p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"voting is not merely bubbling in the right answer on a ballot randomly for most. Even those whom claim that is what the process is about for them does not realize the full scope of the process that occurs, even if they do not actively engage in it. This involves many social elements in society. IN this essay we will be using Rebecca, who is a republican voter, and how she is voting for the 2012 election cycle isspan class="Apple-converted-space" /spaninfluenced by these social elements in society such as persuasion and others attitudes./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"IN terms of how one may be influenced by certain politicians, the balance theory can be used. The balance theory states if the individual and the other individual agree with each other they should be compatible. If the two match up in terms of views it's a yes. If they do not match up in terms of view then it's a no. Do they have the same relationship to the subject or object is the question here. For example, Rebecca thinks that the border should be secured and patrolled. Rick Perry is similar and happens to state these views in his campaign. Thus, Rebecca likes Rick perry and would be likely to vote for him. they match in that case It makes sense because one feels most comfortable when they agree with the other individual. One does not prefer people they are not able to get along with. The balance theory states also that if one does not have the same preferences as the other individual, they will not agree. Barrack Obama thinks that national health care should be implemented. Rebecca does not agree and thinks that Health care should be privatized. Thus, Rebecca is not likely to agree or like Obama and will most likely not vote for him. It is not only based on just this one factor however, attitudes and positions on them matters./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"People have different attitudes, some of which are more moderate and others are more radical. These positions can effect other positions on the latitude scale. This is the social Judgement theory. social judgement theory is a theory to measure and determine how one's positions will affect others. It states The more radical one is the more positions one will disagree with. this scale is numbered from 1 through 9. The position one is at is called their anchor. One usually has two attitudes which they will agree with and consider the same. These positions is known as the attitudes of acceptance. for example Rebecca was at the 3rd position for a flat tax, then the 2nd and 4th positions would both appeal to Rebecca. If one is on the edges of the scale one is more radical. For example if Rebecca is 2 on the scale about fiscal responsibility, then, her attitudes of rejection would be 7 8 and 9. some of the other radical positions may even invoke more radical positions on one's part. the person at the 2nd position may become more radicalized and their latitude may shift to 1. As the radicals on the opposite side of the isle are most likely quite repulsive to the individual. For example someone who advocates big spending and heavy handed government funding may repulse Rebecca. More moderate positions have more attitudes of acceptance If one is in the 4 to 6 range you are likely to agree with more however both edges would be disagreeable to be moderate. For example Rebecca is 4 on the pro-choice issue. someone who is also a moderate would be more or less in agreement. 3 to 7 range. however the radicals would be a little disconcerting and would be in the attitudes of rejection. The social judgement theory also states that People who are moderates would be likely to be persuaded by the other side more easily. for example James who is a 6 on the pro-choice scale would probably influence Rebecca and be influenced by Rebecca. Moderates are more easily influenced then radicals and are somewhat undecided or on the fence about an issue. So, far we have discussed Positions and attitudes. Another thing that impacts voting is impressions./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"Impressions are the way one uses to judge others and gage what types of behavior they may expect to see. Impressions are also able useful in influencing others. impressions can be negative or positive. They are judgements of others behaviors and the impact that the behavior makes. One way impressions are utilized are in something such as the averaging model. This is a model where one adds up the traits and impressions they perceive in another. and they either add or subtract from how one sees another person. For example Rick Santorum seems like he is neat and organized which rebecca likes, and is also very intelligent and informed, which she also thinks is good. on the other hand, He is a social conservative, which she does not appreciate, so this is going to effect the way Santorum is viewed and this thing brings Rebecca's good impression of him down. He also seems to lack good arguments for his social conservativism to Rebecca, which counts against him as well. He seems charming, and appears good looking, which again adds some to her impression. What often matters most is the first impressions. The halo effect. which if all the good impressions add up we tend to view this person as naturally good. If something they do seem as if it's a bad thing then one would still think this person was good. They would attempt to explain away their mistakes by saying that he was down on his luck, or simply being honest, or some other reason. For example, If Rebecca Liked newt Gingrich, and he performed well, seemed prepared, and well argued the first time Rebecca sees him in person. Rebecca would judge a decision that was ill advised to her as not thinking it through, perhaps he was ill informed and not ready for the debate, Perhaps He had good intentions but could not express it. This is natural because he seemed good the first time, he must be a good person. why would he do something terrible. Just the opposite could happen, and we would still call this a halo effect. For example, gary Johnson wen Rebecca first saw him in a debate seemed to be vague, repetitive, and unprepared. This all contributes to the negative. However he seems somewhat neat and organized, which contributes to the positive. He also seems to be defensive when others asks him questions, which adds to the negative. when people are viewed as a bad person or some type of negative impression, it is usually how one will judge this person. If Gary Johnson performs well in a debate, his success is most likely going to be contributed to chance and luck. Rebecca is going to see him as a candidate that is not very good, whatever he may do otherwise in his later debate performances./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"persuasionspan class="Apple-converted-space" /spanalso matters and one of these methods is the way candidates and media chooses to persuade people in terms of advertising there campaigns. The primacy effect is when we watch two advertisements not too far apart, and there is a time lapse before the candidates are chosen. Because they are so close we are likely to remember the first. In many cases the first thing that happens or that we see have a large impact, because we remember. We are more likely to remember and vote for that candidate. If Michelle Bachmann's advertisement played first then Mitt romney's advertisement played a week later, but both were quite a while before election is more likely to remember and vote for Bachmann, assuming that she likes both Bachmann and ?Romney equally. Then, there is the opposite effect. That is the recency effect, and that is when one has seen an add but does not see another add for a while. Closer to the elections, but then there is still some time before the elections after tha ad they see another add. The time lapse will make them forget the first add and remember the second better, which causes all the difference. If rebecca sees a Ron Paul ad in January, but then sees a herman Cain ad in April she is more likely to vote for hermanspan class="Apple-converted-space" /spancain, in the class="Apple-converted-space" /spanIn these advertisements there are different ways to persuade someone./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"One can be persuaded through critical thinking or emotionally. These are the central and peripheral route. The central route is when one persuades another based on logical reasoning. It is generally something one has to think about personally and process this information. They allow the message to sync in because the other has to process and think about it. This convinces people more permanently then emotional appeals. For example, Ron Paul mostly used central route when he was speaking of small governments, free markets, and abolishing the federal reserve. These concepts are not connected to emotions and thus required central thinking about what these things, liberty, free markets, workings of the federal reserve, big governments, and corruption, what all these things meant. When he was attempting to explain why we had to close down the federal reserve, and gave information and figures, One had to think through his arguments and agreed or disagreed with it through logical reasoning. the peripheral route is appealing to one's emotions. It is a process that one uses to persuade others by making the other person feel good, happy, or compelled to class="Apple-converted-space" /spanObama used peripheral route when he claimed that he enjoyed much of the same music as younger voters, enjoyed basketball, and pushed the African-American aspect of himself. This does not require much thinking. The fact that you have something similar to the president is an emotional appeal as it feels right and comforting to know even your tastes are share by a world leader. It is a way to make one feel happy about this aspect of the president and compelled to vote for him because he is more relatable than the other candidate. One is compelled to action because maybe this relatable president will pass laws which one may prefer./p
p class="p1" style="margin: 0px; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"In this paper I have discussed how people are socially influence and behaves during a election cycle. This is often causes for why or why not an individual will vote for a candidate./p