Public Relations Practices and Strategies Reflection: Research and Analysis of the Message “Open” in the “Dawn Saves Wildlife” Campaign

Research and Analysis of the Message “Open” in the “Dawn Saves Wildlife” Campaign

In this section I will describe an assignment I completed for Public Relations. The assignment was to choose a message to research and analyze using two communication theories.  The message I chose was the commercial “Open” from Dawn dish soap’s “Dawn Saves the Wildlife” campaign. I argued that the commercial was an effective persuasive message. The knowledge I have was used through the Theory of Reasoned Action and the Elaboration Likelihood Model within the message.

First, I analyzed how “Open” utilized Theory of Reasoned Action by explaining how the theory works. I described that the theory tries to “explain individuals’ behavior based off attitude toward the behavior and subjective norm.” I then showed the formula used by the Theory of Reasoned Action, BI=AB(W1) + SN(W2), and broke down what that meant, “BI is behavioral intention, AB is attitude toward behavior, SN is the subjective norm, and W’s are what’s weighted.” Afterwards I used the formula and applied it to “Open” by pointing out the specific aspects of the formula. For example, “the attitude toward the behavior would be that Dawn’s products help the wildlife and I would also think that helping animals is important,” or, “the subjective norm would be that the consumer’s peers put importance on helping wildlife and could suggest the Dawn products do that.”

Next, I applied the Elaboration Likelihood Model to the message as well.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model consists of two routes of persuasion which depends on the receivers’ motivation to consider in depth or briefly scan a message in a persuasive topic. These two routes are the peripheral and central route. The central route considers evidence weight and is consistent with the target audience’s values and motives. The route that was cued for “Open” was the peripheral route in which the receiver pays little attention and has a small amount of processing. I argued Dawn used shots of animals “utilizes the theory in the way of the content not being facts heavy, but instead elicits an emotional cue that this product helps animals.” I also argued that the use of the rescuers in the commercial, “cues the audience to find the rescuers credible not the information. Since the rescuers are the ones getting the animals help the audience can assume they know what they are doing.”

Overall, my research and analysis of the message “Open” showed thoughtful application of knowledge with the Theory of Reasoned Action through the use of the formula and the Elaboration Likelihood Model by cueing the peripheral route.

Persuasion: Campaign Plan

Link to the campaign plan here.

This artifact is the written campaign plan I wrote for my Communication 339 Persuasion class. The assignment called for students to create a persuasive message explain the topic, exigence, and goals, audience segment, promotion, and activation. My topic was about the importance of taking care of your mental health for college students. The communication knowledge I used was the use of the Elaboration Likelihood Model through the central route and the persuasion appeals of repetition and a heuristic.

The items of persuasion knowledge I used in my presentation were the Elaboration Likelihood Model in the central route and persuasive appeals. The Elaboration Likelihood Model consists of two routes of persuasion which depends on the receivers’ motivation to look into briefly scan a message in a persuasive topic. These two routes are the peripheral and central route. The peripheral route the receiver pays little attention and has a small amount of processing. I chose central route considers evidence weight and is consistent with the target audience’s values and motives. I showed this in my campaign plan in the topic and exigence section where I gave statistics and later in my audience segments where it explained why mental health care is important. Persuasive appeals are techniques used to persuade the audience. I applied the appeal of a heuristic which was “For when life happens.” A heuristic is coding for favorable audience inferences. My knowledge of this heuristic allowed me to come up with “For when life happens,” in the radio ad because I may have overwhelmed people with information and audience can at quickly remember the heuristic. The next appeal I used was a repetition with that heuristic which helps persuade my audience because greater familiarity makes the message more attractive and truthful.

All in all, my campaign plan showed thoughtful application of knowledge with the use of the Elaboration Likelihood Model through the central route and the persuasion appeals of repetition and a heuristic.

Group Communication: Small Group Reflection

Climate, Conflict, & Groupthink Reflection Paper

For this thoughtful application of knowledge reflection I chose a reflection I wrote in a small group course on Jack Gibb’s Defensive and Supportive Group Behaviors which highlights good and bad behaviors members may feel while working in a small group. In the Communication and Public Relations fields, there will be times where working in a group is required or even all of the time.  Knowing what could make a group less productive or could come in the way of the group’s goals will be helpful for when I am in the Communication or Public Relations field.

Gibb’s separates techniques for communication into supportive and defensive. First, defensive behaviors happen when a member of the group feels threatened and feels like they need to defend themselves. Second, supportive behavior is the outcome where the member feel comfortable and able to communicate effectively. Gibb’s has six supportive and six defensive behaviors that contradict each other. The defensive behaviors are: evaluation, control, strategy, neutrality, superiority, and certainty. The supportive behaviors being: description, problem orientation, spontaneity, empathy, equality, and provisionalism. In my reflection I outlined the two major behaviors I saw in my group. The defensive behavior being neutrality. Neutrality occurs when members do not have really any interest in what a member or members are trying to communicate. An example of this is was when we made our decisions usually one person a suggested something and if it sounded good everyone went along with it and had that “whatever” type attitude. This behavior was supported by verbal communication especially since people say things like “Sure”, “That sounds fine”, “Whatever you want to do is fine with me.” This behavior could have a negative effect on the communication in the group because the member coming up with the ideas might not feel like the other group members were listening. The supportive behavior I stated was  provisionalism. This is when a member feels they are right but is open to listening to the another member’s idea. The example I used I was when we as a group would exchange of ideas and when people reassure each other with “Yeah, that sounds good!” or “Great idea!” This behavior was productive because everyone was involved and it generated a lot of ideas.

Jack Gibb’s Defensive and Supportive Group Behaviors which highlights good and bad behaviors members may feel while working in a small group. Identifying these behaviors are essential in how the group works together and ultimately could affect the final product of the group’s task.

Communication Theory: Relational Dialectics Theory

Theory Paper

The Relational Dialectics Theory was created by Leslie Baxter and Barbara Montgomery to try to classify the understanding of interpersonal relationships and how those relationships interact with the world.  I was assigned to do this research into the Relational Dialectics Theory in my introductory communication course. Relational Dialectics Theory tries to lay out these contradictory forces through the use of internal and external struggles that can be applied to the communication of any interpersonal relationship to understand people.

The first of these contradictions being integration and separation with the internal contradiction being connection vs. autonomy. This deals with the feeling of wanting to be with your partner but also wanting to spend time alone. The external contradiction is seclusion vs. inclusion which is the conflict of the people in the relationship wanting to be with others outside the relationship, but wanting to be by themselves. Next the second group is the stability and change section. The internal dialectic is predictability vs. novelty. This is demonstrated by the need for security in routine, but the want for something new and exciting. The external dialectic for this is conventionality vs. uniqueness. This dialectic as how the relationship is seen by others as traditional or nontraditional. The final dialectic the Relational Dialectic Theory covers is the expression and non-expression of the relationship. The internal conflict is represented through openness vs. closedness which is wanting to feel close and disclose personal information but at the same time wanting to keep some privacy. The external dialectic for this category is revelation vs. concealment. This is the conflict of what to share about the relationship against what to keep personal to an outside party.

This theory is applied to a variety of traditional and nontraditional relationships. One example of the theory applied is Becky L. DeGreeff and Ann Burnett’s work in “Weekend Warriors: Autonomy-Connection, Openness-Closedness, and Coping Strategies of Marital Partners in Nonresidential Stepfamilies” where the relationship of the nonresidential parents is evaluated with the dialectics of autonomy vs. connection and openness vs. closedness.  It involved three interviews with five marital couples, so 10 participants, with children aging from twelve to eighteen.  Nonresidential parents are the parents to the child that the child does not primarily live with and because of this the lack of control in the child’s life was seen as too painful for the nonresidential parent so they withdrew. Relational Dialectics Theory comes in to play here with the pull of wanting to spend time with the child and wanting to withdraw completely and wanting to express how the parent is feeling with people outside of the relationship. The authors touched on the difference in generations as to in the past people divorced because of death of the spouse and now it is more common to divorce before the death of a spouse. This is a good example of Relational Dialectics Theory applied.

Another example of the Relational Dialectics Theory applied is in the study “Negotiation of Dialectical Contradictions by Parents who have Experienced the Death of a Child” by Paige W. Toller. The parents in this study experienced two dialectical contradictions not having physically having their child but continuously having an emotional bond the child that passed and wanting to express or non-express about their child. The study focused on connectedness vs. autonomy, predictability vs. novelty, and openness vs. closedness. This study had sixteen participants who were parents who had difficulty talking about their child who had passed, but wanted to share their feelings of grief and loss with friends and family. The parents were cautious of their feelings being exposed because they feared negative reactions. This is a clear example of expression and non-expression. With openness and closedness the parents wanted to talk about the death of their child, but instead felt like they needed to move on. These dialectics pull in many directions in all sorts of situations.

The Relational Dialectics Theory is a good interpretive theory that shows the contradictory pulls in all relationships in traditional and nontraditional ways. It shows the responses to these dialectics, and how the theory is applied to different types of relationships.