PSYCHOSURVEY: Effective Influence Through Moral Belligerence

Comment on articles posted to The DEFCON Warning System
Post Reply
User avatar
Navarro
Power poster 2
Power poster 2
Posts: 3770
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 4:01 am

PSYCHOSURVEY: Effective Influence Through Moral Belligerence

Post by Navarro » Tue May 02, 2017 5:54 pm

Image

The Fox News Channel recently released a poll which indicated that 53% of respondents would support "US military action to stop North Korea's nuclear program." That poll was conducted April 23-25 with 1009 votes tallied. On April 28 I conducted a total of six simultaneous polls at separate locations across the internet. Each poll asked "Would you support an American military attack against North Korea?" The possible responses were "yes" or "no." One of the six polls was a control. While conducting the control poll, no arguments, imagery or other element was displayed which might effect response. Only the above described question and answers were present. The remaining five polls actively attempted to influence the poll-taker's perception, and thus the results of the polls.

Pictures were shown to poll-takers, which displayed smiling North Koreans. One was a picture of Kim Jong-un standing beside two military officers. The second was of six female North Korean soldiers holding flowers, and a single male North Korean soldier in the background. The final photograph was of a single North Korean soldier. The imagery of each was pleasant, non-confrontational, and projected amiability. A brief argument was also presented, which highlighted humanitarian and ethical concerns, to include the deaths of not only North Koreans, but the loss of lives among Americans and allies. The respondents were informed that they may change their vote at any time.

By the conclusion of the polling on April 30, all polls showed a higher advocacy for attacking DPRK than the FNC poll, averaging 56% in favor of "yes" (53, 54, 56, 59, 62). A total of 427 votes were tallied between the polls, to include the control, which saw 58% in favor, compared to 53% recorded by FNC. None of the poll results showed a variance of greater than three percent following DPRK's recent test-launch.

Aside from the control, all polls included an area in which poll-takers could write, read and respond to comments. These comments were monitored to ensure no aggressive arguments were present, so as to reduce the probability that a poll's results may be greatly effected by such a variable. On April 29, forty hours after the polling began, a new argument was presented prominently within those comments. This brief argument suggested the poll was an experiment and that it was intended to influence respondents. This was done in order to inspire suspicion of manipulation and mistrust, as one might experience when reading or viewing suspected or known foreign propaganda, thus attempting to indirectly simulate that condition.

Additionally, the argument was both aggressive and confrontational, indicating a conclusion that Americans are immoral based on the reasoning that respondents who had voted "yes" were necessarily advocating "warfare, violence, death and destruction." The result in commentation was primarily a series of aggressive retorts. Following this, no participant was observed to have changed their vote, but new votes favored the "No" position by nearly a 4:1 ratio on average, out of 37 total new votes. "No" votes totaled seven, or nineteen percent.

This result was achieved despite eliciting suspicion, as well as implying that Americans are unethical and that respondents who had voted "yes" are also unethical, thus insulting both respondent and their country. It appears that a confrontational approach, even in circumstances provoking skepticism and mistrust, is an effective means of influencing perception. It also appears that the perceptions of individuals already sympathetic to a position aren't altered by suspicious presentation, aggression or denigration. Where, the number of individuals sympathetic to a narrative can be increased by appealing to their sense of morality while aggressively arguing that both they and their country are immoral in assuming the opposing position.

Each poll was conducted on American English-speaking websites. One of the polls was conducted on the darknet, and the remaining were conducted on the clearnet, to include the control. Each of the websites utilized were either social-media (2) or news-oriented (4). It would appear that American readers and viewers of foreign propaganda can be effectively influenced by aggressive and insulting means when the bellicose argument includes an appeal to morality. It appears more effective to appeal to morality in an aggressive manner than not.

This would imply that, for example, Russia could achieve greater effect in influencing the perception of Americans should it directly indicate and demonstrate that America is engaging in unscrupulous activity, such as sponsoring terrorism, while aggressively arguing that support for related activity or for the US government is immoral. Thus, any such supporters of the US government or its activities are themselves immoral, and morality can only be obtained through not supporting said government and activities related to its iniquitous behavior. This is in contrast to Russia's current methods, which involve periodic diluted suggestions of US government immorality. Based on the results of this experiment, Russia's current methods appear inefficient, as moral belligerence generates superior effect.
Twitter: @DefconNavarro

User avatar
DEFCONWarningSystem
Director
Director
Posts: 3809
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:26 pm
Contact:

Re: PSYCHOSURVEY: Effective Influence Through Moral Belligerence

Post by DEFCONWarningSystem » Mon May 08, 2017 10:05 pm

Note: The author has stated that one of the experiments was cut short by eight hours due to unexpected outside influence.

Green
.
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 1:28 pm

Re: PSYCHOSURVEY: Effective Influence Through Moral Belligerence

Post by Green » Tue May 16, 2017 9:53 pm

The same survey where only 30% of the people could find Korea on a map...

User avatar
Doc
Regular contributor
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:10 pm

Re: PSYCHOSURVEY: Effective Influence Through Moral Belligerence

Post by Doc » Tue May 16, 2017 10:53 pm

I belive this to be a testament to the fact that modern westerners are used to being told what to think, I would adhere to whoever is doing the majority of the talking at any given time.
"The first casualty of war is the truth."

User avatar
RiffRaff
Regular contributor
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana, US

Re: PSYCHOSURVEY: Effective Influence Through Moral Belligerence

Post by RiffRaff » Tue May 16, 2017 11:39 pm

Doc wrote:
Tue May 16, 2017 10:53 pm
I belive this to be a testament to the fact that uneducated modern westerners are used to being told what to think, I would adhere to whoever is doing the majority of the talking at any given time.
Fixed that for you. Not all of us believe what our government or our media tells us. I, for instance, do not monitor any US news sources, preferring to look at a mixture of Al Jazeera, BBC, France 24, Tass, and other foreign media. The only exception to that is my local NPR station for local news.

Unfortunately, we are quickly becoming the minority over here.
"It's in your nature to destroy yourselves." - Terminator 2: Judgment Day

User avatar
Doc
Regular contributor
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:10 pm

Re: PSYCHOSURVEY: Effective Influence Through Moral Belligerence

Post by Doc » Wed May 17, 2017 12:29 am

RiffRaff wrote:
Tue May 16, 2017 11:39 pm
Doc wrote:
Tue May 16, 2017 10:53 pm
I belive this to be a testament to the fact that uneducated modern westerners are used to being told what to think, I would adhere to whoever is doing the majority of the talking at any given time.
Fixed that for you. Not all of us believe what our government or our media tells us. I, for instance, do not monitor any US news sources, preferring to look at a mixture of Al Jazeera, BBC, France 24, Tass, and other foreign media. The only exception to that is my local NPR station for local news.

Unfortunately, we are quickly becoming the minority over here.
For future referance, when i generalize like that it will mean median + two standard deviations. ;)
"The first casualty of war is the truth."

User avatar
RiffRaff
Regular contributor
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana, US

Re: PSYCHOSURVEY: Effective Influence Through Moral Belligerence

Post by RiffRaff » Wed May 17, 2017 12:37 am

Doc wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 12:29 am
RiffRaff wrote:
Tue May 16, 2017 11:39 pm
Doc wrote:
Tue May 16, 2017 10:53 pm
I belive this to be a testament to the fact that uneducated modern westerners are used to being told what to think, I would adhere to whoever is doing the majority of the talking at any given time.
Fixed that for you. Not all of us believe what our government or our media tells us. I, for instance, do not monitor any US news sources, preferring to look at a mixture of Al Jazeera, BBC, France 24, Tass, and other foreign media. The only exception to that is my local NPR station for local news.

Unfortunately, we are quickly becoming the minority over here.
For future referance, when i generalize like that it will mean median + two standard deviations. ;)
LMAO. That should be sufficient. :D
"It's in your nature to destroy yourselves." - Terminator 2: Judgment Day

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest