Uses & Gratifications Theory, Cultivation Theory, and Agenda-Setting & Framing Theories

Apple iPhone 13 Advertisement

1. A core assumption of social judgment theory is that your attitudinal anchor influences how you evaluate a persuasive message. Use the advertisement you selected to answer these questions: Who has high ego involvement in terms of this ad and who has low-ego involvement? How does ego-involvement impact the “contrasting” and “assimilation” of a person’s attitudinal anchor?

Social Judgment Theory (SJT) is a cognitive theory that examines how persuasive messages are processed based on how involved people are in those messages. A part of this theory is something called ego-involvement, which basically means “how central an issue is in our lives” (Griffin, p. 172). If someone cares about an issue (or product), they will have a higher ego-involvement. 

In this iPhone 13 advertisement, someone would have a high ego-involvement if they like using Apple products. If someone doesn’t like Apple, they would have a lower ego-involvement. Furthermore, their level of ego-involvement is influenced by whether or not they are in a latitude of rejection or a latitude of acceptance. LOR is the “range of positions along an attitude continuum a person finds unacceptable,” whereas LOA is the “range of positions along an attitude continuum a person finds acceptable” (Griffin, p. 172). Depending on where they fall on that continuum, their ego-involvement could be higher or lower. This then affects whether their judgments on a message are contrasting or assimilating. Contrasting refers to when a person receives a message as being in opposition to views and assimilation refers to when a person receives a message as being similar to one’s attitudinal anchor (Griffin, p. 174-175). 

Ego-involvement affects these two things because it is all connected in one way or another — it affects where your attitudinal anchor is on the LOR/LOA scale, which then affects whether or not you perceive a message as being in opposition or being similar to your views. In the case of this advertisement, I personally use Apple products, so I have a higher ego-involvement. I am in a latitude of acceptance when it comes to Apple products, so seeing this advertisement falls into the assimilation judgment category.

2. Further examine the advertisement by identifying the audience and explaining how one peripheral cue from Ch. 15 would impact their processing of the message.

Elaboration Likelihood Model is a theory that explains how people process messages, whether through a central route or a peripheral route. The central route is “the path of cognitive processing that involves scrutiny of message content” and the peripheral route is “a mental shortcut process that accepts or rejects a message based on irrelevant cues as opposed to actively thinking about the issue” (Griffin, p. 183). 

Within the peripheral route are various peripheral cues, such as source credibility, reward/punishment, and other's reactions. For the audience of this advertisement, which is people looking for a new phone or users of Apple products, a peripheral cue they may use is reward/punishment. The advertisement states the price of the phone right on it: $779 or $21.64/month. To someone who is just looking for a new phone, this may seem too expensive and dismiss the message straightaway. However, to someone who is used to Apple prices, they will see this as reasonable, and instead maybe focus on the sleek design the advertisement shows.

4. Let’s say you bought the product being advertised. Explain the dissonant relationship you’d likely experience. Then, use one of the “magnitude of dissonance” factors to explain WHY you’d experience cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive Dissonance Theory is a theory that explains “the distressing mental state caused by inconsistency between a person’s two beliefs or a belief and an action” (Griffin, p. 194). If I were to buy the iPhone 13, I would certainly be distressed following the purchase. A magnitude of dissonance factor I could experience would be postdecision dissonance, or “strong doubts experienced after making an important, close-call decision that is difficult to reverse” (Griffin, p. 197). Though I use Apple products and do need a phone upgrade, I cannot at this time reasonably make buying an iPhone 13 a good monetary decision. I would experience dissonance after buying it because is it really worth it? My current phone works fine for the time being, and I do not have enough money to buy the phone outright, so I would then be forced to pay a higher monthly bill for my phone. If I were in a better monetary position, I could see this decision as being a good one, but right now, buying the iPhone displayed in the advertisement would cause a fair amount of dissonance.

Works Cited:

Griffin, E., Ledbetter, A., & Sparks, G. (2019). Chapter 7: Expectancy Violations Theory and Chapter 8: Social Penetration Theory. In A first look at communication theory (10th ed., pp. 79–95). essay, McGraw-Hill Education.