http://www.metrotvnews.com/read/news/2012/03/29/86721/Jimly-Negara-Tidak-Berhak-Mengakui-Agama/3
Sosbud | Kamis, 29 Maret 2012 23:19 WIB
Metrotvnews.com, Jakarta: Pakar hukum tata negara Jimly Asshiddiqie berpendapat negara harus berkepentingan sekaligus berperan dalam memberdayakan agama untuk meningkatkan kualitas moral warga.
"Negara di satu sisi memang harus memisahkan diri dengan agama, tetapi juga jangan bermusuhan karena peran agama sangat penting dalam peningkatan kualitas moral warga," katanya dalam "Pengajian Komunitas Titik Temu" bertema "Konstitusi dan Kemajemukan Agama di Indonesia" yang diadakan oleh "Nurcholis Madjid Society" di Jakarta, Kamis (29/3).
Fungsi negara dalam hubungannya dengan agama, menurut Jimly, secara realistis bisa dilakukan dengan memfasilitasi semua aliran ataupun kepercayaan. "Jadi, hubungan antara negara dengan agama bukan terjadi dalam bentuk pengakuan terhadap agama tertentu sebagaimana tercantum pada Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 1965 tentang Pencegahan Penyalahgunaan dan atau Penodaan Agama (UU PNPS)," kata mantan Ketua Mahkamah Konstitusi ini.
UU PNPS menyebut bahwa negara hanya mengakui enam agama yaitu Islam, Kristen, Katholik, Hindu, Buddha, dan Kong Hu Cu. "Negara tidak berhak untuk mengakui agama karena usia agama jauh lebih tua dibandingkan dengan usia negara," kata Jimly.
Jimly memaparkan lima macam bentuk hubungan antara negara dengan agama. Yang pertama, menurutnya, adalah bentuk ekstrem yakni pemusuhan terhadap agama sebagaimana terjadi dalam negara-negara Komunis di Eropa Timur pada masa perang dingin. "Mereka tidak membolehkan agama hidup di ruang publik dan mengagitasi masyarakat negaranya untuk ikut memusuhi agama," kata Jimly.
Pola hubungan antara negara dan agama yang kedua bisa ditemukan di Prancis dan Turki. Negara sama sekali tidak membolehkan simbol-simbol agama muncul di ruang publik, namun di sisi lain mengizinkan masyarakatnya untuk berkeyakinan terhadap Tuhan.
"Model yang ketiga adalah hubungan yang moderat sebagaimana bisa ditemui di Amerika Serikat. Di sini, negara secara tegas memisahkan diri dengan agama, namun sekaligus berkepentingan memberdayakan agama," kata Jimly.
Kontinum keempat hubungan agama dan negara dalam pandangan Jimly bisa ditemukan di Indonesia. Negara itu, menurut Jimly, tidak secara formal memisahkan diri dari prinsip ketuhanan, namun tidak memaksa penduduknya untuk memeluk aliran kepercayaan tertentu. "Yang terakhir bisa kita lihat di Arab Saudi atau Brunei Darussalam yang secara formal berafiliasi dengan agama tertentu," kata dia.
Menurut Jimly, hubungan yang ideal antara kedua komponen kehidupan masyarakat itu adalah pola yang ketiga, namun di sisi lain mengingatkan bahwa Indonesia membutuhkan waktu untuk mencapai idealitas tersebut.(Ant/BEY)
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Tajuk Sindo: Potensi yang luar biasa
http://www.sindonews.com/read/2012/03/28/458/600901/potensi-yang-luar-biasa
Kita memiliki potensi pariwisata atau turisme yang luar biasa. Sayang, potensi demikian hanya dipandang atau diberlakukan secara biasa. Potensi pariwisata ini bisa dilihat dari program Beyond Bali yang meliputi 15 daerah yang sebagian besar berada di luar Bali (harian Seputar Indonesia, Minggu, 25 Maret 2012).
Dari Pelabuhan Sabang di ujung Pulau Sumatera hingga Raja Ampat di timur Indonesia, semua memiliki nilai jual untuk mendatangkan wisatawan mancanegara. Potensi pariwisata yang kita miliki punya nilai jual yang tinggi dan bukan pada tahun-tahun belakangan ini saja muncul, tetapi sejak belasan atau bahkan puluhan tahun yang lalu.
Potensi yang luar biasa, tetapi dilihat atau diberlakukan biasa dapat kita lihat dari kebijakan-kebijakan pemerintah yang belum peduli dengan potensi luar biasa ini. Kita masih terpaku pada jualan tentang komoditas perdagangan, baik komoditas pertanian ataupun energi bumi (minyak atau gas).
Tengok saja agenda lawatan pemerintah kita ke luar negeri yang selalu lebih banyak diisi dengan agenda perdagangan, bukan pariwisata. Padahal, dalam hal perdagangan kita lebih banyak dirugikan negara-negara berekonomi kuat.
Kita yang disebut penghasil minyak mentah, tetapi justru melakukan impor minyak jadi dari negara bukan penghasil minyak. Kita adalah salah satu penghasil minyak sawit terbesar di dunia, tetapi dalam kebijakan perdagangan luar negeri kita selalu dikerjain.
Ini bukan berarti mengecilkan potensi perdagangan hasil bumi atau energi bumi. Tapi seharusnya pemerintah juga melihat dengan jelas potensi pariwisata kita yang luar biasa. Kita bisa menengok Prancis yang pada 2011 berpenduduk sekitar 63 juta jiwa.
Jumlah wisatawan yang masuk ke Prancis pada 2011 mencapai 78 juta wisatawan asing dan bisa mendatangkan devisa sekitar USD45 miliar atau sekitar Rp405 triliun. Padahal “jualan” Prancis hanyalah Menara Eifel, wisata belanja, atau tempat-tempat bersejarah milik mereka.
Adapun potensi pariwisata milik Prancis takseberapa dibandingkan dengan potensi pariwisata Indonesia. Artinya, potensi wisata di Prancis hanya biasa, tetapi dipandang atau diberlakukan secara luar biasa.
Kita hanya mampu mendatangkan 7,5 juta wisatawan asing, itu pun lebih banyak didominasi dari Malaysia dan Singapura. Negara tetangga Singapura yang nyaris hanya menjual wisata belanja saja mampu mendatangkan wisatawan sekitar 13 juta dengan potensi devisa sekitar 33 miliar dolar Singapura atau sekitar Rp161 triliun.
Karena potensi yang luar biasa hanya dipandang atau diberlakukan biasa ini, jumlah wisatawan kita masih jauh dari Prancis atau bahkan Singapura. Ada beberapa bukti kuat kenapa potensi pariwisata yang luar biasa ini hanya dipandang biasa. Pertama tentang infrastruktur kita.
Bandara, pelabuhan, jalan hingga fasilitas transportasi darat kita sangat tidak layak untuk menerima kunjungan wisatawan. Aksesibilitas kita masih sangat buruk. Ini seolah kita memiliki barang yang bagus, tetapi untuk membeli barang tersebut sangat sulit.
Kabar terakhir, bandara terbesar milik kita termasuk salah satu bandara terburuk di dunia. Kedua adalah tentang kemudahan dalam melakukan kunjungan ke Indonesia. Jika ingin mendatangkan belasan juta atau bahkan puluhan juta wisatawan, kemudahan untuk masuk ke negeri ini harus dipermudah.
Selain birokrasi sulit dan berbelit, ditambah lagi banyaknya oknum aparat yang justru melakukan pungutan liar kepada wisatawan. Sekali lagi ini potensi luar biasa. Bayangkan jika kita mampu mendatangkan wisatawan dalam jumlah belasan ribu atau puluhan ribu, mungkin devisa yang dihasilkan bukan hanya Rp81 triliun, tetapi mencapai ratusan triliun.
Singapura yang hanya memiliki wisata belanja dan Prancis yang memiliki Eifel serta wisata belanja saja bisa menghasilkan ratusan triliun, kenapa kita yang punya potensi luar biasa tak bisa melebihi mereka? Kita bisa asalkan potensi ini dipandang dan diberlakukan dengan cara luar biasa.
Kita memiliki potensi pariwisata atau turisme yang luar biasa. Sayang, potensi demikian hanya dipandang atau diberlakukan secara biasa. Potensi pariwisata ini bisa dilihat dari program Beyond Bali yang meliputi 15 daerah yang sebagian besar berada di luar Bali (harian Seputar Indonesia, Minggu, 25 Maret 2012).
Dari Pelabuhan Sabang di ujung Pulau Sumatera hingga Raja Ampat di timur Indonesia, semua memiliki nilai jual untuk mendatangkan wisatawan mancanegara. Potensi pariwisata yang kita miliki punya nilai jual yang tinggi dan bukan pada tahun-tahun belakangan ini saja muncul, tetapi sejak belasan atau bahkan puluhan tahun yang lalu.
Potensi yang luar biasa, tetapi dilihat atau diberlakukan biasa dapat kita lihat dari kebijakan-kebijakan pemerintah yang belum peduli dengan potensi luar biasa ini. Kita masih terpaku pada jualan tentang komoditas perdagangan, baik komoditas pertanian ataupun energi bumi (minyak atau gas).
Tengok saja agenda lawatan pemerintah kita ke luar negeri yang selalu lebih banyak diisi dengan agenda perdagangan, bukan pariwisata. Padahal, dalam hal perdagangan kita lebih banyak dirugikan negara-negara berekonomi kuat.
Kita yang disebut penghasil minyak mentah, tetapi justru melakukan impor minyak jadi dari negara bukan penghasil minyak. Kita adalah salah satu penghasil minyak sawit terbesar di dunia, tetapi dalam kebijakan perdagangan luar negeri kita selalu dikerjain.
Ini bukan berarti mengecilkan potensi perdagangan hasil bumi atau energi bumi. Tapi seharusnya pemerintah juga melihat dengan jelas potensi pariwisata kita yang luar biasa. Kita bisa menengok Prancis yang pada 2011 berpenduduk sekitar 63 juta jiwa.
Jumlah wisatawan yang masuk ke Prancis pada 2011 mencapai 78 juta wisatawan asing dan bisa mendatangkan devisa sekitar USD45 miliar atau sekitar Rp405 triliun. Padahal “jualan” Prancis hanyalah Menara Eifel, wisata belanja, atau tempat-tempat bersejarah milik mereka.
Adapun potensi pariwisata milik Prancis takseberapa dibandingkan dengan potensi pariwisata Indonesia. Artinya, potensi wisata di Prancis hanya biasa, tetapi dipandang atau diberlakukan secara luar biasa.
Kita hanya mampu mendatangkan 7,5 juta wisatawan asing, itu pun lebih banyak didominasi dari Malaysia dan Singapura. Negara tetangga Singapura yang nyaris hanya menjual wisata belanja saja mampu mendatangkan wisatawan sekitar 13 juta dengan potensi devisa sekitar 33 miliar dolar Singapura atau sekitar Rp161 triliun.
Karena potensi yang luar biasa hanya dipandang atau diberlakukan biasa ini, jumlah wisatawan kita masih jauh dari Prancis atau bahkan Singapura. Ada beberapa bukti kuat kenapa potensi pariwisata yang luar biasa ini hanya dipandang biasa. Pertama tentang infrastruktur kita.
Bandara, pelabuhan, jalan hingga fasilitas transportasi darat kita sangat tidak layak untuk menerima kunjungan wisatawan. Aksesibilitas kita masih sangat buruk. Ini seolah kita memiliki barang yang bagus, tetapi untuk membeli barang tersebut sangat sulit.
Kabar terakhir, bandara terbesar milik kita termasuk salah satu bandara terburuk di dunia. Kedua adalah tentang kemudahan dalam melakukan kunjungan ke Indonesia. Jika ingin mendatangkan belasan juta atau bahkan puluhan juta wisatawan, kemudahan untuk masuk ke negeri ini harus dipermudah.
Selain birokrasi sulit dan berbelit, ditambah lagi banyaknya oknum aparat yang justru melakukan pungutan liar kepada wisatawan. Sekali lagi ini potensi luar biasa. Bayangkan jika kita mampu mendatangkan wisatawan dalam jumlah belasan ribu atau puluhan ribu, mungkin devisa yang dihasilkan bukan hanya Rp81 triliun, tetapi mencapai ratusan triliun.
Singapura yang hanya memiliki wisata belanja dan Prancis yang memiliki Eifel serta wisata belanja saja bisa menghasilkan ratusan triliun, kenapa kita yang punya potensi luar biasa tak bisa melebihi mereka? Kita bisa asalkan potensi ini dipandang dan diberlakukan dengan cara luar biasa.
Bahaya Industri Agama
https://www.facebook.com/groups/103950206399622/doc/135670533227589/
Satu dekade yang lalu, Inul Daratista digugat ramai-ramai oleh massa berjubah agama hingga sampai ke Majlis Ulama Indonesia. Gara-gara “pengeboran Inul” muncul H. Rhoma Irama di garis depan, dan sejumlah Ulama yang mendatangi DPR agar segera disahkan UU Anti Pornografi. Rupanya massa pedangdut lebih memihak Inul daripada Bang Haji, bukan karena fatwa keagamaannya, namun soal kejujuran beragama. Inul lebih jujur, karena dia “ngebor” semata mencari uang di Jakarta. Tetapi Raja Dangdut itu menggunakan lambang-lambang dakwah dibalik industri musikalnya, yang sangat tipis batasannya, apakah berdakwah melalui musik atau membangun industri musik dengan merek dakwah?
Dalam waktu bersamaan, kiai dan budayawan, KH Mustofa Bisri (Gus Mus) membuat lukisan heboh. Melukis lingkaran majlis dzikir, ditengahnya ada perempuan sedang mengebor gaya Inul Daratista. Suatu kritik spiritual yang luar biasa dalam kanvas itu, betapa banyaknya majlis dzikir yang tak lebih dari tirai bagi syahwat para pelakunya. Mereka kehilangan Allah Swt, ketika berdzikir, malah perpektif nafsunya yang muncul dalam ritualnya.
Ketidakjujuran seringkali menguatkan politisasi agama dan menciptakan tuhan-tuhan semu yang menjanjikan birahi instan, untuk sekadar melupakan problema sosial, ekonomi dan politik pada publik, adalah bentuk pelarian yang sungguh memuakkan. Belakangan malah muncul gerakan bisnis bernuansa spiritual, kecerdasan spiritual, sedekah berlipat duniawi, pelatihan-pelatihan pengembangan SDM bernuansa spiritual, agar mendapatkan dua pundi-pundi sekaligus, mati masuk syurga, sekaligus dapat untung duniawi. Gerakan yang justru menimbulkan pembusukan esensi agama itu sendiri.
Mengapa? Karena terjadi transaksi “gaya hidup beragama”, sebagai jawaban instan atas peluang-peluang material di celah-celah spiritual yang kososng. Hasilnya adalah status baru dalam kehidupan sosial modern, sosok manusia dengan gaya hidup modern, namun tetap religius dengan mainstream agar dipandang sebagai manusia yang dekat dengan Tuhan. Padahal ajaran agama, sama sekali tidak mentolerir cara beragama yang riya’ dan hipokrit seperti itu.
Kasus-kasus penyimpangan atas nama agama, atau yang kebetulan dilakukan tokoh yang berlatar agama, mengingatkan kita betapa bahaya bendera-bendera agama dikibarkan untuk kepentingan industri ekonomi dan politik. Lebih-lebih ketika ummat terpedaya oleh kelatahan budaya, bahwa setiap yang didukung oleh mayoritas itu memiliki kebenaran mutlak, dan yang minoritas itu tidak lebih dari buih sampah yang batil. Padahal kebenaran bisa didukung mayoritas, dan bisa didukung hanya minoritas. Begitu juga sebaliknya, kebatilan.
Jika kita survey di seluruh negeri ini, merk-merk dagang dan merk “politik” dengan bernuansa serba religius, jumlahnya hampir ratusan. Karena menurut teori marketing, sebuah produk yang bisa melekat secara emosional setara agama, maka produk itu benar-benar sukses di pasar. Inilah yang menarik proyek “berhala bisnis” yang dijadikan lahan industri siapa pun yang ingin memaksa Tuhan menuruti selera nafsunya.
Karena komoditas manusia modern telah melampaui takarannya, maka perkembangan industri muncul dengan eksploitasi apa pun yang untuk membangun kapitalisasi dengan segala cara. Bahkan, konsumsi-konsumsi psikhologis yang maniak terhadap kekerasan, bisa dijadikan lahan bisnis kekerasan, dan berujung industri perang. Konsumsi hedonikal, bisa menyeret maniak kebinatangan manusia untuk dijadikan obyek potensial untuk industri syahwat, pemuasan perut, dan emosi status sosial, maupun mimpi semunya.
Kekerasan, kebuasan dan kebinatangan, akan terus tumpang tindih saling berkelindan dalam gerakan peradaban yang destruktif. Agama dan simbol spititual menjadi sasaran paling potensial untuk dijadikan legitimator atas usaha-usaha syahwatiah tersebut, dan sangat berbahaya jika masuk dalam bursa pasar, sebagai spirit dari satu sisi dua mata uang globalisasi.
Agama mana pun ketika tampil dalam konstruksi verbal, formal, dan simbolik, selalu berujung keruntuhan historinya, karena kepentingan berebut penguasaan simbol-simbol agama tidak pernah muncul sebagai kekuatan sejarah, kecuali sekadar buih-buih yang hebat yang menghempaskan dirinya sendiri dalam kebudayaan yang hampa, tanpa moral. Sehina mereka yang memperdagangkan akhirat untuk kepentingan dunianya, atau sehina mereka yang berbisnis dengan Tuhan, karena memaksakan nafsunya untuk mengukur kriteria keabsahan Ilahi dibalik sukses dan gagalnya urusan duniawi.
Kisah sedih yang berulang
Dalam kultur “amaliah publik” (awam) di bawah, tentu lebih banyak lagi munculnya instanisme religious untuk mengukur derajat kesucian tokoh atau pemimpin agama. Hal ini ditandai maraknya dunia magic dan hal-hal luar biasa yang dilatari kultur spiritual seseorang, lalu dijadikan ukuran status kesucian, manakala instanisme duniawi bisa diproduksi oleh kekuatan spiritualnya. Inilah bentuk-bentuk pembebasan semu penuh tipudaya (ghurur) yang tidak membebaskan belenggu ketololan bangsa, khususnya umat beragama.
Kisah sedih soal manipulasi keagamaan, cabulisme, dan munculnya kepalsuan-kepalsuan spiritual, senantiasa berulang dalam kehidupan kita, terutama ketika depressi ekonomi dan politik menjadi kabut yang tidak menumbuhkan semangat dan harapan, maka spontanitas emosi sosial selalu bersemburat tanpa kendali, bahkan dalam pelarian spiritualnya.
Lembaga-lembaga agama, pemerintah dan institusi pendidikan sangat bertanggungjawab atas keberlangsungan kekuatan moral dalam beragama. Karena, dalam Islam, institusi itu mana pun, baik pemerintahan maupun Ormas, lembaga pendidikan, dibangun justru untuk menegakkan agama. Bukan sebaliknya, agama dijadikan lahan formalisasi, bagi kepentingan ekonomi dan politik, yang berujung perebutan hegemoni konflik.
Agama bukanlah hiburan spiritual yang dipertontonkan. Spiritualitas agama bukan menjadi pintu gerbang bagi para pemburu harta karun, apalagi untuk membangun piramida tahta. Jika memegang amanah agama ini seperti memegang bara, janganlah memilih salju duniawi melalui jubah agama. Karena anda akan sulit membedakan, mana nafsu menghadap Allah Swt, dan mana cinta kepada Allah Swt.
M. Luqman Hakim, Ph D
Dimuat di majalah GATRA edisi 16 / XVIII 29 Peb 2012
Mahfud: Hak Keperdataan Anak Diluar Nikah Minus Waris
http://www.surya.co.id/2012/03/28/mahfud-hak-keperdataan-anak-diluar-nikah-minus-waris
MOJOKERTO I SURYA Online - Ketua Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK) Mahfud MD menilai Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI) salah kaprah dan tak paham konsep hukum yang dipakai MK terkait status anak yang lahir di luar nikah. Mahfud juga menampik jika keputusan yang ditelurkan pihaknya justru menghalalkan perzinahan.
Mahfud menegaskan, vonis MK itu justru sebagai langkah untuk menghalangi perzinahan. Dengan putusan itu kata Mahfud, maka orang yang melakukan perzinahan harus bertanggung jawab karena telah diancam hukuman.
”Kami menyiapkan ancaman hukuman bagi mereka yang tidak bertanggung jawab. Ini justru menghalangi adanya perzinahan,” kata Mahfud MD usai memberi kuliah umum di kampus Universitas Islam Majapahit (UNIM) Mojokerto, Rabu (28/3/2012).
Ia mengakui ada beberapa pemahaman yang berbeda antara pihaknya dengan MUI. MUI sendiri kata Mahfud, menyamakan hubungan keperdataan dengan nazab. Padahal kata dia, dari sisi hukum, keduanya tidak memiliki hubungan (berbeda).
”MK menyatakan bahwa orang yang lahir di luar perkawinan itu punya hubungan keperdataan dengan bapaknya. Lalu oleh MUI hubungan keperdataan diartikan hubungan nazab. Ini yang salah,” katanya.
MK juga menyatakan bahwa perkawinan yang sah itu adalah dilakukan menurut agama masing-masing. Oleh sebab itu, setiap anak yang lahir di luar perkawinan yang sah, tidak mempunyai hubungan nazab, tapi ada hubungan dalam keperdataan. Ia mencontohkan jika ada anak yang lahir di luar perkawinan yang sah, sementara si bapak tidak mengakuinya.
”Nah, anak ini bisa melakukan tuntutan keperdataan kepada bapaknya,” katanya.
Namun, keperdataan yang dimaksud MK, bukan soal waris dan perwalian. Berdasar pada pasal 365 KUHPerdata, barang siapa melakukan sesuatu yang bisa merugikan orang lain, bisa dituntut.
”Sudah jelas. Bahwa keperdataan yang kami maksud bukan keperdataan yang behubungan dengan nazab, yakni soal waris dan perwalian,” ucap dia.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Ketimbang Meratapi Harga BBM, Orang Amerika Berhemat dengan 5 Tips Ini
http://jaringnews.com/ekonomi/umum/12357/ketimbang-meratapi-harga-bbm-orang-amerika-berhemat-dengan-tips-ini
Eben Ezer Siadari
Eben Ezer Siadari
Berikut ini lima tips yang disarankan oleh Kelli Grant, Senior Consumer Reporter untuk SmartMoney.com.
WASHINGTON, Jaringnews.com - Masyarakat AS sudah terbiasa dengan harga BBM yang tinggi. Walau pun kenaikan harga BBM cukup memprihatinkan mereka dewasa ini, umumnya masyarakat makin terdorong mencari cara kreatif agar dapat berhemat mengantisipasi harga BBM yang diperkirakan masih akan terus meningkat. Uniknya, para pebisnis pun tak kalah kreatif untuk memanfaatkan kenaikan harga BBM ini sebagai cara untuk menarik pelanggan.
Lalu, bagaimana cara orang AS berhemat di tengah situasi yang kurang mengenakkan ini? Berikut ini lima tips yang disarankan oleh Kelli Grant, Senior Consumer Reporter untukSmartMoney.com.
1. Mengkaji ulang sistem pembayaran belanja. Seiring dengan terus membubungnya harga BBM di AS, banyak kartu kredit yang menawarkan rewards berupa bonus gratis pembelian BBM. SPBU juga banyak menawarkan potongan harga bagi pembelian secara tunai. Dua bonus ini disarankan agar semakin banyak dimanfaatkan masyarakat dalam menghemat belanja BBM. Di Indonesia sendiri, sejumlah penerbit kartu kredit sudah menawarkan rewards semacam ini.
2. Penggunaan diskon belanja. Banyak supermarket di AS yang mengikat konsumennya dengan tawaran diskon pembelian BBM untuk sejumlah pembelanjaan minimal tertentu. Ini pun menjadi salah satu cara masyarakat AS untuk berhemat dalam membelanjakan pendapatannya untuk BBM. Dengan cermat merencanakan keperluan sehari-hari, misalnya dengan teratur berbelanja bulanan, selain berhemat dari segi frekuensi ke mal, juga mendapat bonus tambahan berupa potongan harga membeli BBM
3. Mengkaji rute hemat bahan bakar. Daripada melewati jalur yang selama ini ada, masyarakat mulai mencermati rute-rute baru yang lebih hemat BBM. Diantaranya dengan menggunakan perangkat GPS untuk menemukan rute paling efisien. Beberapa situs bahkan menyediakan aplikasi untuk diunduh, yang bisa menyediakan rute-rute efisien tersebut.
4. Menjadi supir yang lebih sabar. Menurut Kementerian Energi AS, memacu kendaraan 5mph diatas 60 mph akan menambah konsumsi BBM sekitar US$0,3 per galon. Berhenti tiba-tiba atau menekan gas secara mendadak juga memboroskan BBM sekitar 33 persen. Berkendara secara kalem menghemat sampai US$1,28 per galon. Jadi masyarakat AS juga dianjurkan untuk menjadi pengemudi yang lebih bertanggung jawab dalam berkendara demi hemat energi.
5. Membersihkan kendaraan secara rutin. Seringkali tanpa disadari ada banyak barang-barang menumpuk di bagasi. Padahal setiap tambahan beban 100 pon pada mobil, akan mengurangi keekonomian bahan bakarnya sampai 2 persen. Berbagai asesori seperti pembawa kargo di atap kendaraan, juga akan mengurangi keekonomian bahan-bakar sampai 5 persen.
Lalu, bagaimana cara orang AS berhemat di tengah situasi yang kurang mengenakkan ini? Berikut ini lima tips yang disarankan oleh Kelli Grant, Senior Consumer Reporter untukSmartMoney.com.
1. Mengkaji ulang sistem pembayaran belanja. Seiring dengan terus membubungnya harga BBM di AS, banyak kartu kredit yang menawarkan rewards berupa bonus gratis pembelian BBM. SPBU juga banyak menawarkan potongan harga bagi pembelian secara tunai. Dua bonus ini disarankan agar semakin banyak dimanfaatkan masyarakat dalam menghemat belanja BBM. Di Indonesia sendiri, sejumlah penerbit kartu kredit sudah menawarkan rewards semacam ini.
2. Penggunaan diskon belanja. Banyak supermarket di AS yang mengikat konsumennya dengan tawaran diskon pembelian BBM untuk sejumlah pembelanjaan minimal tertentu. Ini pun menjadi salah satu cara masyarakat AS untuk berhemat dalam membelanjakan pendapatannya untuk BBM. Dengan cermat merencanakan keperluan sehari-hari, misalnya dengan teratur berbelanja bulanan, selain berhemat dari segi frekuensi ke mal, juga mendapat bonus tambahan berupa potongan harga membeli BBM
3. Mengkaji rute hemat bahan bakar. Daripada melewati jalur yang selama ini ada, masyarakat mulai mencermati rute-rute baru yang lebih hemat BBM. Diantaranya dengan menggunakan perangkat GPS untuk menemukan rute paling efisien. Beberapa situs bahkan menyediakan aplikasi untuk diunduh, yang bisa menyediakan rute-rute efisien tersebut.
4. Menjadi supir yang lebih sabar. Menurut Kementerian Energi AS, memacu kendaraan 5mph diatas 60 mph akan menambah konsumsi BBM sekitar US$0,3 per galon. Berhenti tiba-tiba atau menekan gas secara mendadak juga memboroskan BBM sekitar 33 persen. Berkendara secara kalem menghemat sampai US$1,28 per galon. Jadi masyarakat AS juga dianjurkan untuk menjadi pengemudi yang lebih bertanggung jawab dalam berkendara demi hemat energi.
5. Membersihkan kendaraan secara rutin. Seringkali tanpa disadari ada banyak barang-barang menumpuk di bagasi. Padahal setiap tambahan beban 100 pon pada mobil, akan mengurangi keekonomian bahan bakarnya sampai 2 persen. Berbagai asesori seperti pembawa kargo di atap kendaraan, juga akan mengurangi keekonomian bahan-bakar sampai 5 persen.
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Indonesia Nenek Moyang Penduduk Madagaskar
http://sains.kompas.com/read/2012/03/22/05423437/Indonesia.Nenek.Moyang.Penduduk.Madagaskar
Yunanto Wiji Utomo | Aloysius Gonsaga Angi Ebo | Kamis, 22 Maret 2012 | 05:42 WIB
Yunanto Wiji Utomo | Aloysius Gonsaga Angi Ebo | Kamis, 22 Maret 2012 | 05:42 WIB
SELANDIA BARU, KOMPAS.com - Studi terbaru yang dipublikasikan di jurnal Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Rabu (21/3/2012), mengungkapkan bahwa orang Indonesia adalah nenek moyang penduduk Madagaskar. Kesimpulan tersebut didapatkan setelah ilmuwan asal Massey University di Selandia Baru, Murray Cox, melakukan analisis DNA orang Indonesia dan Madagaskar (disebut Malagasi).
Dalam riset, Cox mengambil sampel DNA dari 2.745 orang Indonesia yang berasal dari 12 kepulauan serta 266 etnis Malagasi, terdiri dari Mikea, Vezo, dan Andriana Merina. Penelitian memfokuskan pada DNA Mitokondria, jenis DNA yang terdapat di organel sel yang berfungsi menghasilkan energi. DNA ini diturunkan lewat ibu.
Riset menunjukkan bahwa 22 persen sampel punya pola DNA Polinesia, ciri suku Polinesia namun jarang ditemukan di Indonesia Barat. Pada salah satu suku Malagasi, karakter ini ditemukan pada 1 dari 2 orang.
"Kami berpendapat kolonisasi awal (Madagaskar) oleh sekelompok kecil perempuan Indonesia, kurang lebih 30 orang," ungkap Cox seperti dikutip situs Discovery, Rabu hari ini.
Perempuan yang mengolonisasi Madagaskar masih produktif dan memiliki 93 persen gen yang terkait dengan Indonesia. Penemuan ini mungkin mengejutkan, namun beberapa bukti arkeologis dan linguistik mendukung. Secara linguistik, dialek Madagaskar mirip dengan Indonesia.
Bukti lain, banyak leksikon Madagaskar berasal dari bahasa Ma'anyan yang dipakai di lembah Sungai Barito, Kalimantan. Sementara, terdapat beberapa kata yang mirip bahasa Jawa, Melayu, dan Sansekerta.
Secara arkeologis, kolonisasi oleh Indonesia dibuktikan dengan temuan perahu, alat besi, alat musik seperti xylophone, alat makan serta budidaya tanaman ubi jalar, pisang dan talas.
Adakah laki-laki Indonesia yang berperan dalam kolonisasi Madagaskar? "Kami tahu laki-laki dan perempuan Madagaskar berasal dari Indonesia cuma kami tak tahu berapa jumlah laki-laki. Bukti yang kami miliki menunjukkan bahwa jumlahnya sangat kecil," tambah Cox seperti dikutip Livescience, hari ini.
Teori kolonisasi Madagaskar sebelumnya menyebutkan bahwa kolonisasi sangat terencana, sebab pulau tersebut cocok untuk pelabuhan dalam perdagangan jalur Afrika ke Eurasia.
Dengan penemuan ini, Cox mengatakan, "Kita perlu berpikir kembali banyak hal tentang bagaimana Madagaskar dikolonisasi."
Cox mengungkapkan bahwa kolonisasi Madagaskar bisa jadi terjadi secara tak sengaja. Hal ini didukung oleh simulasi arus laut dan pola cuaca monsun.
Pada masa Perang Dunia II misalnya, bangkai kapal yang dibom di dekat Sumatera dan jawa bisa terbawa hingga ke Madagaskar. hal yang sama juga bisa terjadi pada pelaut masa lalu.
Menanggapi hasil penelitian ini, Matthew Hurles, peneliti dari Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute mengakui adanya keterkaitan antara Indonesia dan Madagaskar.
Ia berpendapat, "Orang Malagasi adalah 50:50 perpaduan dari dua grup nenek moyang, Indonesia dan Afrika Timur."
Sumber :
Saturday, March 10, 2012
PENGELOLAAN AIR DAN SANITASI: PENJERNIHAN AIR MENGGUNAKAN ARANG SEKAM PADI
http://www.iptek.net.id/ind/warintek/?mnu=6&ttg=5&doc=5b8
- PENDAHULUAN
Kebutuhan akan air bersih di daerah pedesaan dan pinggiran kota untuk air minum, memasak , mencuci dan sebagiannya harus diperhatikan. Cara penjernihan air perlu diketahui karena semakin banyak sumber air yang tercemar limbah rumah tangga maupun limbah industri.
Cara penjernihan air baik secara alami maupun kimiawi akan diuraikan dalam bab ini. Cara-cara yang disajikan dapat digunakan di desa karena bahan dan alatnya mudah didapat. Bahan-bahannya anatara lain batu, pasir, kerikil, arang tempurung kelapa, arang sekam padi, tanah liat, ijuk, kaporit, kapur, tawas, biji kelor dan lain-lain. - URAIAN SINGKAT
Sekam padi banyak terdapat didaerah pedesaan, namun penggunaan sekam padi belum dimanfaatkan sepenuhnya. Uraian ini adalah salah satu cara memanfaatkan sekam padi untuk memperoleh air bersih yang merupakan kebutuhan dasar bagi masyarakat. - BAHAN DAN PERALATAN
- Arang sekam padi
- Kayu bakar
- Sampah-sampah/tanah
- Pipa
- Kerikil
- Kawat ram
- Lumpur
- Drum diameter 40 cm dan tinggi 72 cm
- PEMBUATAN
- Dasar drum dibuat lubang-lubang kecil (diameter 2 mm) dan 4 lubang dengan diameter 3,5 mm. Pada dinding drum diberi 6 lubang berdiameter 3,5 mm. Jarak antara masing-masing lubang 10 cm. Bagian kiri dan kanan drum dipasangi pipa yang panjangnya 15 cm. Pada bagian dasar dari drum diberi kawat ram (lihat Gambar 1).
Gambar 1. Alat Pembuatan Arang Sekam Padi - Tungku pembakaran :
Tungku pembakaran adalah tungku rumah tangga yang dimodifikasi untuk pengarangan kayu bakar. Lihat Gambar 2.
Gambar 2. Tungku Pembakaran Sekam Padi - Alat penjernihan air terdiri atas 2 bagian :
- Alat pengendapan yang terbuat dari drum.
- Alat penyaringan yang dibuat dari gentong. Pada dasar gentong diberi kerikil dan arang sekam padi setebal dari 10 sampai 20 cm di atasnya. Di atas arang sekam padi diberi ijuk.
- Pembuatan arang sekam padi :
- Secara tradisional arang sekam padi dibuat dalam suatu lubang yang berukuran : panjang 50 cm, tinggi 30 cm dan diameter 50 cm, dengan kapasitas 5 kg. Sekam dibakar di atas tungku singer. Sekam yang sudah terbakar ditutup tanah dan diatasnya diberi sampah. Pada salah satu sudut lubang diberi pipa udara.
- Cara lain dengan menggunakan drum sebagi tungku pembakaran. Temperatur pada waktu pengarangan 400°-600°C dan lama pengarangan 2,5 jam. Bahan bakar kayu yang digunakan 5 kg, untuk 5 kg sekam padi.
Gambar 3. Alat Penjernihan Air
- Dasar drum dibuat lubang-lubang kecil (diameter 2 mm) dan 4 lubang dengan diameter 3,5 mm. Pada dinding drum diberi 6 lubang berdiameter 3,5 mm. Jarak antara masing-masing lubang 10 cm. Bagian kiri dan kanan drum dipasangi pipa yang panjangnya 15 cm. Pada bagian dasar dari drum diberi kawat ram (lihat Gambar 1).
- PENGGUNAAN
Proses penyaringan air:- Tahap pertama pengendapan
- Tahap kedua penyaringan dengan arang sekam padi kira-kira 10 cm tebalnya. Proses penyaringan ini bekerja selama 6 jam/hari.
- KEUNTUNGAN
- Dapat memenuhi kebutuhan air bersih untuk keperluan keluarga
- Pengarangan sekam padi mudah dikerjakan oleh masyarakat pedesaan sendiri.
- Relatif murah
- Hasil penjernihan memenuhi syarat kesehatan.
- Sekam padi mudah diperileh di pedesaan.
- KERUGIAN
Pembakaran harus sempurna, apabila pembakaran”tidak sempurna” (kekurangan oksigen) arang sekam padi dan abu akan bercampur. - DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Asril, Lutan. Penjernihan air menggunakan arang sekam padi skala keluarga untuk daerah pedesaan. Dalam kumpulan makalah : Lokakarya penelitian dan pengembangan teknologi tepat guna penyediaan air minum dan pembuangan kotoran di pedesaan, Cimacan : 2-4 Februari 1981. Jakarta : Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Kesehatan, Pusat Penelitian Ekologi Kesehatan, 1981. - INFORMASI LEBIH LANJUT
- Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Fisika Terapan – LIPI; Jl. Cisitu Sangkuriang No. 1 – Bandung 40134 - INDONESIA; Tel.+62 22 250 3052, 250 4826, 250 4832, 250 4833; Fax. +62 22 250 3050
- Pusat Informasi Wanita dalam Pembangunan PDII-LIPI; Sasana Widya Sarwono, Jl. Jend. Gatot Subroto 10 Jakarta 12710, INDONESIA.
Sumber : Buku Panduan Air dan Sanitasi, Pusat Informasi Wanita dalam Pembangunan PDII-LIPIbekerjasama dengan Swiss Development Cooperation, Jakarta, 1991.
Wednesday, March 07, 2012
Prayer in public schools: No place to bend the knee
http://www.economist.com/node/21548997?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/ar/noplacetobendtheknee
Mar 3rd 2012 | SUNNYSIDE, NEW YORK | from the print edition
Churches are being evicted from their unlikely billet in schools
A LARGE sign outside PS 150, a public school in Queens, encourages students to “KEEP READING!”. On Sundays another sign appears, temporarily fixed to the school fence, that says “Grace Fellowship Church”. Grace Fellowship, a Presbyterian congregation, owns no space of its own, so it pays the Department of Education about $1,400 a month for the use of the auditorium in PS 150. But because of a court battle its 90 or so members face having nowhere to pray.
About 60 churches, mostly Christian but also Buddhist, Jewish and Hindu congregations, rent space from New York City’s Department of Education. But the city authorities have been trying to enforce a ban on worship in schools since 1996. Court rulings have swung between the two sides for years. February 12th was supposed to have been the last Sunday on which religious groups were legally permitted to use public schools for services. But a federal judge intervened and ruled that churches could continue to use schools while the case is subject to yet more review. And on February 29th an appeals court decided they could stay until mid-June when, supposedly, a final ruling will be made.
The separation of church and state is sacrosanct in America, yet for some, like the Republican contender Rick Santorum (see Lexington) the line between the two is neither clearly defined nor in the right place. Student-led religious activities are permitted in many schools, but prayer in the classroom, when led by teachers, is not. Religious groups are allowed to meet after hours in public schools in many districts, including Miami, Chicago and Los Angeles. In New York, despite the activity in the courts, religious instruction, hymn singing and prayers all go on when schools are not in session.
The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) says allowing worship in school buildings sends out the message that the government favours Christian churches, as they can use them more easily than groups who worship on days when they are open. (Most Muslims, for instance, have Fridays as their principal day of prayer, ruling out the use of schools.) This violates the First Amendment’s prohibition on government endorsement of religion, reckons Donna Lieberman of the NYCLU.
Meanwhile, in Albany, the state capital, the Senate has passed a bill which would allow worship in schools. But Sheldon Silver, the Assembly speaker, thinks the bill’s language is too broad, and might open up schools to the likes of the Ku Klux Klan. The bill sits in limbo while battle continues in the courts.
Before the latest decision, Jon Storck, Grace Fellowship’s pastor, was worried what his congregation would do if it had to leave the school. One idea was to share a church with another Presbyterian community. Other churches looked for new homes, too. One leased space at a local cinema; another found shelter in a golf club. Some considered merging with other congregations, a couple nearly disbanded. At least one held services outdoors. Whatever happens, though, Pastor Storck is confident the Lord will provide.
Mengapa 50% Bencana Terjadi di Pulau Jawa
http://fokus.vivanews.com/news/read/294293-pulau-jawa-ladang-bencana--mengapa-
RABU, 7 MARET 2012, 06:25 WIB
VIVAnews - Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana mencatat, bencana di Indonesia terkonsentrasi di Pulau Jawa. Rata-rata dari tahun 2002 hingga sekarang, lebih 50% kejadian bencana terjadi di Jawa.
Pada tahun 2011, dari 2.066 kejadian bencana, sekitar 827 bencana (40%) terjadi di Jawa. Diproyeksikan tren bencana dan dampaknya di masa mendatang makin besar.
"Tentu saja menjadi tantangan pembangunan karena bencana dapat menjadi faktor penghambat pembangunan," kata Kepala Pusat Data Informasi dan Humas BNPB Sutopo Purwo Nugroho dalam rilis yang disiarkan 6 Maret 2012. "Bencana menyusutkan kapasitas produktif dalam skala besar yang berakibat kerugian finansial karena bencana membutuhkan pemulihan, rehabilitasi dan rekonstruksi agar kehidupan ekonomi kembali normal."
Bencana memiliki dampak negative-sum game. Suatu wilayah yang terkena bencana mengalami kemunduran ekonomi. Sementara wilayah yang tidak terkena bencana tidak mengalami kemajuan ekonomi.
Menurut BNPB, ada beberapa faktor mengapa Jawa makin rentan terhadap bencana. Disparitas pembangunan ekonomi antar daerah di Jawa dan luar Jawa perbedaannya demikian besar. Disparitas ini dapat dilihat dari indikator makro pulau, yakni kontribusi Produk Domestik Regional Bruto (PDRB) Jawa terhadap nasional, yaitu dengan minyak dan gas (60,12%) dan tanpa minyak dan gas (64,78%). Sisanya, 40% tersebar di luar Jawa.
"Ini menyebabkan urbanisasi terus meningkat. Sekitar 129 juta jiwa atau 59% penduduk Indonesia tinggal di Jawa. Akibatnya terjadi ekstraktif pembangunan yang menyebabkan kerusakan lingkungan," kata Sutopo.
Tutupan hutan diperkirakan hanya 13% dari luas Jawa. Jauh dari idealnya 30%. Kecenderungan tersebut akan mengancam daya dukung lingkungan, sehingga dalam jangka panjang diperkirakan akan memicu terjadinya tiga macam krisis, yaitu krisis air, pangan dan energi.
"Terbukti, daya dukung lingkungan Jawa sudah terlampaui saat ini. Akibatnya watak hidrologi sungai-sungai di Jawa telah berubah dan mudah terjadi banjir dan kekeringan. Analisis risiko bencana menjadi faktor penting dalam perencanaan pembangunan."
• VIVAnews
Pada tahun 2011, dari 2.066 bencana 827 di antaranya [ 40
persen ] terjadi di Jawa
RABU, 7 MARET 2012, 06:25 WIB
VIVAnews - Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana mencatat, bencana di Indonesia terkonsentrasi di Pulau Jawa. Rata-rata dari tahun 2002 hingga sekarang, lebih 50% kejadian bencana terjadi di Jawa.
Pada tahun 2011, dari 2.066 kejadian bencana, sekitar 827 bencana (40%) terjadi di Jawa. Diproyeksikan tren bencana dan dampaknya di masa mendatang makin besar.
"Tentu saja menjadi tantangan pembangunan karena bencana dapat menjadi faktor penghambat pembangunan," kata Kepala Pusat Data Informasi dan Humas BNPB Sutopo Purwo Nugroho dalam rilis yang disiarkan 6 Maret 2012. "Bencana menyusutkan kapasitas produktif dalam skala besar yang berakibat kerugian finansial karena bencana membutuhkan pemulihan, rehabilitasi dan rekonstruksi agar kehidupan ekonomi kembali normal."
Bencana memiliki dampak negative-sum game. Suatu wilayah yang terkena bencana mengalami kemunduran ekonomi. Sementara wilayah yang tidak terkena bencana tidak mengalami kemajuan ekonomi.
Menurut BNPB, ada beberapa faktor mengapa Jawa makin rentan terhadap bencana. Disparitas pembangunan ekonomi antar daerah di Jawa dan luar Jawa perbedaannya demikian besar. Disparitas ini dapat dilihat dari indikator makro pulau, yakni kontribusi Produk Domestik Regional Bruto (PDRB) Jawa terhadap nasional, yaitu dengan minyak dan gas (60,12%) dan tanpa minyak dan gas (64,78%). Sisanya, 40% tersebar di luar Jawa.
"Ini menyebabkan urbanisasi terus meningkat. Sekitar 129 juta jiwa atau 59% penduduk Indonesia tinggal di Jawa. Akibatnya terjadi ekstraktif pembangunan yang menyebabkan kerusakan lingkungan," kata Sutopo.
Tutupan hutan diperkirakan hanya 13% dari luas Jawa. Jauh dari idealnya 30%. Kecenderungan tersebut akan mengancam daya dukung lingkungan, sehingga dalam jangka panjang diperkirakan akan memicu terjadinya tiga macam krisis, yaitu krisis air, pangan dan energi.
"Terbukti, daya dukung lingkungan Jawa sudah terlampaui saat ini. Akibatnya watak hidrologi sungai-sungai di Jawa telah berubah dan mudah terjadi banjir dan kekeringan. Analisis risiko bencana menjadi faktor penting dalam perencanaan pembangunan."
Thursday, March 01, 2012
The Nature of Attitudes and Persuasion
http://www.cios.org/encyclopedia/persuasion/Aintroduction_1whatis.htm
What is Persuasion?
Persuasion is, quite simply, the use of messages to influence an audience. The messages that make up persuasive discourse are instrumental, or means to ends or goals of the persuader. Companies use persuasion in the form of advertising to convince consumers to buy their products or services. Students use persuasion to convince their parents to increase their allowance, or let them go to see a particular movie, or to let them use the car. Parents can use persuasion to get their children to study or to clean up their rooms. People use persuasion to get their friends to go to see a certain movie, or a band, or to hang out at the mall. Persuasion can convince another person to go out on a date. It can convince a teacher to accept a paper after the due date. Of course, people can also use threats to get what they want, but that is not persuasion. In persuasion, we try to convince the audience that they should want to do what we want them to do--not that they should do it “or else.”
Why Study Persuasion?
The idea that persuasion is important, and well worth learning, is true for several reasons. First, persuasion can be found almost everywhere humans can be found. As explained above, students, parents, teachers, politicians, sales persons, friends, and others use persuasion in their everyday lives. Mass media from print (newspapers, magazines, direct mailing) to electronic (radio, television, the World Wide Web) positively thrives on advertisements. These are examples of the kinds of situations all of us could encounter, in which we have the opportunity to try to persuade others. Thus, thinking about the varied contexts in which communication occurs shows that persuasion exists throughout human society.
In these situations persuasion exists in one or both of two forms: we can try to persuade others, and other people can try to persuade us. Persuasion, coming from us to others and from others to us, frequently occurs in interpersonal or dyadic situations. Although we rarely have to opportunity to persuade others via the mass media, that is a context in which others frequently develop persuasive messages aimed at us. A moment’s reflection should convince you that understanding the nature of persuasive communication, and how it works, is well worth knowing. Whenever we want to influence others through messages (speaking, writing, or using pictures and symbols), we need to understand persuasion in order to increase the likelihood that our message(s) will be successful. However, it is also important for us to understand the persuasion aimed at us so that other people cannot unduly influence us.
We can also see that persuasion pervades our lives by thinking about the activities that make up our daily lives. Persuasion is a part of education and learning. A college recruiter, alum, or parent may try to persuade us to attend his or her school. Once at school, students persuade their friends when to take classes (e.g., in the morning or afternoon) and which classes to take. Professors and academic advisors can persuade students what major to select, and whether to go to graduate or professional school. Students may persuade professors to accept an assignment late, to change a grade, or to take a test early. Persuasion is a part of work. During employment interviews, we want to persuade the employer to offer us a job. At work, we persuade co-workers about projects, bosses about promotions, and customers about our products or company. We may even try to persuade (rather than order) subordinates about their tasks to keep morale up. Many professions, like sales, politics, and the law, are essentially about persuading others. Persuasion is also a part of recreation and relaxation. We persuade our families, roommates, and friends that we should go out to eat, and which restaurant to patronize. We persuade our friends that we ought to go see a movie, and then which film to see. We tell our friends about a new musical group we have heard or a book we have read, persuading them to buy it. So we persuade each other while learning, working, and socializing. The fact is, most of us have never thought about just how much of our lives are influenced by persuasion.
However, it is important to realize that the fact that we persuade, and are persuaded, so often does not mean we are already experts in persuasion. Of course, we have learned something about persuasive strategies through trial and error. However, thousands and thousands of scholars in disciplines like communication, psychology, and advertising have systematically studied persuasion for many, many years. In fact, rhetoricians like Aristotle have written about how to persuade others since four centuries before the Christian era. Practitioners, like lawyers, politicians, and advertisers have also devoted an incredible amount of time and effort to understanding persuasion “in the real world.” Three hundred years after Aristotle, Cicero was one of the greatest orators in ancientRome. He was an accomplished orator and was elected consul, a position roughly analogous to President. Cicero also wrote several books on rhetoric or persuasion. More recently, social scientists have conducted tens of thousands of experiments into the nature of persuasion or attitude change. Thus, there is an incredible wealth of knowledge about persuasion that has accumulated over literally hundreds of years, from scholars and practitioners, in a variety of disciplines. There is much useful to be learned about persuasion.
Persuasion as an Alternative to Apathy
or Coercion
Not only is persuasion present almost everywhere in human social activity, but persuasion can be a positive force. Persuasion can be understood as ameans to accomplishing something you (the persuader) want. If there is a goal that you want to accomplish -- to get someone to go to a particular movie, to change your grade, to be hired for a job, to have your suggestion included in a report, to get a customer to buy your company’s product, to encourage someone to vote for you -- that depends on the actions of others. To obtain the cooperation of other people you have only a few basic choices.
First, you can do nothing (apathy), ignoring your wants, needs, and desires -- or hoping someone else will notice what you want and spontaneously comply with your wishes. Doing nothing gives up control of your own life, allowing your want to go unmet, or met only at the whim of others. This approach (well, really a non-approach) is not likely to be very satisfying or very effective. Of course, there are times when we must realize that what we want is impossible or impractical, and asking for it can be a waste of time. It can even be counterproductive if we make obviously unreasonable requests, or if we make reasonable requests to those who we know are obviously unreasonable people. So, while there are specific situations in which it is better to do nothing, as a general strategy for trying to achieve our wants doing nothing is simply not very productive.
Second, you can use force, violence, or threats (coercion) to get your own way. Assuming you have both the ability and the willingness to punish (threaten, hurt) others, it can be a way to get what you want. However, coercion is also not a highly recommended method of getting what you want. Obviously, there can be legal and/or moral problems with using force to get others to comply with our wishes. Furthermore, it can cause others to be difficult or slow in satisfying our demands, to do a poor job on purpose, and to dislike us and possibly retaliate against us. Creating bad feelings can be especially unfortunate if we have to work with those whom we are coercing. Coercion may work at times -- although some people just become obstinate in the face of threats -- but it isn’t likely to be pleasant. Furthermore, if you lose power or can’t observe others’ behavior to make certain they comply, threats can be ineffectual.
Third, one can use persuasion to try to satisfy wants and needs. It is far more likely to succeed than doing nothing (apathy). It may not always work -- but even coercion does not always work, and this book is about things you can do to make your attempts at persuasion more likely to be successful. More importantly, when it does work the people we persuade will cooperate willingly. This will make us more popular (or less despised) than if we had used coercion. And if others are doing what we want them to do willingly, they may do a better job than when they are being coerced.
So, not only is persuasion everywhere, but it is one of only three basic options for getting others to help satisfy our needs, wants, and desires. Arguably, persuasion is the best way for us to obtain the cooperation of others in achieving our goals. Persuasion is a way for us to exert influence or control over our own lives, so we have some measure of control rather than feeling helpless. Of course, like any other tool, it is not always appropriate. Sometimes we have authority over others and giving them an order, with its implicit threat for noncompliance, is the best thing to so. Persuasion can be abused, as demagogues like Hitler and con artists who trick the elderly out of their life savings show. Still, it can be used for good as well as evil -- and it can be used against con artists and demagogues -- and it is usually better than the alternatives for getting our own way.
The Nature of Attitudes
An attitude is a cognition (form of thought) that is formed through experience and influences our behavior. Both parts of this definition are important for our purposes. The fact that attitudes are formed through experience means that we can, potentially, change them. When a persuader gives a message to an auditor (an audience member), that message becomes part of the listener’s experience, and it can affect his or her attitudes. The fact that attitudes influence our behavior means that we can use persuasion as a means to achieve our goals -- when the behavior, or actions, or others can help attain those goals.
Attitudes have two basic components: beliefs and values. Beliefs are, roughly, statements of facts. Beliefs are potentially verifiable. We say a belief is true or correct when it seems to reflect the world and false or incorrect when it seems contradicted by the world. Values are judgments of worth, like good or bad, useful or useless, expensive or cheap, efficient or inefficient. Together, these cognitions (thoughts), beliefs and values, form attitudes.
For example, I may believe that Al Gore has executive branch experience, because he has served as the Vice President. I may value executive branch experience, thinking that, in general, presidents are likely to do a more effective job as president if they have executive branch experience. Together, this belief/value pair creates a positive attitude toward Al Gore as a presidential candidate.
Belief 1: Al Gore has executive branch experience.
Value 1: Executive branch experience is desirable for a president.
Attitude: I have a favorable attitude toward Al Gore as a potential president.
Many attitudes are made up of several belief/value pairs. I may also hold these belief value pairs:
Belief 2: Al Gore is a Democrat.
Value 2: I think on many issues Democrats are better than Republicans.
Belief 3: Al Gore is rather stiff and passionless.
Value 3: It is important for presidents to have and reveal emotions.
Notice that B1/V1 and B2/V2 incline me toward Gore as a president, while B3/V3 inclines me away from him. Often, what we know and believe about a given attitude object, like Al Gore, is mixed rather than uniformly positive or negative. A person’s attitude is a conglomeration of all the relevant belief/value pairs that are salient (not forgotten). However, some belief/value pairs are more important than others, and the important ones contribute more to the attitude than the trivial ones.
Notice that these beliefs and values come in related pairs. This is very important: Beliefs and values both contribute to attitudes, and they do so in relevant pairs. For instance, this pair would not influence a person’s attitude because they are irrelevant:
Belief 4: Al Gore may have solicited campaign contributions from China in 1996.
Value 5: For me, a president should understand the South.
For Belief 4 to influence one’s attitude, it must be connected with a value like this: Foreign countries should not contribute to presidential campaigns. If one doesn’t think soliciting campaign contributions from China is bad, Belief 4 cannot influence one’s attitude (of course, some people might think China should give money to presidential candidates; for those people, Belief 4 inclines them toward a positive attitude toward Gore). Similarly, Value 5 cannot influence a person’s attitude unless it is combined with a belief, that Gore does (or does not) understand the South. A belief without a relevant value cannot influence one’s attitude, and a value without a relevant belief cannot affect a person’s attitude.
Understanding the nature of attitudes can be helpful in understanding how to persuade someone. For example, suppose one of your friends likes (has a favorable attitude toward) Gore and you want to change that attitude. Knowing your friend’s beliefs and attitudes can help change his or her attitude. For example, they might hold this belief/value pair.
Belief 1: Al Gore has executive branch experience.
Value 1: Executive branch experience is desirable for a president.
If so, you could try to change Belief 1, arguing that Vice Presidents, like Gore, don’t have very meaningful jobs, and thus, he does not really have executive branch experience. If you change this belief, you can make the attitude toward
Gore less positive:
Belief 1a: Al Gore, as Vice President, does not really have executive branch experience.
Value 1: Executive branch experience is desirable for a president.
Or you could try to change your friend’s value, pointing out that some presidents (Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and George Bush) who had experience in the White House were poor presidents. This revised value means that your friend’s attitude toward Gore should be less favorable:
Belief 1: Al Gore has executive branch experience.
Value 1a: Executive branch experience can hurt a president.
However, you must be careful not to change both parts of a belief/value pair:
Belief 1a: Al Gore, as Vice President, does not really have executive branch experience.
Value 1a: Executive branch experience can hurt a president.
When both elements of the pair are changed, the attitude remains the same (although it is now held for different reasons).
Notice also that knowing an auditor’s belief/value pairs can prevent wasted messages. For example, assume again that your friend has a favorable attitude toward Gore for these reasons:
Belief 1: Al Gore has executive branch experience.
Value 1: Executive branch experience is desirable for a president.
Telling your friend that campaign contributions from other countries are wrong, a value, probably won’t change his or her attitude unless he or she already knows (has the belief) that Gore tried to obtain contributions from foreign countries in 1996. Of course, you can give your friend a new, complete, belief/value pair, telling him or her that campaign contributions from other countries are wrong and telling your friend that Gore solicited contributions from China in 1996.
Thus, attitudes are learned from experience and influence our behavior. They are made up of pairs of (relevant) beliefs and values. A person’s attitude is a composite of all the relevant belief/value pairs, with the more important ones influencing the attitude more. You can change a person’s attitude by changing either the belief or the value (but not both), or by creating new belief/value pairs (or by changing the relative importance of belief/value pairs).
The Process of Persuasion
Persuasion is really a pretty simple process with four basic parts. First, it begins with a person (the source or persuader) who wants something that he or she doesn’t have already. Persuasion is goal-directed; so all persuaders have goals that they seek, which is the second part in the process of persuasion. Third, persuasion actually works or occurs throughmessages, which are directed to the audience to help achieve the persuader’s goal. Fourth, persuasion is always aimed at an audience, which is made up of those people who can help the persuader accomplish his or her goal.
So, if a Tom wants an advance on his allowance, he first has to decide that he needs some money. Then he decides that his parents could give him some cash. He could offer to do some chores for them, but instead he decides to try to convince them to give him his allowance early. This leads him to talk with his parents, asking them for an advance. He might just blurt out whatever comes to mind (or perhaps all he has to do is ask). However, he might want to think about what to say, what reason to offer if they ask him why he needs as advance, before he brings up his request. The point is, in this example, Tom is the source, obtaining some money is his goal, themessage is his request for an advance (along with reasons), and theaudience is his parents.
If Jill owns a small business and needs some money (she will call it “capital” instead of cash) to buy some more goods to sell, the same basic elements apply. Jill is the source. Her goal is to obtain some money. Themessage asks for money (and includes reasons about why this will be a safe investment). The audience is the bank or potential investors.
Persuasion is a process, which means it goes through steps. First, the persuader must identify a goal, want or desire. Some goals don’t require the cooperation of others. For example, if I am bored I might decide to watch television, play a video-game, or walk over to the swimming pool for a swim. Ordinarily, persuasion isn’t needed in those situations (although I may have to persuade someone else to let me use the TV, for example). Other goals are unrealistic: I want someone to give me a million dollars, I want world peace today, I want to fly on the very next Space Shuttle mission. It is not likely that persuasion will help these goals. However, often the goals that we want to attain are possible, but require the cooperation of others. When we have a goal that others might be willing to help us obtain, identification of that goal is the first step in persuasion. We must know what we want before we can hope to achieve it. Do you want another person to go out on a date? Do you want a professor to change your grade? Do you want to sell your product to a customer? Do you want someone to vote for you?
Second, we have to identify the right audience; the groups of people who can help us achieve our goal. It has to be a group that we can speak with or write to (we have to be able to get our message to them). They must also have what it takes to obtain our goal. They may have information, or money, or power. But for persuasion to be successful the audience has to be able to grant our wish.
Third, we have to make up a message. For simple and easy requests, just asking might be enough. For other goals, we will have to convince the audience, persuade them, or give them reasons to do what we want. It is important not to just tell them why we want them to do something. Persuaders can be more successful when they can make the audience want to help us achieve our goal. This means that we should understand our audience. We can increase our chances of convincing them to help us if we know our audience. Knowing what the audience knows, what interests the audience, what is important to them, can be very helpful.
Fourth, the message has to be conveyed to the audience. In interpersonal relations, this simply means meeting (or calling, or mailing) the other person. Other messages, like advertisements, require more elaborate preparation and distribution arrangements. But persuasion can’t be successful if the messages do not reach its intended audience.
Glossary
attitude: a cognition (thought) that is learned through experience and influences a person’s behavior; comprised of (relevant) belief/value pairs
belief: a statement of fact, potentially verifiable
value: a judgment of worth
Additional Readings
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth , TX : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Kiesler, C. A., Collins, B. E., & Miller, N. (1969; rpt. 1983). Attitude change: A critical analysis of theoretical approaches. Malabar , FL : Robert E. Krieger.
O’Keefe, D. J. (1990). Persuasion: Theory and research. Newbury Park , CA: Sage.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981; rpt. 1996). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Boulder , CO: Westview Press.
Ziegelmueller, G. W., & Dause, C. A. (1975). Argumentation: Inquiry and advocacy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall (on beliefs, values).
persuasion: the use of messages to influence an audience (help achieve a goal of the persuader)
What is Persuasion?
Persuasion is, quite simply, the use of messages to influence an audience. The messages that make up persuasive discourse are instrumental, or means to ends or goals of the persuader. Companies use persuasion in the form of advertising to convince consumers to buy their products or services. Students use persuasion to convince their parents to increase their allowance, or let them go to see a particular movie, or to let them use the car. Parents can use persuasion to get their children to study or to clean up their rooms. People use persuasion to get their friends to go to see a certain movie, or a band, or to hang out at the mall. Persuasion can convince another person to go out on a date. It can convince a teacher to accept a paper after the due date. Of course, people can also use threats to get what they want, but that is not persuasion. In persuasion, we try to convince the audience that they should want to do what we want them to do--not that they should do it “or else.”
Why Study Persuasion?
The idea that persuasion is important, and well worth learning, is true for several reasons. First, persuasion can be found almost everywhere humans can be found. As explained above, students, parents, teachers, politicians, sales persons, friends, and others use persuasion in their everyday lives. Mass media from print (newspapers, magazines, direct mailing) to electronic (radio, television, the World Wide Web) positively thrives on advertisements. These are examples of the kinds of situations all of us could encounter, in which we have the opportunity to try to persuade others. Thus, thinking about the varied contexts in which communication occurs shows that persuasion exists throughout human society.
In these situations persuasion exists in one or both of two forms: we can try to persuade others, and other people can try to persuade us. Persuasion, coming from us to others and from others to us, frequently occurs in interpersonal or dyadic situations. Although we rarely have to opportunity to persuade others via the mass media, that is a context in which others frequently develop persuasive messages aimed at us. A moment’s reflection should convince you that understanding the nature of persuasive communication, and how it works, is well worth knowing. Whenever we want to influence others through messages (speaking, writing, or using pictures and symbols), we need to understand persuasion in order to increase the likelihood that our message(s) will be successful. However, it is also important for us to understand the persuasion aimed at us so that other people cannot unduly influence us.
We can also see that persuasion pervades our lives by thinking about the activities that make up our daily lives. Persuasion is a part of education and learning. A college recruiter, alum, or parent may try to persuade us to attend his or her school. Once at school, students persuade their friends when to take classes (e.g., in the morning or afternoon) and which classes to take. Professors and academic advisors can persuade students what major to select, and whether to go to graduate or professional school. Students may persuade professors to accept an assignment late, to change a grade, or to take a test early. Persuasion is a part of work. During employment interviews, we want to persuade the employer to offer us a job. At work, we persuade co-workers about projects, bosses about promotions, and customers about our products or company. We may even try to persuade (rather than order) subordinates about their tasks to keep morale up. Many professions, like sales, politics, and the law, are essentially about persuading others. Persuasion is also a part of recreation and relaxation. We persuade our families, roommates, and friends that we should go out to eat, and which restaurant to patronize. We persuade our friends that we ought to go see a movie, and then which film to see. We tell our friends about a new musical group we have heard or a book we have read, persuading them to buy it. So we persuade each other while learning, working, and socializing. The fact is, most of us have never thought about just how much of our lives are influenced by persuasion.
However, it is important to realize that the fact that we persuade, and are persuaded, so often does not mean we are already experts in persuasion. Of course, we have learned something about persuasive strategies through trial and error. However, thousands and thousands of scholars in disciplines like communication, psychology, and advertising have systematically studied persuasion for many, many years. In fact, rhetoricians like Aristotle have written about how to persuade others since four centuries before the Christian era. Practitioners, like lawyers, politicians, and advertisers have also devoted an incredible amount of time and effort to understanding persuasion “in the real world.” Three hundred years after Aristotle, Cicero was one of the greatest orators in ancientRome. He was an accomplished orator and was elected consul, a position roughly analogous to President. Cicero also wrote several books on rhetoric or persuasion. More recently, social scientists have conducted tens of thousands of experiments into the nature of persuasion or attitude change. Thus, there is an incredible wealth of knowledge about persuasion that has accumulated over literally hundreds of years, from scholars and practitioners, in a variety of disciplines. There is much useful to be learned about persuasion.
Persuasion as an Alternative to Apathy
or Coercion
Not only is persuasion present almost everywhere in human social activity, but persuasion can be a positive force. Persuasion can be understood as ameans to accomplishing something you (the persuader) want. If there is a goal that you want to accomplish -- to get someone to go to a particular movie, to change your grade, to be hired for a job, to have your suggestion included in a report, to get a customer to buy your company’s product, to encourage someone to vote for you -- that depends on the actions of others. To obtain the cooperation of other people you have only a few basic choices.
First, you can do nothing (apathy), ignoring your wants, needs, and desires -- or hoping someone else will notice what you want and spontaneously comply with your wishes. Doing nothing gives up control of your own life, allowing your want to go unmet, or met only at the whim of others. This approach (well, really a non-approach) is not likely to be very satisfying or very effective. Of course, there are times when we must realize that what we want is impossible or impractical, and asking for it can be a waste of time. It can even be counterproductive if we make obviously unreasonable requests, or if we make reasonable requests to those who we know are obviously unreasonable people. So, while there are specific situations in which it is better to do nothing, as a general strategy for trying to achieve our wants doing nothing is simply not very productive.
Second, you can use force, violence, or threats (coercion) to get your own way. Assuming you have both the ability and the willingness to punish (threaten, hurt) others, it can be a way to get what you want. However, coercion is also not a highly recommended method of getting what you want. Obviously, there can be legal and/or moral problems with using force to get others to comply with our wishes. Furthermore, it can cause others to be difficult or slow in satisfying our demands, to do a poor job on purpose, and to dislike us and possibly retaliate against us. Creating bad feelings can be especially unfortunate if we have to work with those whom we are coercing. Coercion may work at times -- although some people just become obstinate in the face of threats -- but it isn’t likely to be pleasant. Furthermore, if you lose power or can’t observe others’ behavior to make certain they comply, threats can be ineffectual.
Third, one can use persuasion to try to satisfy wants and needs. It is far more likely to succeed than doing nothing (apathy). It may not always work -- but even coercion does not always work, and this book is about things you can do to make your attempts at persuasion more likely to be successful. More importantly, when it does work the people we persuade will cooperate willingly. This will make us more popular (or less despised) than if we had used coercion. And if others are doing what we want them to do willingly, they may do a better job than when they are being coerced.
So, not only is persuasion everywhere, but it is one of only three basic options for getting others to help satisfy our needs, wants, and desires. Arguably, persuasion is the best way for us to obtain the cooperation of others in achieving our goals. Persuasion is a way for us to exert influence or control over our own lives, so we have some measure of control rather than feeling helpless. Of course, like any other tool, it is not always appropriate. Sometimes we have authority over others and giving them an order, with its implicit threat for noncompliance, is the best thing to so. Persuasion can be abused, as demagogues like Hitler and con artists who trick the elderly out of their life savings show. Still, it can be used for good as well as evil -- and it can be used against con artists and demagogues -- and it is usually better than the alternatives for getting our own way.
The Nature of Attitudes
An attitude is a cognition (form of thought) that is formed through experience and influences our behavior. Both parts of this definition are important for our purposes. The fact that attitudes are formed through experience means that we can, potentially, change them. When a persuader gives a message to an auditor (an audience member), that message becomes part of the listener’s experience, and it can affect his or her attitudes. The fact that attitudes influence our behavior means that we can use persuasion as a means to achieve our goals -- when the behavior, or actions, or others can help attain those goals.
Attitudes have two basic components: beliefs and values. Beliefs are, roughly, statements of facts. Beliefs are potentially verifiable. We say a belief is true or correct when it seems to reflect the world and false or incorrect when it seems contradicted by the world. Values are judgments of worth, like good or bad, useful or useless, expensive or cheap, efficient or inefficient. Together, these cognitions (thoughts), beliefs and values, form attitudes.
For example, I may believe that Al Gore has executive branch experience, because he has served as the Vice President. I may value executive branch experience, thinking that, in general, presidents are likely to do a more effective job as president if they have executive branch experience. Together, this belief/value pair creates a positive attitude toward Al Gore as a presidential candidate.
Belief 1: Al Gore has executive branch experience.
Value 1: Executive branch experience is desirable for a president.
Attitude: I have a favorable attitude toward Al Gore as a potential president.
Many attitudes are made up of several belief/value pairs. I may also hold these belief value pairs:
Belief 2: Al Gore is a Democrat.
Value 2: I think on many issues Democrats are better than Republicans.
Belief 3: Al Gore is rather stiff and passionless.
Value 3: It is important for presidents to have and reveal emotions.
Notice that B1/V1 and B2/V2 incline me toward Gore as a president, while B3/V3 inclines me away from him. Often, what we know and believe about a given attitude object, like Al Gore, is mixed rather than uniformly positive or negative. A person’s attitude is a conglomeration of all the relevant belief/value pairs that are salient (not forgotten). However, some belief/value pairs are more important than others, and the important ones contribute more to the attitude than the trivial ones.
Notice that these beliefs and values come in related pairs. This is very important: Beliefs and values both contribute to attitudes, and they do so in relevant pairs. For instance, this pair would not influence a person’s attitude because they are irrelevant:
Belief 4: Al Gore may have solicited campaign contributions from China in 1996.
Value 5: For me, a president should understand the South.
For Belief 4 to influence one’s attitude, it must be connected with a value like this: Foreign countries should not contribute to presidential campaigns. If one doesn’t think soliciting campaign contributions from China is bad, Belief 4 cannot influence one’s attitude (of course, some people might think China should give money to presidential candidates; for those people, Belief 4 inclines them toward a positive attitude toward Gore). Similarly, Value 5 cannot influence a person’s attitude unless it is combined with a belief, that Gore does (or does not) understand the South. A belief without a relevant value cannot influence one’s attitude, and a value without a relevant belief cannot affect a person’s attitude.
Understanding the nature of attitudes can be helpful in understanding how to persuade someone. For example, suppose one of your friends likes (has a favorable attitude toward) Gore and you want to change that attitude. Knowing your friend’s beliefs and attitudes can help change his or her attitude. For example, they might hold this belief/value pair.
Belief 1: Al Gore has executive branch experience.
Value 1: Executive branch experience is desirable for a president.
If so, you could try to change Belief 1, arguing that Vice Presidents, like Gore, don’t have very meaningful jobs, and thus, he does not really have executive branch experience. If you change this belief, you can make the attitude toward
Gore less positive:
Belief 1a: Al Gore, as Vice President, does not really have executive branch experience.
Value 1: Executive branch experience is desirable for a president.
Or you could try to change your friend’s value, pointing out that some presidents (Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and George Bush) who had experience in the White House were poor presidents. This revised value means that your friend’s attitude toward Gore should be less favorable:
Belief 1: Al Gore has executive branch experience.
Value 1a: Executive branch experience can hurt a president.
However, you must be careful not to change both parts of a belief/value pair:
Belief 1a: Al Gore, as Vice President, does not really have executive branch experience.
Value 1a: Executive branch experience can hurt a president.
When both elements of the pair are changed, the attitude remains the same (although it is now held for different reasons).
Notice also that knowing an auditor’s belief/value pairs can prevent wasted messages. For example, assume again that your friend has a favorable attitude toward Gore for these reasons:
Belief 1: Al Gore has executive branch experience.
Value 1: Executive branch experience is desirable for a president.
Telling your friend that campaign contributions from other countries are wrong, a value, probably won’t change his or her attitude unless he or she already knows (has the belief) that Gore tried to obtain contributions from foreign countries in 1996. Of course, you can give your friend a new, complete, belief/value pair, telling him or her that campaign contributions from other countries are wrong and telling your friend that Gore solicited contributions from China in 1996.
Thus, attitudes are learned from experience and influence our behavior. They are made up of pairs of (relevant) beliefs and values. A person’s attitude is a composite of all the relevant belief/value pairs, with the more important ones influencing the attitude more. You can change a person’s attitude by changing either the belief or the value (but not both), or by creating new belief/value pairs (or by changing the relative importance of belief/value pairs).
The Process of Persuasion
Persuasion is really a pretty simple process with four basic parts. First, it begins with a person (the source or persuader) who wants something that he or she doesn’t have already. Persuasion is goal-directed; so all persuaders have goals that they seek, which is the second part in the process of persuasion. Third, persuasion actually works or occurs throughmessages, which are directed to the audience to help achieve the persuader’s goal. Fourth, persuasion is always aimed at an audience, which is made up of those people who can help the persuader accomplish his or her goal.
So, if a Tom wants an advance on his allowance, he first has to decide that he needs some money. Then he decides that his parents could give him some cash. He could offer to do some chores for them, but instead he decides to try to convince them to give him his allowance early. This leads him to talk with his parents, asking them for an advance. He might just blurt out whatever comes to mind (or perhaps all he has to do is ask). However, he might want to think about what to say, what reason to offer if they ask him why he needs as advance, before he brings up his request. The point is, in this example, Tom is the source, obtaining some money is his goal, themessage is his request for an advance (along with reasons), and theaudience is his parents.
If Jill owns a small business and needs some money (she will call it “capital” instead of cash) to buy some more goods to sell, the same basic elements apply. Jill is the source. Her goal is to obtain some money. Themessage asks for money (and includes reasons about why this will be a safe investment). The audience is the bank or potential investors.
Persuasion is a process, which means it goes through steps. First, the persuader must identify a goal, want or desire. Some goals don’t require the cooperation of others. For example, if I am bored I might decide to watch television, play a video-game, or walk over to the swimming pool for a swim. Ordinarily, persuasion isn’t needed in those situations (although I may have to persuade someone else to let me use the TV, for example). Other goals are unrealistic: I want someone to give me a million dollars, I want world peace today, I want to fly on the very next Space Shuttle mission. It is not likely that persuasion will help these goals. However, often the goals that we want to attain are possible, but require the cooperation of others. When we have a goal that others might be willing to help us obtain, identification of that goal is the first step in persuasion. We must know what we want before we can hope to achieve it. Do you want another person to go out on a date? Do you want a professor to change your grade? Do you want to sell your product to a customer? Do you want someone to vote for you?
Second, we have to identify the right audience; the groups of people who can help us achieve our goal. It has to be a group that we can speak with or write to (we have to be able to get our message to them). They must also have what it takes to obtain our goal. They may have information, or money, or power. But for persuasion to be successful the audience has to be able to grant our wish.
Third, we have to make up a message. For simple and easy requests, just asking might be enough. For other goals, we will have to convince the audience, persuade them, or give them reasons to do what we want. It is important not to just tell them why we want them to do something. Persuaders can be more successful when they can make the audience want to help us achieve our goal. This means that we should understand our audience. We can increase our chances of convincing them to help us if we know our audience. Knowing what the audience knows, what interests the audience, what is important to them, can be very helpful.
Fourth, the message has to be conveyed to the audience. In interpersonal relations, this simply means meeting (or calling, or mailing) the other person. Other messages, like advertisements, require more elaborate preparation and distribution arrangements. But persuasion can’t be successful if the messages do not reach its intended audience.
Glossary
attitude: a cognition (thought) that is learned through experience and influences a person’s behavior; comprised of (relevant) belief/value pairs
belief: a statement of fact, potentially verifiable
value: a judgment of worth
Additional Readings
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth , TX : Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Kiesler, C. A., Collins, B. E., & Miller, N. (1969; rpt. 1983). Attitude change: A critical analysis of theoretical approaches. Malabar , FL : Robert E. Krieger.
O’Keefe, D. J. (1990). Persuasion: Theory and research. Newbury Park , CA: Sage.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981; rpt. 1996). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Boulder , CO: Westview Press.
Ziegelmueller, G. W., & Dause, C. A. (1975). Argumentation: Inquiry and advocacy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall (on beliefs, values).
persuasion: the use of messages to influence an audience (help achieve a goal of the persuader)
Theory of Reasoned Action
http://www.cios.org/encyclopedia/persuasion/Gtheory_1reasoned.htm
Theory of Reasoned Action
The theory of Reasoned Action was developed by Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen as an improvement over Information Integration theory (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). There are two important changes. First, Reasoned Actions adds another element in the process of persuasion, behavioral intention. Rather than attempt to predict attitudes, as does Information Integration theory (and several others), Reasoned Action is explicitly concerned with behavior. However, this theory also recognizes that there are situations (or factors) that limit the influence of attitude on behavior. For example, if our attitude leads us to want to go out on a date but we have no money, our lack of money will prevent our attitude from causing us to go on a date. Therefore, Reasoned Action predicts behavioral intention, a compromise between stopping at attitude predictions and actually predicting behavior. Because it separates behavioral intention from behavior, Reasoned Action also discusses the factors that limit the influence of attitudes (or behavioral intention) on behavior.
The second change from Information Integration theory is that Reasoned Action uses two elements, attitudes and norms (or the expectations of other people), to predict behavioral intent. That is, whenever our attitudes lead us to do one thing but the relevant norms suggest we should do something else, both factors influence our behavioral intent. For example, John’s attitudes may encourage him to want to read a Harry Potter book, but his friends may think this series is childish. Does John do what his attitudes suggest (read the book) or what the norms of his friends suggest (not read the book)?
Specifically, Reasoned Action predicts that behavioral intent is created or caused by two factors: our attitudes and our subjective norms. As in Information Integration theory, attitudes have two components. Fishbein and Ajzen call these the evaluation and strength of a belief. The second component influencing behavioral intent, subjective norms, also have two components: normative beliefs (what I think others would want or expect me to do) and motivation to comply (how important it is to me to do what I think others expect).
Therefore, we have several options for trying to persuade someone. The first group of options are like the strategies identified by information integration theory:
-strengthen the belief strength of an attitude that supports the persuasive goal.
-strengthen the evaluation of an attitude that supports the persuasive goal
-weaken the belief strength of an attitude that opposes the persuasive goal
-weaken the evaluation of an attitude that supports the persuasive goal
-create a new attitude with a belief strength and evaluation that supports the persuasive goal
-remind our audience of a forgotten attitude with a belief strength and evaluation that supports the persuasive goal.
For example, suppose you wanted to persuade your roommate, Pat, to go see a movie. If Pat had a positive attitude toward that movie (“I’ve heard that movie is funny”), you could try to increase the belief strength (“Everyone says it is funny; no question about it”) or evaluation (“That movie isn’t just funny, its hilarious!”) of that attitude. If Pat had a negative attitude toward attending the movie (“The movie theater is decrepit”) you could try to reduce the belief strength (“They remodeled it”) or evaluation (“The important thing is the movie, not the theater”) of that negative attitude. You could create a new favorable attitude (“I heard the soundtrack to this movie is great!”) or remind Pat of a favorable attitude.
However, the addition of subjective norms creates several other options:
-strengthen a normative belief that supports the persuasive goal
-increase the motivation to comply with a norm that supports the persuasive goal
-reduce a normative belief that opposes the persuasive goal
-reduce the motivation to comply with a norm that opposes the persuasive goal
-create a new subjective norm that supports the persuasive goal
-remind the audience of a forgotten subjective norm that supports the persuasive goal.
For example, you could try to strengthen an existing normative belief (“No one should sit home on a Friday night”) or increase the motivation to comply (“You’ll really be depressed if you stay home -- people are right when they say you shouldn’t stay home on the weekend”). If Pat thinks it is wrong to go to a movie with a roommate instead of a date, you could try to weaken this normative belief or her motivation to comply with it. Furthermore, you could try to create a new norm (“Everybody is going to see movies made by this director”) or remind Pat of a forgotten norm.
Finally, the fact that there are two influences on behavioral intention, attitudes and norms, gives one final possibility for persuading others:
-if one component (attitudes, norms) supports the persuasive goal more than the other, make that component more important than the other.
Relationship of Behavioral Intention to Behavior
The theory of Reasoned Action adds a new variable between attitudes (and norms) and behavior: behavioral intent. An important question, therefore, is how does behavioral intent relate to behavior? Reasoned Action states that three factors influence whether (or how much) behavioral intent shapes our behavior. First, as suggested above, we must have control over our behavior (volitional control). If I am broke, I cannot go to the movies with my girlfriend. My attitude (and norms of others) may lead me to want very much to teach at Harvard, but I cannot make them hire me. Because our society in may ways is cooperative, we do not always get what we want (what our attitudes lead us to desire and what norms suggest we should want) because we just do not have complete control over our environment.
A second reason why behavioral intent may not yield the expected behavior is that attitudes and behavior must be measured at the same level. If my intent is to buy a new car I may not buy a Ford Mustang. So the fact that I did not purchase a Mustang does not show that my behavioral intent did not affect my behavior (I could have bought a Chevrolet). If I want to go to college I might not attend the University of Southern California. Again, knowing that I did not go to USC is not a reason to think that my behavioral intent had no influence on my behavior; I may attend theUniversity of California, Los Angeles.
This may seem somewhat silly, but some researchers thought that they found that behavioral intent did not influence behavior because they did not measure intent and behavior correctly. For example, in one study behavioral intent (or attitude) was measured by asking a group of people if they like snakes. Everyone said no, indicating a negative attitude. Then these people were asked if they would like to touch a snake, and many did so. The researchers concluded that those who did touch the snake were inconsistent, because the engaged in a behavior (touching a snake) that was inconsistent with their attitude (not liking snakes). However, this behavior (touching a snake) is not a good indicator of their attitude. Perhaps they were curious to know what snakes (an animal they did not like) felt like. A better behavioral measure would have been to ask them if they wanted a snake for a pet. It seems likely that everyone who displayed a negative attitude (“I don’t like snakes”) would have also had a negative behavior (“No, I will not take a snake for a pet”). So, for attitudes or behavioral intent must be measured at the same level.
Third, we know that attitudes do change over time. Behavioral intent and behavior must be measured at the same time for us to expect that they will relate. Reasoned action states that attitudes, together with subjective norms, determine behavioral intent. This means that if a person’s attitude changes, his or her behavioral intent will probably change to. So, if we learn people’s behavioral intent and then wait to measure their behavior several weeks or months later, that behavior may correspond to their currentbehavioral intent but not the behavioral intent we learned.
Evaluation
There has been a great deal of research on the theory of Reasoned Action (see, e.g., Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Sheppard, Hartwick, & Warshaw, 1988). This research is generally supportive of the predictions it makes: Behavioral intent can be predicted from attitudes toward behavior and subjective norms. These predictions hold up in a variety of situations, like consumer behavior, voting, and others (see O’Keefe, 1990). However, this research shows that, of the two components, attitude is a better (more accurate) predictor of behavioral intent than subjective norms. O’Keefe points out the relationship between the attitudinal component and the factors that contribute to it (evaluation, belief strength) is stronger than the relationship between the subject norms and their components (normative beliefs, motivation to comply).
Thus, I believe it is useful to add the idea of subjective norms, because sometimes they can influence our behavior, but in general attitudes are a more important influence. Reasoned Action complicates our understanding of persuasion (a drawback), because it inserts another variable into the process: messages > attitudes > behavioral intent > behavior (and note that the Elaboration Likelihood Model would insert cognitive responses between messages and attitudes). However, Reasoned Action explains some of the reasons why an attitude (or behavioral intent) will not result in the expect behavior.
Glossary
attitude toward behavior: the attitudinal component of Reasoned Action
behavioral intent: how our attitudes and norms would lead us to behave
belief strength: likelihood that an attitude is true
evaluation: favorability or unfavorability of an attitude
motivation to comply: how much (or how little) we want follow norms
normative beliefs: expectations of how we should behave in a given situation
subjective norms: expectations we think others have about how we should behavior; the normative component of Reasoned Action
volitional control: extent to which a person has voluntary power over what he or she will do
References
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975).. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 325-343.
Theory of Reasoned Action
The theory of Reasoned Action was developed by Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen as an improvement over Information Integration theory (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). There are two important changes. First, Reasoned Actions adds another element in the process of persuasion, behavioral intention. Rather than attempt to predict attitudes, as does Information Integration theory (and several others), Reasoned Action is explicitly concerned with behavior. However, this theory also recognizes that there are situations (or factors) that limit the influence of attitude on behavior. For example, if our attitude leads us to want to go out on a date but we have no money, our lack of money will prevent our attitude from causing us to go on a date. Therefore, Reasoned Action predicts behavioral intention, a compromise between stopping at attitude predictions and actually predicting behavior. Because it separates behavioral intention from behavior, Reasoned Action also discusses the factors that limit the influence of attitudes (or behavioral intention) on behavior.
The second change from Information Integration theory is that Reasoned Action uses two elements, attitudes and norms (or the expectations of other people), to predict behavioral intent. That is, whenever our attitudes lead us to do one thing but the relevant norms suggest we should do something else, both factors influence our behavioral intent. For example, John’s attitudes may encourage him to want to read a Harry Potter book, but his friends may think this series is childish. Does John do what his attitudes suggest (read the book) or what the norms of his friends suggest (not read the book)?
Specifically, Reasoned Action predicts that behavioral intent is created or caused by two factors: our attitudes and our subjective norms. As in Information Integration theory, attitudes have two components. Fishbein and Ajzen call these the evaluation and strength of a belief. The second component influencing behavioral intent, subjective norms, also have two components: normative beliefs (what I think others would want or expect me to do) and motivation to comply (how important it is to me to do what I think others expect).
Therefore, we have several options for trying to persuade someone. The first group of options are like the strategies identified by information integration theory:
-strengthen the belief strength of an attitude that supports the persuasive goal.
-strengthen the evaluation of an attitude that supports the persuasive goal
-weaken the belief strength of an attitude that opposes the persuasive goal
-weaken the evaluation of an attitude that supports the persuasive goal
-create a new attitude with a belief strength and evaluation that supports the persuasive goal
-remind our audience of a forgotten attitude with a belief strength and evaluation that supports the persuasive goal.
For example, suppose you wanted to persuade your roommate, Pat, to go see a movie. If Pat had a positive attitude toward that movie (“I’ve heard that movie is funny”), you could try to increase the belief strength (“Everyone says it is funny; no question about it”) or evaluation (“That movie isn’t just funny, its hilarious!”) of that attitude. If Pat had a negative attitude toward attending the movie (“The movie theater is decrepit”) you could try to reduce the belief strength (“They remodeled it”) or evaluation (“The important thing is the movie, not the theater”) of that negative attitude. You could create a new favorable attitude (“I heard the soundtrack to this movie is great!”) or remind Pat of a favorable attitude.
However, the addition of subjective norms creates several other options:
-strengthen a normative belief that supports the persuasive goal
-increase the motivation to comply with a norm that supports the persuasive goal
-reduce a normative belief that opposes the persuasive goal
-reduce the motivation to comply with a norm that opposes the persuasive goal
-create a new subjective norm that supports the persuasive goal
-remind the audience of a forgotten subjective norm that supports the persuasive goal.
For example, you could try to strengthen an existing normative belief (“No one should sit home on a Friday night”) or increase the motivation to comply (“You’ll really be depressed if you stay home -- people are right when they say you shouldn’t stay home on the weekend”). If Pat thinks it is wrong to go to a movie with a roommate instead of a date, you could try to weaken this normative belief or her motivation to comply with it. Furthermore, you could try to create a new norm (“Everybody is going to see movies made by this director”) or remind Pat of a forgotten norm.
Finally, the fact that there are two influences on behavioral intention, attitudes and norms, gives one final possibility for persuading others:
-if one component (attitudes, norms) supports the persuasive goal more than the other, make that component more important than the other.
Relationship of Behavioral Intention to Behavior
The theory of Reasoned Action adds a new variable between attitudes (and norms) and behavior: behavioral intent. An important question, therefore, is how does behavioral intent relate to behavior? Reasoned Action states that three factors influence whether (or how much) behavioral intent shapes our behavior. First, as suggested above, we must have control over our behavior (volitional control). If I am broke, I cannot go to the movies with my girlfriend. My attitude (and norms of others) may lead me to want very much to teach at Harvard, but I cannot make them hire me. Because our society in may ways is cooperative, we do not always get what we want (what our attitudes lead us to desire and what norms suggest we should want) because we just do not have complete control over our environment.
A second reason why behavioral intent may not yield the expected behavior is that attitudes and behavior must be measured at the same level. If my intent is to buy a new car I may not buy a Ford Mustang. So the fact that I did not purchase a Mustang does not show that my behavioral intent did not affect my behavior (I could have bought a Chevrolet). If I want to go to college I might not attend the University of Southern California. Again, knowing that I did not go to USC is not a reason to think that my behavioral intent had no influence on my behavior; I may attend theUniversity of California, Los Angeles.
This may seem somewhat silly, but some researchers thought that they found that behavioral intent did not influence behavior because they did not measure intent and behavior correctly. For example, in one study behavioral intent (or attitude) was measured by asking a group of people if they like snakes. Everyone said no, indicating a negative attitude. Then these people were asked if they would like to touch a snake, and many did so. The researchers concluded that those who did touch the snake were inconsistent, because the engaged in a behavior (touching a snake) that was inconsistent with their attitude (not liking snakes). However, this behavior (touching a snake) is not a good indicator of their attitude. Perhaps they were curious to know what snakes (an animal they did not like) felt like. A better behavioral measure would have been to ask them if they wanted a snake for a pet. It seems likely that everyone who displayed a negative attitude (“I don’t like snakes”) would have also had a negative behavior (“No, I will not take a snake for a pet”). So, for attitudes or behavioral intent must be measured at the same level.
Third, we know that attitudes do change over time. Behavioral intent and behavior must be measured at the same time for us to expect that they will relate. Reasoned action states that attitudes, together with subjective norms, determine behavioral intent. This means that if a person’s attitude changes, his or her behavioral intent will probably change to. So, if we learn people’s behavioral intent and then wait to measure their behavior several weeks or months later, that behavior may correspond to their currentbehavioral intent but not the behavioral intent we learned.
Evaluation
There has been a great deal of research on the theory of Reasoned Action (see, e.g., Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Sheppard, Hartwick, & Warshaw, 1988). This research is generally supportive of the predictions it makes: Behavioral intent can be predicted from attitudes toward behavior and subjective norms. These predictions hold up in a variety of situations, like consumer behavior, voting, and others (see O’Keefe, 1990). However, this research shows that, of the two components, attitude is a better (more accurate) predictor of behavioral intent than subjective norms. O’Keefe points out the relationship between the attitudinal component and the factors that contribute to it (evaluation, belief strength) is stronger than the relationship between the subject norms and their components (normative beliefs, motivation to comply).
Thus, I believe it is useful to add the idea of subjective norms, because sometimes they can influence our behavior, but in general attitudes are a more important influence. Reasoned Action complicates our understanding of persuasion (a drawback), because it inserts another variable into the process: messages > attitudes > behavioral intent > behavior (and note that the Elaboration Likelihood Model would insert cognitive responses between messages and attitudes). However, Reasoned Action explains some of the reasons why an attitude (or behavioral intent) will not result in the expect behavior.
Glossary
attitude toward behavior: the attitudinal component of Reasoned Action
behavioral intent: how our attitudes and norms would lead us to behave
belief strength: likelihood that an attitude is true
evaluation: favorability or unfavorability of an attitude
motivation to comply: how much (or how little) we want follow norms
normative beliefs: expectations of how we should behave in a given situation
subjective norms: expectations we think others have about how we should behavior; the normative component of Reasoned Action
volitional control: extent to which a person has voluntary power over what he or she will do
References
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975).. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 325-343.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)