現在除了新聞、報紙等媒體滿是腦殘業配報導,就連許多人氣部落格也充斥著產品置入,
從國O石化到化妝品是無其不有,內容更極盡塗脂抹粉,每每喊讚喊的有若要斬雞頭一般;
然而廠商花錢請這些”專業領域部落客”來大聲叫好,其對讀者的說服成效又是如何呢?
在一份由3月號哈佛商業評論(Harvard Business Review)所刊登的構想觀察,
“專家可信度大考驗“中,史丹佛大學的研究者Zakary Tormala就認為─與通常認知相左,
比起極為肯定的專家評論,表示出”不確定”的專家評論,反而更能讓讀者信服!
(以下內容引述自Experts Are More Persuasive When They’re Less Certain)
…..The finding: When experts express uncertainty about their opinions,
people find them more compelling…..
…..The research: Zakary Tormala of Stanford Business School had subjects read a review
that gave a new eatery four out of five stars. Half the subjects read a write-up by
a professional food critic, and the other half, one by an amateur.
Half of each group saw a review that was highly certain; the rest, a review that was tentative.
The subjects were then asked how good they thought the restaurant would be.
While the confident amateur inspired subjects to give better ratings than the uncertain one,
the less assured expert prompted higher ratings than the certain expert…..
…..
…..The phenomenon at work here is what we call expectancy violations. People expect experts to
be confident. Violations of that expectation surprise them. We see that in our data.
Subjects reported being more surprised by the uncertain experts and the confident amateurs.
A surprise draws you in and makes you pay more attention. It gives the review more impact…..
…..
…..But closer attention doesn’t always lead to more persuasion. Remember that in our study,
both write-ups gave four out of five stars, and what the reviewer had to say was compelling.
If what you’re saying is not compelling, it could backfire…..
…..
雖然乍看之下和”專家斬釘截鐵的言論更強而有力”的認知有些不大一樣,
但這結果其實也很符合Elaboration Likelihood Model(ELM)的預測,
畢竟比起肯定的內容,透露出些許不確定性的專家似乎更吸引人的注意力,
此時轉而使用中央路徑(central route to persuasion)來解析訊息,
而被”專家”影響產生更大的態度改變,就歷程而言應該也不是意外之事? ww
不過那也是在具有”專家”此一影響力的前提下,像我這樣的普通好青年,
比起現在的文章標題,也許將它修改成模稜兩可、又不怎麼正確,
但語氣非常肯定的”驚爆!史丹佛大學研究指出內容確定性與說服力完全無關!”這種調子,
也許更能吸引觀眾眼光呢─嗯,大概會是這樣吧? ww