Thinking from a message producer’s POV Assignment | Online Homework Help

In this reflection paper, you are asked to 1) describe a design of a persuasive narrative message (text-based or audio-visual) that will be released through some form of mass media; 2) analyze why (or why not) your message can influence your target audience’s decision making (e.g., persuade them to change their attitude or behavior). ——————— Choose ONE topic from the list below to design your persuasive narrative message on. If you are not interested in any of these topics, please propose your own topic to me via email. Professors should never be allowed to crush a student’s dream. Students shouldn’t be afraid to challenge a professor if they disagree with something. Changing a major isn’t the end of the world. Students shouldn’t drink or smoke just because they want to fit in. Students should not over commit themselves just to look good on their resumes. Persuade the government to pay the basic healthcare of students. Convincing a student to stay in college is very important. Never make hasty decisions on what to major in. It is important that students have a balanced life. Pregnancy shouldn’t be the end of a student’s college dream. Your persuasive message should be a narrative. Consider responding to the following questions while describing your message design: Who is (are) your protagonist for the narrative? Their gender? Age? Race(ethnicity)? Which mass media channel(s) will this message be released through? Who is your target audience? What kind of story line will the message use? Then, cite at least TWO theories or concepts you learned from this course (See the updated reference listPreview the document) to analyze why or why not your message can influence your target audience’s decision making. Things to consider for this section: what decision-making systems will your audience use to process the narrative? Will they identify with the characters in the narrative? Why or why not? What emotions do you expect the message will trigger in your audience? What kind of frame did you use in your narrative (gain frame? Lose frame? Others?) How will the factors above influence your audience’s decision making?

The affect heuristic q
Paul Slovic *, Melissa L. Finucane, Ellen Peters, Donald G. MacGregor
Decision Research Inc., 1201 Oak Street, Suite 200, Eugene, OR 97401, USA
Available online 16 October 2006
Abstract
This paper introduces a theoretical framework that describes the importance of affect in guiding judgments and decisions.
As used here, ‘‘affect’’ means the specific quality of ‘‘goodness’’ or ‘‘badness’’ (i) experienced as a feeling state
(with or without consciousness) and (ii) demarcating a positive or negative quality of a stimulus. Affective responses
occur rapidly and automatically—note how quickly you sense the feelings associated with the stimulus word ‘‘treasure’’
or the word ‘‘hate’’. We argue that reliance on such feelings can be characterized as ‘‘the affect heuristic’’. In this paper
we trace the development of the affect heuristic across a variety of research paths followed by ourselves and many others.
We also discuss some of the important practical implications resulting from ways that this heuristic impacts our
daily lives.
2002 Cambridge University Press. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Keywords: Affect heuristic; Judgment; Decision making; Risk perception
1. Background
Although affect has long played a key role in
many behavioral theories, it has rarely been recognized
as an important component of human judgment
and decision making. Perhaps befitting its
rationalistic origins, the main focus of descriptive
decision research has been cognitive, rather than
affective. When principles of utility maximization
appeared to be descriptively inadequate, Simon
(1956) oriented the field toward problem solving
and information-processing models based upon
bounded rationality. The work of Tversky and
Kahneman (1974) and Kahneman et al. (1982)
demonstrated how boundedly rational individuals
employ heuristics such as availability, representativeness,
and anchoring and adjustment to make
judgments and how they use simplified strategies
such as ‘‘elimination by aspects’’