 |
| (Source:business.time.com) |
Advertisers, politicians, religious leaders, and public speakers use humor as an effective persuasion tool. Humor successfully works in advertisements because funny and entertaining advertisements are more memorable than the humorless ones. People are more likely to remember hilarious television commercials and share them with their friends and relatives.
Humor produces a positive affect on the viewer’s mood by influencing the individual’s pathos, or emotions. Laughter, for example, reduces stress while uplifting the viewer’s mood. Good mood, in its turn, can have a positive effect on persuasion. According to a study (cited in Lyttle, 2001), “people who are in a good mood are less likely to disagree with a persuasive message” (para. 6). This might happen because the receiver can relate to the comical situation or because he or she appreciates the type of humor that the persuader is using. Relating to the situation and/or liking the type of humor may also increase the feeling of liking and connection with the source of humor in the viewer.
Appreciation of the type of humor the persuader is using can lead to developing a personal liking and connection in the viewer. According to Meyer (cited in Lyttle, 2001), “the choice of humor [the persuader employs] might illustrate a shared sense of humor that hints at a similar set of values” (para. 7). The closer the values depicted in the humorous situation resemble the viewer’s values, the closer the connection the viewer feels toward the persuader, and the more “likable” the persuader becomes to the viewer. Thus, persuasion can occur because the viewer is inclined to trust the person whose certain values resemble his or her own.
Humor and Persuasion Theories: Elaboration Likelihood Model and Heuristic Systematic Model
Persuasion theories, such as the Elaboration Likelihood Model and the Heuristic Systematic Model explain the effects of humor on persuasion. Both the Elaboration Likelihood Model and the Heuristic Systematic model, according to Siter and Gass (2004), maintain that depending on the individual’s motivation and ability to process information, the individual may employ either central (systematic) route, or peripheral (heuristic) route to process information (p. 57). When the viewer is motivated to process the message, he or she will be using the central, or systematic information processing route. When, on the other hand, the viewer’s motivation to process information is low he or she is more likely to rely on the peripheral or heuristic route, which provides shortcuts to the processing to information. In this case, the viewer may rely more on the source credibility and/or likability of the source, rather than on the quality of information. Humor, according to a study (cited in Lyttle, 2001), is effective in persuasion because the persuader may use it to “block systematic/central processing by distracting receivers from constructing counterarguments” (para. 8). When the systematic processing route becomes disengaged, the viewer is more likely to resort to using the peripheral processing route, which might facilitate successful persuasion.
Effects of the Types of Humor Used in Persuasion
The type of humor that advertisers use affect persuasion in the way that some types of humor may be more persuasive than others. For example, the results of one study conducted by Lyttle (2001) have shown that “ironic humor may be more effective than cartoon drawings and that self-effacing humor may be the most effective of all” (Discussion, para. 10). The reason why irony can be more effective in persuasion than a drawing is because it takes the viewer more time to process ironic humor than a drawing. Therefore, irony may have a longer impact on the viewer. The reason why self-effacing humor may be the most persuasive is that when the speaker points out his or her weaknesses or previous mistakes, the audience can relate to the speaker, which may increase the speakers likability and credibility.
Risks of Using Humor in Persuasion
The use of humor, in some instances, may involve risks. The potential drawbacks of using humor in persuasion include a) creating a distraction inhibiting the processing of information, and b) inducing insensitivity to the audience. One study (cited in Cline and Kellaris, 1999) suggests that a “humorous ad may increase attention while at the same time disrupt [information] processing” (Background and Hypotheses, para. 4). For example, when the persuader interrupts the message with an unrelated joke, the receiver pays more attention to the joke itself than to the contents of the message. Thus, the persuasiveness of the message’s arguments may be lost.
The advertisers have to be sensitive to their audience when advertising their product or service. For example, advertisers of life insurance companies and funeral home services should employ humor with care and sensitivity. When humor is used insensibly, chances are that the audience will not be persuaded, but rather offended. In such instances, strong arguments without humor might be a better option for advertisers. Cline and Kellaris (1999) write that, “strong, persuasive ad claims may not need humor to help sell a product” (Discussion, para. 4). The use of humor, thus, should depend on the specific product or service being advertised.
References:
Cline , T.W., & Kellaris, J.J. (1999). The joint impact of humor and argument strength in a print advertising context: A case for weaker arguments. Psychology and Marketing, 16(1), 69. Retrieved December 11, 2011, from ProQuest student database. (Document ID: 37875581).
Lyttle, J. (2001, April). The effectiveness of humor in persuasion: The case of business ethics training. The Journal of General Psychology, 128(2), p. 206. Retrieved December 11, 2011, from ProQuest student database. (Document ID: 77223102).
Seiter, J.E., & Gass, R.H. (2004). Perspectives on persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
