A lesson in behavioral science, by President Trump: Part 2

Bite-size: Another hallmark of Trump’s communication style is repetition. He repeatedly asserts a claim or idea to build familiarity and reinforce belief. He does this to either, (A) create a sense of consensus and normalize his position, or (B) exploit the tendency for people to believe something is true because they’ve heard it multiple times.

Full-size:
By repeatedly asserting a claim or idea (e.g., “Make America Great Again,” for example), President Trump reinforces this idea through “Repetition for Social Proof”. Repeated use and exposure to his position creates a sense of acceptance and accord, a tactic often seen in marketing to convince consumers of a brand or product’s popularity or reliability.

This also exploits the tendency for people to believe something is true simply because they’ve heard it multiple times. This is called the “Illusory Truth Effect.” By repeatedly stating false or exaggerated claims (even if the claim is debunked), the constant repetition leaves an impression and can subtly, unnoticeably alter perceptions, creating doubt about opposing views.

Brands use this effectively (and ethically) by:

• Repeatedly reinforcing how many people are actively engaged (e.g., fitness apps and their users) to make people feel like they’re missing out on some global movement. Or…

• Brands lean on familiar associations (e.g., beauty brands using influencers) to repeat subtle phrases of “effectiveness” and create a perception of legitimacy.

Over time, customers hear and see these numbers or phrases often enough to perceive the brand as credible and superior, even without hard proof.

A lesson in behavioral science, by President Trump: Part 1

Bite-size: You might be familiar with the “foot-in-the-door” phenomenon—a persuasive strategy used by sneaky salesmen—but have you heard of the “door-in-the-face” technique? Sounds painful doesn’t it? Well, it’ll surely leave a mark. Trump uses it to a capital T. And it’ll make you think differently about his plan to take over Greenland.

Full-size:
You might be familiar with “Foot-in-the-Door” as a popular sales technique—it involves starting with a small request first to gain compliance, followed by a larger request. This technique builds commitment over time, but gradually escalates the request to something much bigger once people have shown initial support. A popular marketing example would be the free trial (e.g., Netflix, Spotify). Once the user becomes accustomed to the service and sees its value, they’re more likely to agree to a larger commitment (such as subscribing to a paid plan).

But what I’ve seen from Trump lately is using the “Door-in-the-Face” technique. This involves making an initial, large request that is likely to be rejected, followed by a smaller, more reasonable request. Trump often starts with extreme proposals (e.g., building a massive border wall, taking over Greenland) which attract attention and controversy. When scaled back or refined, the adjusted proposals seem more reasonable by comparison, increasing the likelihood of acceptance. A brand might use this by upselling with an initial higher-ticket item, followed by a lower-priced product. Luxury retailers and automakers do this SUPER well.

Not all attitudes are created equal

Bite-size: Marketing is about changing attitudes, but some attitudes are more difficult to change than others. Preferences toward a brand, for example, are flexible (e.g., positive or negative associations), but attitudes formed along moral lines are much more rigid (e.g., a matter of right vs. wrong).

Full-size:
When we think about attitudes it’s usually simplified as likes and dislikes. Preferences, like positive/negative associations made during experiences and formed as memories are flexible and often what marketing is targeting. But social norms—opinions from friends and family, or rules we follow as a society—also inform our attitudes. These social conventions can be a bit more difficult to affect. Moral convictions, however, are uncompromising. 

Compared to other constructs, attitudes that reflect moral beliefs are seen as “objectively and universally true,” and, “inherently more motivating and self-justifying” than non-moral attitudes. This makes people with moral conviction steadfast and inflexible in their belief, with no actual proof required (think staunch vaccine disbelievers when presented with scientific evidence).

The Moral Foundations Theory says that not only are moral convictions are seen as strong, morally rooted attitudes, but they are equally strong in moral investment. Findings from research make a connection to emotional responses as well. Those with moral convictions tend to be more intolerant of change and more defensive in their position. 

Marketers can overcome this using: moral reframing. By framing a position in a way that appeals to someone's moral values, even if they would not normally support it, is a well-supported scientific technique for effective and persuasive communication. Example: A person who is negative towards vaccines because they believe the mandates violate their personal liberty and freedom. They are not persuaded by scientific evidence alone. So, by re-framing a pro-vaccine message around ‘liberty’ the message challenges the attitude by appealing to the underlying belief: our freedoms must be protected, and COVID-19 is the enemy.