent value in protecting the lives of unborn children, especially in cases where they are viable outside the womb.
Introduce the Pro-Life View: Present the pro-life perspective as a contrasting option that provides a more morally principled approach to the issue of abortion. Emphasize the importance of recognizing the inherent dignity and value of every human life, regardless of its stage of development.
Appeal to Reason and Moderation: Contrast the extreme positions of the pro-choice view with the more moderate and reasoned approach offered by the pro-life stance. Highlight the importance of finding common ground and seeking solutions that respect both the rights of women and the rights of unborn children.
Encourage Action: Finally, encourage the individual to reconsider their stance on abortion and to support policies and initiatives that promote a more balanced and humane approach to the issue. Encourage advocacy for measures that seek to reduce the prevalence of abortion while providing support and resources for women facing unplanned pregnancies.
By contrasting the extreme aspects of the pro-choice view with the more moderate and principled approach offered by the pro-life stance, you can effectively persuade someone to reconsider their position on abortion.
Create Cognitive Dissonance
Creating cognitive dissonance in a person to influence their attitude and behavior can be done by introducing conflicting beliefs, values, or actions. Here's a general strategy:
Identify the Belief-Action Discrepancy: Find a belief or attitude that the person holds, and identify actions that are inconsistent with that belief.
Encourage the Conflicting Action: Get the person to engage in the action that contradicts their belief or attitude. This could involve anything from making a small commitment to a larger action.
Highlight the Inconsistency: Once the person has engaged in the conflicting action, draw their attention to the inconsistency between their belief and their behavior. This can be done subtly or directly, depending on the situation and the person.
Encourage Rationalization: Offer justifications or reasons why the conflicting action was necessary or acceptable. This can help the person to resolve the cognitive dissonance by bringing their attitude more in line with their behavior.
Reinforce the New Attitude: Once the cognitive dissonance has been resolved and the person's attitude has shifted to align more closely with their behavior, reinforce this new attitude through positive feedback or further actions that are consistent with it.
It's important to note that while cognitive dissonance can be a powerful tool for persuasion, it's also ethically complex and can potentially lead to manipulation if used improperly. Always consider the ethical implications and the well-being of the person you're trying to influence.
For a pro-life example, we can generate that dissonance by leveraging the human rights argument. Getting someone to agree that human rights exist for all humans, and that the unborn are humans, creates dissonance that can be resolved most easily by agreeing that abortion violates human rights.
Set Positive Tones
As part of a self-fulfilling prophecy, you can determine the tone of a conversation based on this phenomenon. An easy tool is to always start conversations with a simple question "how are you?" People are conditioned to respond positively, even if they are having the worst possible day. As part of social signaling, you can actually cause someone to feel more positive just by prompting them to respond with the standard "I am good" or "fine." When you respond in accordance (e.g. "Awesome! me too! Great day, huh?") you are also conditioning yourself with a self-fulfilling prophecy as well.
Failure to do this can result in a negative feedback loop that hampers the whole discussion.
Last updated