Nicoletta Cavazza

The Social Value of Being Ambivalent Self-Presentational Concerns in the Expression of Attitudinal Ambivalence

We tested whether individuals can exert control over the expression of attitudinal ambivalence and if this control is exerted with self-presentational concerns. Using the self-presentation paradigm, participants reported more ambivalence about Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in a standard and a self-enhancement (present yourself positively) conditions than in a self-depreciation (present yourself negatively) condition, on felt (Experiments 1a and 2a) and potential ambivalence, in its cognitive (Experiments 1b and 2b) and affective components (Experiments 1b and 2c). The role of ambivalent attitudes in conveying a positive social value was confirmed by the fact that the above effect was found on a controversial attitude object (GMOs), but the opposite appeared on a noncontroversial one (e.g., tooth brushing, a truism; Experiment 3). Such a reversal was obtained by directly manipulating the perception of controversy on GMOs (Experiment 4). Attitudinal ambivalence may thus serve an adaptive function, that is, achieving a positive social value.

Swearing in Political Discourse Why Vulgarity Works

An experimental study investigated the effect of politicians’ profanity and gender on their perceived and actual persuasiveness. Results showed that a candidate’s use of swear words increased the perception of language informality and improved the general impression about the source. The latter effect was particularly strong for male candidate, as female candidate was already evaluated positively, irrespective of her cursing. In addition, though the manipulation of the politician’s vulgarity did not directly affect participants’ self-reported likelihood of voting for him or her, an indirect effect through language informality and impression about the candidate emerged. On the contrary, profanity use reduced perceived persuasiveness of the message, suggesting that the influence of swearing could be automatic and unaware. Theoretical implications are discussed.

Looking for the “right” amount to eat at the restaurant: Social influence effects when ordering

Two studies are presented showing that the social facilitation of eating has its roots in the phase of ordering food, both in an ecologically valid context (a real restaurant) and in a simulated context (a mock scenario). In both studies people ordered a number of dishes as a function of their co-eater group size. We contend that this is due to the activation of the “social meal” script assuming a normative nature. In line with our hypothesis, participants’ self-monitoring orientation moderated the effects of group size on the amount of food people ordered. We wish to express our gratitude to Alberto Roverato for the statistical advice, Elena Bellin for collecting the data of the first study, and 14 students of the first year of Corso di laurea magistrale in Scienze gastronomiche at the University of Parma (Italy), 2009–2010, who conducted the experimental sessions of Study 2.

Right-wing face, left-wing faces: The matching effect in the realm of political persuasion

We present two studies showing that a matching effect in persuasion can be observed between message content and the shared symbolic representation of the message object. The experimental paradigm was built on the Italian political context where citizens hold asymmetrical symbolic representations about the right-wing and the left-wing (i.e., centered on the leaders in the former, and on the coalition in the latter). Since 2001, both coalitions have focused their persuasive strategies principally on candidate image. Thus, the right-wing coalition is in a communicative congruence condition, whereas the left-wing coalition is in an incongruent condition. Results showed that when the coalitions use these images in corresponding ways, they provoke in the audience an impression of message efficacy, enhancing their persuasiveness.

Ways of thinking about the incinerator: A typology of citizens’ mindsets

Abstract This paper considers the social representation of an incinerator plant operating for more than 30 years in a medium-sized city in Italy. A survey was carried out with a representative sample of an Italian town, a community that was not generally hostile to it. On the basis of self-efficacy and trust in institutions, and by applying cluster analyses, we obtain evidence for four distinct groups labelled as Fatalists, Collaboratives, Activists, and Delegants. The four groups express systematic variations in social representation. We discuss the theoretical and practical impacts of these results.

Perceived Disagreement and Heterogeneity in Social Networks: Distinct Effects on Political Participation

ABSTRACT Although the coexistence of conflicting opinions in society is the very core of democracy, people’s tendency to avoid conflict could keep them away from political discussion and participation. On the other hand, being exposed to diverse political views could motivate citizens to participate. We conducted secondary analyses on two 2013 ITANES (Italian National Election Studies) probability samples in order to test the hypotheses that perceived network disagreement (between an individual and her/his discussion partners) and heterogeneity (among discussants holding different political opinions) exert independent and opposite effects on political participation through motivation and knowledge. Results converged in showing that disagreement dampened, while heterogeneity encouraged, political participation (voting, propensity to abstain in future, offline and online activism, and timing of vote decision) by decreasing or increasing, respectively, political interest and, in turn, knowledge.

When political candidates “go positive”: the effects of flattering the rival in political communication

Abstract In the field of political communication, the effects of negative propaganda strategies have been long studied. In the current work, I investigated the perceived and actual persuasiveness of an unexplored positive propaganda strategy, i.e., addressing a flattery to the rival in a political speech. In a 2 × 2 full-factorial design experiment, a fictitious candidate (a man or a woman) flattered, or did not flatter, an opponent in a political speech. Results showed that when the candidate flattered a rival s/he influenced the likelihood of being voted through source trustworthiness evaluation, irrespective of the candidate’s gender. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

The Tone Dilemma: Comparing the Effects of Flattery and Verbal Aggression in a Political Speech

In the realm of political communication, the effects of personal verbal attacks on political opponents have long been studied. However, less well understood are the effects of flattery on such opponents. I present an experiment showing that praising a political opponent elicits an audience’s positive emotions, which in turn positively influences source trustworthiness, and ultimately increases the likelihood of voting for that source. In contrast, attacking an opponent elicits aversion, which in turn negatively influences source trustworthiness, thus reducing the likelihood of voting for the source.

The Social Utility of Ambivalence: Being Ambivalent on Controversial Issues is Recognized as Competence

Research on attitudinal ambivalence is flourishing, but no research has studied how others perceive its expression. We tested the hypothesis that the expression of attitudinal ambivalence could be positively valued if it signals careful consideration of an issue. More specifically, ambivalence should be judged higher on social utility (competence) but not on social desirability (warmth), compared to clear-cut attitudes. This should be the case for controversial (vs. consensual) issues, where ambivalence can signal some competence. The participants in four experiments indeed evaluated ambivalence higher on a measure of social utility, compared to clear-cut (pro-normative and counter-normative) attitudes, when the attitude objects were controversial; they judged pro-normative attitudes higher for both social utility and social desirability when the attitude objects were consensual. Attitudinal ambivalence can therefore be positively valued, as it is perceived as competence when the expression of criticism is socially accepted.

Lega and Five-star Movement voters: exploring the role of cultural, economic and political bewilderment

ABSTRACT We explore the motivations behind the electoral success of the Lega and the Five-star Movement at the 2018 Italian general election. In most of the literature on populism, the success of the new European populist parties is interpreted as stemming from the process of globalisation, which has produced the so-called ‘modernisation losers’: ‘cultural losers’ (people who are disorientated by changes in values, by new waves of migration and by the loss of national sovereignty to the European Union) and ‘economic losers’ (those for whom the globalisation process has meant economic hardship, downward social mobility and occupational uncertainty). It is these ‘modernisation losers’ who are claimed to have voted for the populist parties. To this two-fold theoretical hypothesis, we added another: the rise in populism can be explained by the democratic malaise, and particularly by the crisis of mainstream parties, which have steadily lost their function as a link between the people and politics. We analyse the role of these three antecedents of populism – labelled as cultural, economic and political – drawing on 2018 Italian National Election Studies (ITANES: see www.itanes.org/en) data. Votes for the Lega were motivated by ‘cultural populism’, while those for the Five-star Movement could be ascribed to ‘political populism’, stemming from citizens’ growing mistrust – generalised and latent in Western democracies – of political institutions, activated in Italy by favourable structural conditions and external circumstances.