The Psychological Theories of Propaganda

This page is a collection of Psychological theories of political and social controls theories, which started being investigated and implemented during World War II, and continue to be used by almost all organisations in the world. We will discuss each theory by following them in their chronological progression from that WWII starting point.

First, we can look at the propaganda researchers understanding of the psychology pf a typical person

Common Assumptions About Human Influence

Susceptibility to Fear and Emotion: The Hypodermic Needle Theory and the Two-Step Flow Theory both highlight the role of fear and emotion in shaping public opinion. They assumed that individuals were easily swayed by powerful imagery, emotional appeals, and persuasive narratives. This assumption reflects the historical context of war, where fear of the enemy and patriotism were powerful motivators.

Limited Critical Thinking: These theories implicitly suggest that individuals were not always critical thinkers, readily accepting information presented by authority figures or opinion leaders. This assumption aligns with the idea of a “mass society,” where individuals were seen as less informed and more susceptible to manipulation.

Conformity and Social Pressure: The Two-Step Flow Theory emphasizes the influence of social networks and opinion leaders. It assumes that individuals are prone to conform to the opinions and behaviours of their social groups, particularly those they respect or admire. This reflects the social pressures of the time, where conformity and adherence to social norms were highly valued.

Lack of Individuality: While not explicitly stated, these theories often implicitly treat individuals as homogenous entities, neglecting the diversity of individual experiences, beliefs, and values. This assumption, while common during the period, is challenged by later theories that emphasize the role of individual differences in shaping media effects.

Understanding the Human Condition

These assumptions, while based on the context of the time, offer a glimpse into how the human condition was perceived during World War II. The theories reflect a sense of societal vulnerability, a belief in the power of authority figures, and a focus on the collective rather than the individual.

While these theories have been criticized for their simplistic view of human behaviour, they serve as a starting point for understanding how media influence was conceptualized during a pivotal period. They also pointed the way for our politicians to understand the profile of their perfect “voter”.

Hypodermic Needle Theory

The Hypodermic Needle Theory suggested that media could inject ideas directly into the audience’s minds, influencing public opinion and behaviour. This embryonic theory of social control and manipulation was a critical step towards an acute understanding of a great many manipulation techniques and method that continue to be applied, mostly without mention, and hidden behind unclaimed information access restrictions.

This theory, also known as the Magic Bullet Theory, emerged in the early 20th century and gained prominence during World War II. Here are its key aspects:

Concept: This theory posits that media messages are “injected” directly into the minds of a passive audience, much like a hypodermic needle delivers a drug into the bloodstream. The audience is seen as uniform and susceptible to the media’s influence.

Assumptions: Audiences are considered passive recipients of information.

• Media has a direct and immediate effect on public opinion and behaviour.
• Propaganda can easily manipulate the audience’s thoughts and actions.

Historical Context: During World War II, governments utilized this theory to create powerful propaganda campaigns, believing that carefully crafted messages could rally support for the war effort and demonize the enemy.

Two-Step Flow Theory

Overview: Developed by Paul Lazarsfeld in the 1940s, this theory suggests that media effects are mediated by opinion leaders who interpret and pass on information to others. We can think of these as the accepted authority figures and social influencers of the individual that is the intended target of the messaging.

Key Points:

• Information flows from media to opinion leaders, who then influence their social circles. If those social circles believe they have access to “special” information. They will virtue signal thins, and retransmit it, with their own personal encouragements to believe it without challenge. Or to buy into the “plot”, behind some secrecy. In wartime, those secrets can be like wildfire: The gossip army floods its private broadcasts with this very open secret.
• This theory highlights the role of interpersonal communication in shaping public opinion, contrasting with the direct influence suggested by the Hypodermic Needle Theory. Over time, these two theories were combined to reinforce each others strengths, in order to create a much more solid emotional buy in to the overall message of the manipulation system that is being applied.

The Two Steps of the Two-Step Flow Theory

Mass Media to Opinion Leaders:

In the first step, information is transmitted from mass media (like newspapers, radio, and television) to opinion leaders. These are individuals who are more exposed to media and are considered knowledgeable or influential within their social circles. I.e., readers of The Times, get special information that allows them to continue their façade of faultless superior knowledge. Later, we will see how false “conspiracy stories”, became part of this process of control and manipulation.

Opinion Leaders to the Public

In the second step, these opinion leaders then interpret and relay the information to the broader public. This means that the public is influenced not directly by the media, but through these intermediaries who filter and contextualize the information. Today, this function has mainly been replaced by AI, Search engines and social media influencers.

It’s important to note that secondary authorities would also need to comply with, and perhaps influence the overall strategy to their own ends. Church leaders, teachers, and just about every aspect of our lives, became targets as protentional sources, not only of control, but of gathering information about the private citizen.

Limited Effects Theory

Overview: This theory emerged in the 1940s and 1950s, challenging the idea that media has a strong, direct influence on audiences.

Key Points: It posits that media effects are limited and vary based on individual differences, social context, and pre-existing beliefs. Which was recognised as being true, but also useful. As it pointed the way towards more accurately targeted manipulation. And the need to careful indoctrination in a child’s early years.

The theory emphasizes that people actively interpret media messages based on their own experiences and social environments. Further investigations confirmed the need to control every aspect of the media, and to create a multi-layered and highly targeted message. Which increasing sought to compartmentalise individuals seeking to break out of this conditioning.

Emergence and Changes of Communication Theories up to 1960

The Two-Step Flow Theory emerged in the 1940s, particularly from Paul Lazarsfeld’s study, “The People’s Choice,” which examined how voters made decisions during the 1940 presidential election. Here’s how it evolved alongside other theories:

1940s: The Two-Step Flow Theory was introduced, complaining the earlier Hypodermic Needle Model, which suggested that media had a direct and powerful effect on audiences. This two step approach, not integrated into the core proposal that it is our environment that affects our behaviour. and this became a wider theme in the emergent concept of Behaviourism.

1950s: The theory gained traction as researchers recognized the importance of interpersonal communication. It highlighted that people are more likely to be influenced by those they trust and interact with regularly.

Late 1950s to 1960: Other theories began to emerge, such as the Diffusion of Innovations and Uses and Gratifications Theory, exploring their origins, key proponents, and how they influenced media targeting and social group dynamics during the mid-20th century.

Diffusion of Innovations

Proponent: The theory was popularized by Everett Rogers in his seminal book, Diffusion of Innovations, first published in 1962. However, its roots can be traced back to earlier studies, including a 1943 study by Bryce Ryan and Neal C. Gross on hybrid seed corn.

Core Concept: This theory examines how new ideas and technologies spread within cultures. It emphasizes the role of opinion leaders—individuals who are more informed and influential within their social networks. The process typically follows these stages:

• Knowledge: awareness of the innovation.
• Persuasion: Forming a favourable or unfavourable attitude toward the innovation.
• Decision: Choosing to adopt or reject the innovation.
• Implementation: Putting the innovation into use.
• Confirmation: Seeking reinforcement for the decision.

Targeting Social Groups: By identifying opinion leaders, marketers and communicators could effectively target specific social groups. This allowed for tailored messaging that resonated with the values and beliefs of those groups, enhancing the likelihood of adoption of new ideas or technologies.

Uses and Gratifications Theory

Proponents: This theory emerged in the 1940s, with early contributions from scholars like Paul Lazarsfeld and Elihu Katz. It gained prominence in the 1970s as researchers began to focus on audience behaviour.

Core Concept: Uses and Gratifications Theory shifts the focus from the media itself to the audience’s motivations for using media. It posits that individuals actively seek out media to satisfy specific needs, such as:

• Information: Seeking knowledge or news.
• Personal Identity: Finding content that reflects personal beliefs or experiences.
• integration and Social Interaction: Using media to connect with others.
• Entertainment: Seeking enjoyment or relaxation.

Targeting Social Groups: This theory allowed media producers to better understand their audiences, leading to more effective targeting strategies. By recognizing that audiences are not passive consumers but active participants, media outlets could create content that aligned with the preferences and biases of specific social groups. This often resulted in the promotion of Good News stories that reinforced existing beliefs, helping maintain a perceived sense of balance while subtly embedding biases.

Attachment Theory

Attachment theory emerged in the 1950s, primarily through the work of John Bowlby, who is often credited as its founder. Bowlby’s research focused on the emotional bonds between  children and their primary caregivers, emphasizing that these early relationships significantly influence an individual’s emotional and social development throughout life. His seminal work laid the groundwork for further exploration by Mary Ainsworth, who expanded on Bowlby’s ideas with her Strange Situation study in the 1960s, identifying different attachment styles.

Developed in the 1950s by John Bowlby, Attachment Theory has become a significant and important core to our understanding of human nature. Expanded by Mary Ainsworth in the 1960s it informs us not only of how humans respond to caregiver interactions from birth, but also how those responses and learnt behaviour can develop into personality disorders and other serious dissociation related mental health conditions.

Core Concepts

Attachment Theory focuses on the emotional bonds between individuals, particularly between children and caregivers. It suggests that early attachments can have lasting impacts on relationships and emotional regulation. A caregiver that neglect their child, may cause the child to develop an avoidant approach to future relationship, for example.

Impact on Propaganda and Social Control

The emergence of attachment theory has had significant implications for understanding propaganda and social control in several ways:

Understanding Human Behaviour:

Attachment styles can influence how individuals respond to social messages and authority figures. For instance, those with secure attachments may be more open to constructive criticism and change, while those with anxious or avoidant attachments might react defensively to perceived threats. In recent years it has been understood that these attachment patterns exhibit a more complex interactive model, due to specific situations tending to trigger situation specific triggers and attachment patterns.

Targeting Audiences:

Propagandists can tailor messages based on the audience’s attachment styles. For example, individuals with anxious attachment may be more susceptible to fear-based messaging, and may need constant reassurance of an ongoing attachment, not just to another individual or personality, but also for possessions, experiences, consuming’s, etc., While those with avoidant attachment might resist overt attempts at persuasion.

Social Media Dynamics: Recent studies indicate that attachment styles influence how people engage with social media, which is a modern tool for propaganda. For instance, individuals with anxious attachment may engage more frequently with social media, seeking validation, which can be exploited by propagandists to spread specific narratives.

Reinforcement of social norms: Media and propaganda often reinforce existing social norms and biases, which can be particularly effective when targeting groups with similar attachment styles. This creates a sense of community and belonging, further solidifying social control.

Media, controlled under the shared understanding that the majority of people, in a fear ridden world, while be increasingly motivated to display an anxiety driven response to their existing attachment styles and addictions.

People with trauma related dissociative behaviours, such as PTSD or paranoia, will tend to find this toxic background of fear and increasingly open coercion and control, very challenging. People may well develop those conditions because of this overt and hidden toxicity in society.

Suppression of personal resilience and Window of Tolerance ensures may in society are constantly on a “hair trigger”, a waiting time bomb of panic, just waiting for the next trigger message.

Agenda-Setting Theory: The Power of Salience

The 1960s and 1970s saw a surge in propaganda and social control theories theories, and the Agenda-Setting Theory was a major player in understanding the influence of media on public opinion.

This theory, developed by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw, posits that the media doesn’t tell us what to think, but what to think about. In essence, the media sets the agenda for public discourse by highlighting certain issues and events, making them more salient in the public consciousness.

How It Works

• Issue Salience: The media’s coverage of specific issues elevates their importance in the public’s mind. For example, if a news channel constantly reports on climate change, viewers are more likely to perceive it as a significant issue.
• Framing: The way the media frames an issue can influence public opinion. Presenting climate change as a scientific consensus versus a political debate will shape how people perceive it.
• The “Spiral of Silence”: This theory, developed by Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann, builds upon agenda-setting by suggesting that individuals are less likely to express opinions that they perceive as being in the minority. The media’s agenda can amplify this effect, making people more hesitant to voice dissenting views.

Impact on Society

• Political Campaigns: The agenda-setting theory explains why political campaigns focus on specific issues and events, hoping to influence public opinion.
• Social Movements: The media’s coverage of social movements can amplify their message and garner public support.
• Public awareness: The media plays a crucial role in raising awareness about important issues like environmental concerns, social justice, and health crises.
• Cultivation Theory is a fascinating concept that delves into how our long-term exposure to media, especially television, influences our perceptions of reality. Let’s break it down further:

Cultivation Theory

Cultivation Theory was developed by George Gerbner in the 1960s and 1970s. It suggests that:

Prolonged Exposure: The more time individuals spend watching television, the more likely they are to perceive the world in ways that reflect the most common messages and themes presented on TV.

Shaping Reality: This theory posits that television doesn’t just reflect reality; it actively shapes it. Viewers may come to believe that the world is more violent, dangerous, or glamorous than it actually is, based on the content they consume.

Key Concepts

Mainstreaming: This refers to the process by which heavy television viewers develop a common outlook on the world, regardless of their actual backgrounds. It suggests that television can homogenize perceptions across diverse groups.

Resonance: This occurs when the television content resonates with the viewer’s real-life experiences, amplifying the effects of cultivation. For example, someone living in a high-crime area may find that crime-related TV shows reinforce their fears and perceptions of danger.

Mean World Syndrome: A term coined by Gerbner, it describes the phenomenon where heavy viewers of violent television content come to believe that the world is more dangerous than it actually is. This can lead to increased fear and anxiety about personal safety.

Implications of Cultivation Theory

Social Perceptions: Cultivation Theory highlights how media can influence societal norms and values. For instance, repeated portrayals of certain stereotypes can shape public attitudes toward different social groups.

Political Views: The theory also suggests that media can influence political perceptions and opinions. For example, if political issues are consistently framed in a particular way, viewers may adopt those perspectives as their own.

Consumer Behaviour: Advertising and marketing strategies often rely on cultivation principles, as repeated exposure to certain products or lifestyles can shape consumer preferences and behaviours.

Critiques of Cultivation Theory

While Cultivation Theory has been influential, it has also faced criticism:

Oversimplification: Critics argue that it oversimplifies the relationship between media and reality, ignoring the active role of viewers in interpreting media content.

Diverse Media Landscape: With the rise of the internet and social media, the media landscape has become more fragmented, making it harder to generalize the effects of television alone.

Behaviourism is a significant complement to Cultivation Theory, as both explore how external factors influence human behaviour and perceptions. Let’s dive into the key aspects of Behaviourism and how it relates to media consumption:

Behaviourism

Behaviourism is a psychological approach that focuses on observable behaviours rather than internal mental states. It posits that all behaviours are learned through interactions with the environment, primarily through conditioning. Here are some key points:

Classical Conditioning: This concept, pioneered by Ivan Pavlov, involves learning through association. For example, if a person consistently sees a product advertised alongside positive imagery, they may begin to associate that product with positive feelings.

Operant Conditioning: Developed by B.F. Skinner, this theory emphasises the role of reinforcement and punishment in shaping behaviour. For instance, if a viewer receives social approval for discussing a popular TV show, they may be more likely to engage with that content again.

Reinforcement Schedules: The timing and frequency of rewards can significantly affect behaviour. In media, consistent positive reinforcement (like likes or shares on social media) can encourage users to engage more with certain types of content.

connection to Cultivation Theory

Influence of Media: Just as Cultivation Theory suggests that prolonged exposure to media shapes perceptions of reality, Behaviourism explains how repeated media interactions can condition viewers’ responses and behaviours.

Social Learning: Both theories highlight the importance of social context. Behaviourism focuses on how behaviours are learned through observation and imitation, while Cultivation Theory emphasizes how media portrayals can shape societal norms and expectations.

Impact on Attitudes: Media can reinforce certain behaviours and attitudes through repeated exposure, aligning with the principles of both Behaviourism and Cultivation Theory. For example, if violent behaviour is frequently depicted in media, viewers may come to accept such behaviour as normal.

Implications of Behaviourism in Media

Advertising: Advertisers often use behaviourist principles to create effective campaigns that condition consumer responses through repeated exposure and reinforcement.

Content Creation: Understanding how audiences learn and respond to media can help creators design content that resonates and engages effectively.

Public Policy: Behaviourism can inform strategies for public health campaigns, where desired behaviours (like vaccination) are encouraged through positive reinforcement.

Uses and Gratifications Theory adds another crucial dimension to our understanding of media influence. It shifts the focus from the power of media to the power of the audience, emphasizing their active choices and motivations for media consumption.

Uses and Gratifications Theory

This theory emerged in the 1970s, challenging the traditional view of media as a passive force that simply transmits information to a passive audience. It proposes that individuals actively select and use media to fulfil their needs and desires.

Key Concepts

Active Audience: This theory recognizes that audiences are not simply passive recipients of media messages but active consumers who make conscious choices about what they consume and how they interpret it.

Gratifications Sought: Individuals seek specific gratifications from media consumption, such as entertainment, information, social connection, or escapism. The motivations for media use vary widely based on individual needs and preferences.

Media Choice: People select media that aligns with their personal needs and goals. They actively choose content that provides them with the desired gratifications.

Effects of Media: The effects of media consumption are not uniform but vary depending on the individual’s motivations and the specific content they consume.

Examples of Gratifications Sought

Entertainment: Watching a comedy show to relax or escape from stress.

Information: Reading news articles to stay informed about current events.

Social connection: Joining online communities to connect with people who share similar interests.

Identity Formation: Consuming media that reflects or reinforces personal values and beliefs.

Implications of Uses and Gratifications Theory

Media Selection: This theory helps us understand why individuals choose specific media platforms and content.

Audience Engagement: It emphasizes the importance of creating content that meets the needs and desires of the target audience.

Media Effects: It suggests that media effects are not predetermined but depend on the individual’s motivations and how they interpret the content.

The Theory of the Self-police Patrol

Robert Calvert, vocalist with the psychedelic Rock band Hawkwind included many intriguing concepts, especially regarding his theory on the Self-police Patrol. Calvert, known for his poetic and lyrical prowess, often explored themes of identity, control, and societal structures. Here’s an outline based on his work:

Concept of Self-Policing:

Calvert suggests that individuals who are able to express their individuality become the targets for usually self appointed vigilantes, who see it as their job to suppress such displays of nonconformance with their concept of “normal”. 

Lyrics and Themes:

His lyrics frequently touched on the struggles of the individual against the external pressures of a society seeking to control him and his self-expression. The notion of self-policing can be seen as a a very real threat to freedom within society. A free army that the government can call on at any time.

• Mental Health and Identity: Calvert’s own experiences with mental health informed his work. He often portrayed the tension between self-identity and societal enforcement of roles that he did not agree with, suggesting that the pressure to conform can lead to psychological distress by the toxic nature of the way that society responds to individuality and freedom of expression. This can be particularly significant to a free thinker and artist performer such as Bob. Bob realised that his various mental health issues seemed to be a direct result of the toxicity of a societal defence measure against non-conformists such as artists and freethinkers like himself.
• Critique of Authority: In his lyrics, while advocating for self-awareness, Calvert also critiques the incongruent authoritarian structures that enforce conformity to moralities and rules that assume the ideal is a society of clones, not individuals. His work implies that self-policing can be both a survival mechanism of the societal organism, as well as a form of oppression and control.
• Imagery and Symbolism: Through vivid imagery and symbolism in his poetry, Calvert illustrates the struggle for autonomy. The Self-police Patrol can be seen as an informal but highly effective unofficial policing unit. condoned and allowed to wreak havoc on peoples lives with minimal oversight, often leading to them gaslighting, isolating and random acts of violence from members of society determined to stop them thinking “dangerous” thoughts.
• Bob, in a private remark to fellow band members, also suggested that the mental health system was also part of that defensive control. He realised that a society constantly measuring each other for signs of “abnormality”, would naturally choose to see any signs of free and critical thinking, and of basic individuality, as signs of “madness”. His own medication giving him horrific side effects which, it has been claimed, were a significant factor in his early death.
• Recently, during the Covid 19 crisis, many were able to see in clear view, this self-police patrol, in action. People started watching and reporting their neighbours for even the slightest infringement of any rules. Including those to vulnerable to understand. The population stood by and watch their eldest citizens die in isolation from an illness given to them, by their care team. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister let it be known that ne knew, he had no reason to obey those rules. As did everyone in Downing St.
• Call for Liberation: Ultimately, Calvert’s work encourages a re-examination of the nature of our society and an openness with regards those societal controls. He advocated for breaking down those societal control and propaganda systems that force people into hate filled, self-destructive relationship with everyone they meet, that “isn’t normal”.
• 50 years on, and the memory and meaning of Bob’s message of those patrols society has against people like him is starting to be lost. Most of us now know, quite chillingly, he was right.

Putting it all together

By the late 1980s, a convergence of theories and research painted a stark picture of media’s influence on society. The theories we’ve discussed – Agenda-Setting, Cultivation, Behaviourism, and Uses and Gratifications – all pointed towards a powerful reality: media was not merely reflecting society, but actively shaping it. This realization led to a troubling conclusion: media had become a tool for manipulation and social control on a massive scale, not just informing or entertaining.

Propaganda’s Success: The effectiveness of propaganda techniques, honed during wartime and political campaigns, has become undeniable. It is very likely that George Orwell’s vision set out in his book 1984, are with us, right now, under a slightly different guise. One that incudes Calvert’s Self-Police Patrol.

These methods, designed to influence public opinion and behaviour, are being applied in a more subtle, yet pervasive manner. Media outlets, driven by profit and influence, are increasingly adept at using these techniques to create desires, anxieties, and insecurities in their audiences. Systematic threat, together with localised self-policing means each of us have far less freewill than we pretend to ourselves we have. We have been running scared for quite some time.