In chapter 4, one of the first traditions Griffin explains for Communication Theory is the Socio-Psychological Tradition where communication is monitored by interpersonal interaction and influence. Influence is something that affects individuals and the choices they may make. Many people, including myself, is easily influenced by something or someone who is believed to have a high level of source credibility. Griffin defines source credibility as the "audience perception of the competence and trustworthiness of a speaker or writer" (pg 43), which greatly affects opinions. I had never realized that there were two types of credibility, expertness and character, but that makes sense (discovered by the Yale researchers). The experts obviously know what it is they're talking about and those with [good] character are believed if they are sincere enough.
The experience I've had with source credibility that comes to mind is from the time I worked at MAC cosmetics (I know some of the ladies will be able to relate; Guys, you can just pretend you can relate). Spending a few years working for MAC (or just retail in general) there were things I noticed about the consumers as well as some of my employees. First of all, I'm going to share a secret with you MAC shoppers, but not ALL the MAC artists know what they're talking about. Well, I should rephrase that: Not all the MAC employees we hire start out as experts. I remember my first day, a customer asked me what lipstick would look best on her, and I was thinking "I have no clue!" but I was regarded as an expert because I was the one behind the counter. However, I noticed that most, if not all of the MAC employees were considered credible sources of information because the way they were often perceived by customers. The most typical scenarios:
1) The customers loved the way way their makeup looked (they looked like experts doing it-- customers wanted their makeup to look "professional" like the artists'.)
2) They [MAC employees] sounded like they knew what they were talking about (there was a new hire I had that had limited product knowledge and was horrible at applying makeup... but she was good at sales and made everything sound good!)
And lastly-
3) the customers that came to the counter who don't fit in the above mentioned groups that didn't want to be "sold" or look made up, but judged the retail artists' sincerity (character) and established the artists as credible who are 'honest' and not trying to sell or make you look like them.
I don't want to mislead anyone in any way, I'm not saying that MAC artists are bad, or don't know what they're talking about and trying to sell you a bunch of unnecessary things, many of them are "Artists" and are experts at what they do (there's a reason their makeup looks the way it does). I just recall how it was when I was a consumer and what I thought, and then eventually became a retail artist myself and observed what was perceived to be credible. I witnessed the influence of source credibility from both sides. :)
-J
[Watch *HD*] In the Heart of the Sea Full Movie
6 years ago
3 comments:
I totally know what you're talking about. I work in an electronics department at a retail store and people think that I know everything there is to know about electronics. I don't mean to brag but I do have a fair knowledge about the products I sell. But a few years ago I didn't. My experience came from looking stuff up online, tinkering with the products themselves, and also asking other people more knowledgable than I.
This concept could also apply to first impressions. Do you wonder what a person's thinking about you just based on what you look like? I would like to know what they think.
I really appreciate the scenarios that you gave regarding the perception of customers. It was a great example of Griffin’s Socio-Psychological tradition. I have been to many makeup counters and I always thought that they had to attend classes before they are allowed to work on customers. This of course was my own assumption. I know better now, thanks.
I always watch Rob Black. He is on one of the local channels and gives financial advice. I have been watching him for so long; I feel that he is creditable in his advice. I have actually used some of his suggestions. He falls into the category of credibility of expertness. It would be a lot different if Jerry Springer was giving advice.
I really liked your scenarios as well. I think it is hard to differentiate between someone who looks like they know what they are doing or talking about, and someone who actually knows. I have also had my fair share of encounters with MAC employees and find myself questioning their advice. I suppose it isn't entirely that important if I am trusting someone with what color base I am wearing, but there are many other daily scenarios such as the advice from college counselors where being able to make the distinction between the two would be essential. I find myself wondering about the presidential candidates and whether they are experts or just sincere (or insincere) characters.
Post a Comment