Author: Sergey S. Frolov
Communicology. 2018. Vol.6. No.1
Sergey Stanislavovich Frolov, Dr. Sc. (Soc.), professor at the department of sociology, Moscow State Institute of International Relations. 119454, Moscow, Vernadsky av., 76. Е-mail: frolovss2002@yandex.ru.
Abstract. Communicative processes advertising and PR, exhibit certain characteristics that distinguish them from other information transfer processes. One of the most important specific blacks of such communicative processes is such an obligatory characteristic as conviction. Despite the fact that the persuasive part of the communication process in advertising and PR appears in all communicative models, it has a private, sporadic nature that can not satisfy the requirements for advertising and PR communications. In this regard, this can be done in order to create a model of the communicative process of a fully minded representative in accordance with the goals of advertising and PR specialists. The presented article is devoted to the consideration of such models of persuasive communication. To achieve the goals of building the process of convincing communication, we recommend to use the possibilities of communicative impact on the basis of the classical chain: communicative incentives – audience – effect. Identifying opportunities for effective persuasion, the stimulating effect produced by each of the components of the communication process is important: message, communicator, channel, situation. Each of these incentives has a number of characteristics that affect the perception by target audiences of the information contained in the message. It is especially important to take into account and form the situation of information, since it is the context of obtaining and decoding information that can have the strongest persuasive impact. At the same time, under the condition of persuasive influence, it is necessary that they are in the process of communication, as well as the susceptibility of individuals to the stimulating effect of the communicator. In general, the paper allows to identify and eliminate new ways to achieve the goals of advertising and public relations.
Keywords: model of persuasive communication, communicative stimuli, communicator, message, information situation, communication channel, effectiveness of communication, target audience, setting factors of the target audience
Text: PDF
For citation: Frolov S.S. Influence over Target Audience Via Use of Persuasive Communication. Communicology (Russia). 2018. Vol. 6. No.1. P. 85-96. DOI 10.21453/2311-3065-2018-6-1-85-96.
References
Baudrillard J. (2011). Symbolic exchange and death. Moscow: Dobrosvet, Publishing house KDU (In Rus.).
Castells M. (2010). The Rise of the Network Society. The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Oxford.
Chomsky N. (2002) Language and Thinking. Moscow: Moscow State University (In Rus.). Chomsky N. (2007). Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy. NY:
Metropolitan Books.
Couldry N., Livingstone S., Markham T. (2007). Media consumption and public engagement: Beyond the presumption of attention. London.
Foxall G., Goldsmith R. (1999). Consumer Psychology for marketing. ITBP London.
Frolov S.S. (2016). Public Relations in Business. Moscow: URSS.
Hamelink C. (2011). Thinking about the communicative city. Cities, Creativity, Con-nectivity: IAMCR. Istanbul.
Jensen K.B. (ed.) (2002). A Handbook of Media and Communication Research: Qualita-tive and Quantitative Methodologies. London. P. 82-94.
Mattila P., Tokan F. (2011). Media as Multitasking. An Exploratory Study on Capturing Audiences Media Multitasking and Multiple Media Use Behaviors. Aalto Uni-versity School of Economics.
McAdam D., Tarrow S., Tilly C. (2001). Dynamics of Contention. Cambridge University Press, 2001. Myers, David J. (2013) Social psychology. St. Petersburg: Peter (In Rus.).
Newman M. (2010). Networks: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Olson M. (1971). The logic of collective action. Public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press.
Osgood Ch.E., Tzeng O. (eds) (1990). Language, Meaning, and Culture: The Selected Papers of C.E. Osgood. Praeger Publishers.
Pocheptsov G.G. (2002) Strategic communications: strategic communications in politics, business and public administration. Kiev: Alfterpress (In Rus.).
Rainie L., Wellman B. (2012). Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Reckwitz А. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices. European Journal of Social Theory. Vol.5. No. 2. Р.175-184.
Robbins S.P. (1992). Essentials of Organizational Behavior. Prentice Hall. Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey.
Steinschaden J. (2011). Social network. The phenomenon of Facebook. St. Petersburg: Peter (In Rus.).
Trattner C., Kappe F. (2012). Social Stream Marketing on Facebook: A Case Study. International Journal of Social and Humanistic Computing (IJSHC).
Vikentiev I.L. (2008). Advertising Techniques and Public Relations. St. Petersburg (In Rus.).
Communicology. 2018. Vol.6. No.1
Sergey Stanislavovich Frolov, Dr. Sc. (Soc.), professor at the department of sociology, Moscow State Institute of International Relations. 119454, Moscow, Vernadsky av., 76. Е-mail: frolovss2002@yandex.ru.
Abstract. Communicative processes advertising and PR, exhibit certain characteristics that distinguish them from other information transfer processes. One of the most important specific blacks of such communicative processes is such an obligatory characteristic as conviction. Despite the fact that the persuasive part of the communication process in advertising and PR appears in all communicative models, it has a private, sporadic nature that can not satisfy the requirements for advertising and PR communications. In this regard, this can be done in order to create a model of the communicative process of a fully minded representative in accordance with the goals of advertising and PR specialists. The presented article is devoted to the consideration of such models of persuasive communication. To achieve the goals of building the process of convincing communication, we recommend to use the possibilities of communicative impact on the basis of the classical chain: communicative incentives – audience – effect. Identifying opportunities for effective persuasion, the stimulating effect produced by each of the components of the communication process is important: message, communicator, channel, situation. Each of these incentives has a number of characteristics that affect the perception by target audiences of the information contained in the message. It is especially important to take into account and form the situation of information, since it is the context of obtaining and decoding information that can have the strongest persuasive impact. At the same time, under the condition of persuasive influence, it is necessary that they are in the process of communication, as well as the susceptibility of individuals to the stimulating effect of the communicator. In general, the paper allows to identify and eliminate new ways to achieve the goals of advertising and public relations.
Keywords: model of persuasive communication, communicative stimuli, communicator, message, information situation, communication channel, effectiveness of communication, target audience, setting factors of the target audience
Text: PDF
For citation: Frolov S.S. Influence over Target Audience Via Use of Persuasive Communication. Communicology (Russia). 2018. Vol. 6. No.1. P. 85-96. DOI 10.21453/2311-3065-2018-6-1-85-96.
References
Baudrillard J. (2011). Symbolic exchange and death. Moscow: Dobrosvet, Publishing house KDU (In Rus.).
Castells M. (2010). The Rise of the Network Society. The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture. Oxford.
Chomsky N. (2002) Language and Thinking. Moscow: Moscow State University (In Rus.). Chomsky N. (2007). Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy. NY:
Metropolitan Books.
Couldry N., Livingstone S., Markham T. (2007). Media consumption and public engagement: Beyond the presumption of attention. London.
Foxall G., Goldsmith R. (1999). Consumer Psychology for marketing. ITBP London.
Frolov S.S. (2016). Public Relations in Business. Moscow: URSS.
Hamelink C. (2011). Thinking about the communicative city. Cities, Creativity, Con-nectivity: IAMCR. Istanbul.
Jensen K.B. (ed.) (2002). A Handbook of Media and Communication Research: Qualita-tive and Quantitative Methodologies. London. P. 82-94.
Mattila P., Tokan F. (2011). Media as Multitasking. An Exploratory Study on Capturing Audiences Media Multitasking and Multiple Media Use Behaviors. Aalto Uni-versity School of Economics.
McAdam D., Tarrow S., Tilly C. (2001). Dynamics of Contention. Cambridge University Press, 2001. Myers, David J. (2013) Social psychology. St. Petersburg: Peter (In Rus.).
Newman M. (2010). Networks: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Olson M. (1971). The logic of collective action. Public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press.
Osgood Ch.E., Tzeng O. (eds) (1990). Language, Meaning, and Culture: The Selected Papers of C.E. Osgood. Praeger Publishers.
Pocheptsov G.G. (2002) Strategic communications: strategic communications in politics, business and public administration. Kiev: Alfterpress (In Rus.).
Rainie L., Wellman B. (2012). Networked: The New Social Operating System. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Reckwitz А. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices. European Journal of Social Theory. Vol.5. No. 2. Р.175-184.
Robbins S.P. (1992). Essentials of Organizational Behavior. Prentice Hall. Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey.
Steinschaden J. (2011). Social network. The phenomenon of Facebook. St. Petersburg: Peter (In Rus.).
Trattner C., Kappe F. (2012). Social Stream Marketing on Facebook: A Case Study. International Journal of Social and Humanistic Computing (IJSHC).
Vikentiev I.L. (2008). Advertising Techniques and Public Relations. St. Petersburg (In Rus.).
