Appeal to fear: Difference between revisions
imported>Fishy-Finns m Reverted 1 edit by 200.118.62.237 (talk) to last revision by OAbot |
Added FOMO as a related term, since it is an appeal to fear |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Logical fallacy}} | {{Short description|Logical fallacy}} | ||
{{refimprove|date=August 2015}} | {{refimprove|date=August 2015}} | ||
An '''appeal to fear''' (also called '''''argumentum ad metum'''''<!-- or ad metum? yes metum is the correct form in latin--> or '''''argumentum in terrorem''''') is a [[fallacy]] in which a person attempts to create support for an idea by attempting to increase fear towards an alternative. An appeal to fear is related to the broader strategy of [[fear appeal]] and is a common tactic in [[marketing]], [[politics]], and [[media (communication)]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/fallacies/fallacies_alpha.htm|title=Full alphabetic list of Fallacies|access-date=17 June 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Tannenbaum |first1=Melanie B. |last2=Hepler |first2=Justin |last3=Zimmerman |first3=Rick S. |last4=Saul |first4=Lindsey |last5=Jacobs |first5=Samantha |last6=Wilson |first6=Kristina |last7=Albarracín |first7=Dolores |title=Appealing to fear: A meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness and theories. |journal=Psychological Bulletin |date=November 2015 |volume=141 |issue=6 |pages=1178–1204 |doi=10.1037/a0039729|pmc=5789790 }}</ref> | An '''appeal to fear''' (also called '''''argumentum ad metum'''''<!-- or ad metum? yes metum is the correct form in latin--> or '''''argumentum in terrorem''''') is a [[fallacy]] in which a person attempts to create support for an idea by attempting to increase fear towards an alternative. An appeal to fear is related to the broader strategy of [[fear appeal]] and is a common tactic in [[marketing]], [[politics]], and [[media (communication)]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/fallacies/fallacies_alpha.htm|title=Full alphabetic list of Fallacies|access-date=17 June 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Tannenbaum |first1=Melanie B. |last2=Hepler |first2=Justin |last3=Zimmerman |first3=Rick S. |last4=Saul |first4=Lindsey |last5=Jacobs |first5=Samantha |last6=Wilson |first6=Kristina |last7=Albarracín |first7=Dolores |title=Appealing to fear: A meta-analysis of fear appeal effectiveness and theories. |journal=Psychological Bulletin |date=November 2015 |volume=141 |issue=6 |pages=1178–1204 |doi=10.1037/a0039729|pmid=26501228 |pmc=5789790 }}</ref> | ||
==Logic== | ==Logic== | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:Therefore, P is true. | :Therefore, P is true. | ||
The argument is invalid. The [[appeal to emotion]] is used in exploiting existing fears to create support for the speaker's proposal, namely P. Also, often the [[false dilemma]] fallacy is involved, suggesting Q is the proposed idea's sole alternative.<ref>{{Citation|title=Zweiter Beratungsgegenstand: Die Steuerung des Verwaltungshandelns durch Haushaltsrecht und Haushaltskontrolle | The argument is invalid. The [[appeal to emotion]] is used in exploiting existing fears to create support for the speaker's proposal, namely P. Also, often the [[false dilemma]] fallacy is involved, suggesting Q is the proposed idea's sole alternative.<ref>{{Citation|title=Zweiter Beratungsgegenstand: Die Steuerung des Verwaltungshandelns durch Haushaltsrecht und Haushaltskontrolle|work=Kulturauftrag im staatlichen Gemeinwesen. Die Steuerung des Verwaltungshandelns durch Haushaltsrecht und Haushaltskontrolle|year=1984 |pages=147–328 |place=Berlin, Boston|publisher=DE GRUYTER|doi=10.1515/9783110871104.147 |isbn=9783110871104 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | ||
==Fear, uncertainty and doubt== | ==Fear, uncertainty and doubt== | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
*[[Fear appeal]] | *[[Fear appeal]] | ||
*[[Fear mongering]] | *[[Fear mongering]] | ||
*[[FOMO]] | |||
*[[List of fallacies]] | *[[List of fallacies]] | ||
*[[Moral panic]] | *[[Moral panic]] | ||
Latest revision as of 04:51, 30 June 2025
Template:Short description Template:Refimprove An appeal to fear (also called argumentum ad metum or argumentum in terrorem) is a fallacy in which a person attempts to create support for an idea by attempting to increase fear towards an alternative. An appeal to fear is related to the broader strategy of fear appeal and is a common tactic in marketing, politics, and media (communication).[1][2]
Logic
This fallacy has the following argument form:
- Either P or Q is true.
- Q is frightening.
- Therefore, P is true.
The argument is invalid. The appeal to emotion is used in exploiting existing fears to create support for the speaker's proposal, namely P. Also, often the false dilemma fallacy is involved, suggesting Q is the proposed idea's sole alternative.[3]
Fear, uncertainty and doubt
Fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) is the appeal to fear in sales or marketing; in which a company disseminates negative (and vague) information on a competitor's product. The term originated to describe misinformation tactics in the computer hardware industry and has since been used more broadly. FUD is "implicit coercion" by "any kind of disinformation used as a competitive weapon."[4]Template:Unreliable source FUD creates a situation in which buyers are encouraged to purchase by brand, regardless of the relative technical merits. Opponents of certain large computer corporationsScript error: No such module "Unsubst". state that the spreading of fear, uncertainty, and doubt is an unethical marketing technique that these corporations consciously employ.
As persuasion
Fear appeals are often used in marketing and social policy, as a method of persuasion. Fear is an effective tool to change attitudes,[5]Template:Unreliable source which are moderated by the motivation and ability to process the fear message. Examples of fear appeal include reference to social exclusion, and getting laid-off from one's job,[6] getting cancer from smoking or involvement in car accidents and driving.
Fear appeals are nonmonotonic, meaning that the level of persuasion does not always increase when the claimed danger is increased. A study of public service messages on AIDS found that if the messages were too aggressive or fearful, they were rejected by the subject; a moderate amount of fear is the most effective attitude changer.[6]
Others argue that it is not the level of fear that is decisive changing attitudes via the persuasion process. Rather, as long as a scare-tactics message includes a recommendation to cope with the fear, it can work.[7]
See also
- Appeal to emotion
- Appeal to force
- Culture of fear
- Demagogue
- Embrace, extend and extinguish
- Fear appeal
- Fear mongering
- FOMO
- List of fallacies
- Moral panic
- Red Scare
- Scareware
- The terrorists have won
References
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Solomon. Zaichkowsky, Polegato. Consumer Behaviour Pearson, Toronto. 2005
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".