The manipulative influence issue is not a new topic for discussion. However only with the advent of the mass media concept it became popular and requires the intervention not only of scientists but also of the international community. The investigation mass media phenomena are equipping a mankind with a broader and deeper understanding of society and culture due to the fact that the texts produced by the mass media are the most socially significant messages and have a priority in the society over all other types of texts. Moreover, in in recent years, the concepts of mass consciousness influence and mass behavior influence had become increasingly popular. Frequently, mass media is the subject or instrument of such manipulation. The manipulation process (as the influencing process on a person or a social group) is the more effective (by the power of impact), when the deeper level of consciousness the manipulator employs. Additionally, the deeper the level of manipulation when the slower the «processing» of consciousness, but the stronger the transformation in all other levels, and the result of exposure is more prolonged. In the article was developed the quantitative evaluation method of mass media manipulative influence on public opinion. The method by means of evaluating financial expenditures, defining goals, objectives and strategies for manipulating, selecting mass media and classified methods of manipulation, based on the generated databases of causes, goals of the criteria, focus groups and mass media, allows to calculate the quantitative parameters that characterize the magnitude of manipulative mass media influences on public opinion.
Currently, the mass media has become the main tool for information dissemination that affect individual consciousness and subconscious and, as a consequence, the public consciousness. Public consciousness should be considered as a social phenomenon whose main function is to influence the audience through semantic and evaluative information transmitted by mass media channels. Moreover, public consciousness is a mechanism for actualizing information through various means of communication. Therefore, mass media influence does not always have a negative effect, since in the globalized world it is difficult to imagine human life without newspapers, social networks and other mass media. However, on the other hand, some individuals, for gaining their own advantages, use mass media as an instrument of influence on society. 2
Analysis of known approaches for evaluation the manipulative influence The research in mass media manipulative influence field was engaged by large number of scientists, both Ukrainian and foreign, among them: Ivanov, V., Nesteryak,Yu., McQuail, D., Schiller, G., Noelle-Neumann, E. etc.
In Peleschyshyn, A. and Guminskyi, R. scientific researches, the description of
informational environment of the virtual community in social networks was described; a
model of internal informational environment and the discussion model of the virtual
community were developed and detailed; on the basis of a formal model of the
informational environment of the virtual community, taking into account the quality of
information content, the indicator of information threats is determined [
A human activity model and human joint activities model in the information space
was proposed by Shiyan, A. On the basis of proposed models, a human protection
method from negative informational and psychological influence on the basis of the
peculiarities of its activity was presented [
In Gubanov, D. studies [
The formalized model for detecting PR-influence through publications in the
Internet was developed by Ryabyy, M., Khatyan, O. and Bagatsky, S. [
Proceeding from the above, a detailed analysis of manipulative influences models
was conducted [
The analysis was based on such basic criteria (Table 1): IE – taking into account the information environment influence; MMI – taking into account methods of manipulative influence; EE – taking into account the links between information environment elements; FD – the formal description of models and methods; CIE – taking into account the content of information environment; TCh – taking into account the content transfer channel; CA – taking into account the content adequacy.
As a result of multicriteria analysis, it is established that studied models and
methods have certain limitations as to practical application for solving various kind of
tasks of information and psychological security. It is found that the evaluation method
of mass media manipulative influence is only then effective and adequate in case it
meets all the specified criteria. The paper purpose is to develop an evaluation method
of mass media manipulative influence, which will allow to calculate the quantitative
parameters of their influence on public opinion.
1. Peleschyshyn-Guminskyi’s Model
2. Shiyan’s Model
3. Gubanov’s Models
Type 1. Optimization and simulation models
3.1. Models with thresholds
3.2. Models of independent cascades
3.3. Impregnation and infestation models
3.4. Ising models
3.5. Models based on cellular automata
3.6. Models based on Markov chains
Type 2. Theoretical and game model
Type 3. Models of innovations diffusion
Type 4. Models of network correlation
Type 5. Models of imitative behavior
Type 6. ∗ - social influence models
Type 7. Models of «diffusion of
innovations» associated with the social opinion
formation
4. Oltarzhevskiy’s Methods [
Method
6. The Ministry of Russian Federation
for the Affairs of Civil Defence,
Emergency Situations and Disaster
Relief Methodology [
Theoretical background developed method
The proposed evaluation method of mass media manipulative influence on public
opinion is realized in 8 stages (Fig. 1): 1) Evaluation the financial costs; 2) Ranking
of reasons by the degree of their danger; 3) Determination the objectives of the
manipulation campaign (hereinafter - KMp); 4) Determination of the KMp tasks; 5)
Determination of strategies for the KMp implementation; 6) Selection the mass media
for manipulation; 7) Selection the manipulation method; 8) Estimation of
manipulative influence. Input data for the method are: the set of reasons for conducting KMp;
the set of dislocation places; the set of goals for KMp; the set of focus groups; set of
criteria for estimating parameters; the set of strategies for KMp; the set of mass
media; the set of manipulation methods and the set of «weight by criteria». Output data:
list of selected causes, goals, criteria, tasks, strategies, methods, mass media; values
of magnitude and effectiveness of manipulative influence. The realization of this
method allows to evaluate the magnitude of mass media manipulative influence on
public opinion [
Evaluation the effectiveness of manipulative actions is the preparatory stage for conducting the campaign. This stage is only necessary for the customer – to evaluate the financial efficiency of KMp. At this stage, from the whole mass media database it is necessary to select those mass media which, in the opinion of the expert, are suitable for the implementation of manipulative influence. First of all, it is necessary to determine the economic effect of advertising in selected mass media:
E ТD HT U P U D ,
100 where E – the economic effect of advertising; ТD – additional trade turnover under the advertising influence; НТ – trade margin on goods (measured in % to the realization price); UР – advertising costs; UD – additional expenses on the growth of goods turnover. The next relation ZP ZP ZO . gives an opportunity to evaluate the effec
ZO ZO tiveness of advertising in relation to the profits of the company, obtained from advertising ( ZP ) to profit before advertising ( ZO ).
Stage 1 – Evaluation the financial costs on KMp. Step 1 – Choosing the reasons for conducting KMp. At the first step of Stage 1 it is necessary to input a set of reason ( I ):
P i1 I {
Ii} {I1, I2,..., I p}, Ii I , i 1, P and experts choose those reasons (using voting method), which, in their opinion, require a KMp . After that experts go to step 2.
I1,I2. .In Database of reasons
I1,I2. .In r1,r2. .rn Database of regions Сi Gi r1,r2. .rn rj(t),cir j 1,I ui out from a financial point of view.
Stage 2 – Ranking of reasons by the degree of their danger. During the ranking of reasons by the degree of their danger, each expert are conducting pairwise comparison of reasons by the degree of their danger for KMp (step 1) and create the matrix Hr number, j – the reason number, r – the region number:
1, if Ii equal to Ii1; hirj 2, if Ii more dangerous than Ii1;
0, if Ii less dangerous than Ii1; Hr hij (i1,a) h21, ( jb) ... by experts. The set of objectives is a possible consequence of the reasons for conducting the KMp (step 1). Moreover, by experts are creating the set of focus group (who are the target of influence) ( G ): c i1 g i1 r i1 G {
Gi} {G1,G2,...,Gg}, Gi G, i 1, g , (step 2) and criteria ( Kr ):
Kr {
Kri} {Kr1, Kr2,..., Krr}, Kri Kr, i 1, r , that is, the parameters by which the objectives and tasks of the KMp will be selected.
As a result of the Stage 3 implementation, will be formed objectives, the focus groups who are the objects of influence are identified and the criteria (for choosing objectives and tasks) are selected.
Stage 4 – Determination of the KMp tasks. At the step 1, experts form a set of tasks ( A ), which are connected to the objectives of the KMP (the objectives were identified in step 3), for assessing the KMP's tasks:
A {
Ai} {A1, A2,..., Ay}, Ai A, i 1, y.
At the step 2, the proportion of agreed positive scores xvAi to the criteria of each v task of each agent Ai according to all the criteria is calculated: xvAi AviKri , i 1,v. aAiKri v As a result of Stage 4, the tasks to be achieved during KMp are formed.
Stage 5 – Determination of strategies for the KMp implementation. The objectives of manipulating different groups are made at different times ti and with different benefits. In accordance with the formulated objectives and tasks their strategies ( L ) Ci Li, Ai Li are selected and implemented. At the step 1, from the set of strategies experts select the strategy that require of the KMp conducting: L { m i1
Li} {L1, L2,..., Lm}, Li L, i 1, m.
3, if al ap, flp 2, if al ap, 1, if al ap.
At the step 2, the list of strategies are ranked: Step 2 – evaluation the effectiveness of manipulative actions can be presented as:
R cZRiiGi abZZRiiGiii , where aZRiiGi – a score of z mass media in g focus group in r region, As a result of Stage 5, it is formed a number of strategies (possibly more than 1) on which KMp will be conducted.
Stage 6 – Selection the mass media for manipulation. At the stage 6, it is necessary
to choose mass media ( Z ) which will be used during manipulative influences [
Then, it is necessary to conduct an analytical study of mass media with further evaluation of the information influence effectiveness. At the step 1, a set of mass media is formed:
Z {
Zi} {Z1, Z2,..., Zz}, Zi Z, i 1, z . z 1, Z , g 1,G, r 1, R, bZRi – a score of z mass media of population in r -region, i R cZiiGi – a compliance index of z mass media in g focus group in r region.
Thereafter, the mass media price matrix is created and stored in database of manipulation system:
d1Z Dzp dZ1 d1P , dP1 where dzp – publication price (unit of standard area, standard broadcast time etc.) in z mass media on р page (in р broadcast time etc.).
After that, an important action is the calculation of «cost per thousand» readers: eZiGi pRi
dZi p bZiRi cZiGiRi .
According to the different price in different cities (regions), the «cost per thousand» quantity will difference. So, ind index can be presented as indZGR and matrix IND converted into cube, but in our example, it is necessary to leave just two indices Z and G : where indzg – the influence of z mass media on g focus group or its segment.
The ratio of advantages in g focus group for each studied above j criteria of p j (k,h) for pair of mass media alternatives Ak , Ah can be presented as INDZP ind1Z
indZ1 ind1P , indP1 rkgj rhgj , if rkgj rhj , g p gj k, h m j
0 if not. where m j – the rating scale according to the j criteria, rkgj , rhgj – the value of the Ak , Ah options according to the j criteria in g focus group.
The ratio of advantages over a pair of alternatives ( Ak , Ah ) taking into account all considered criteria can be defined as:
J J rkgj rhgj , if rkgj rhgj ; pg k, h p gj k,h m j
j1 j1 0 if not.
The ratio of the dominance Ak alternative over Ah in g focus group can be presented by membership function Dg k, h which characterizes the dominance intensity of k over h mass media: Dg k, h pg k,h pg h,k , if pg k,h pg h,k ;
0 if not.
The best alternative corresponds to the condition: * Ak* max Dk1,,m* Ak 1 min max pk,hkl11,,..,m,l ph,k .
lk As a result of Stage 6, the mass media which according to the criteria has the highest rating will be chosen. Moreover, isn’t necessarily it will be one mass media for all disposition places. It is also possible to choose different mass media for different disposition places.
Stage 7 – Selection the manipulation method. In database the manipulative influence methods ( M ) are stored. These methods can be presented as:
x x e M { Mi} { { Mij}} {{M11, M12,..., M1e},{M21, M22,.., M2e}, i1 i1 j1
,...,{Mx1, Mx2,..., Mxex }}, (i 1, x, j 1,e) .
In database all methods are separated by certain characteristics and used by different mass media. Furthermore, each agent chooses the most effective method from the database that, in agent’s opinion can use by mass media. After that, the list of criteria for which the method selecting are conducting will be formed.
M ij k11i, j k2 2i, j k3 3i, j , i 1, I , j 1, J , gN where k1 «the value» of l criteria ( l 1, 2, 3 ), iij – criterion value of j operative manipulative influences method according to i strategy for l criteria.
As a result of Stage 7, manipulative influence methods which will be implemented by the mass media chosen in step 6 will be chosen.
Stage 8 – Estimation of manipulative influence. If the initial evaluation of g focus group is presented as bg ,then the task of manipulation is to change the group's opinion to bg qg , qg Qg , g N, where qg – the change of initial opinion, thus qg is the controlling influence.
As a result of the sequence of operational manipulative influences, the final opinion in some focus groups is formed: Bq T (b q), where qg – the initial opinion of focus group, q qg . The target function of public opinion modification can be represented as: Ф Bq, q max H (Bq ) C q, where H () – received benefits (profit, votes in elections, change in certain officials or government, etc.) by an organization in whose interests the manipulative influence is conducted, which depends on the change of public opinion, C() – costs for manipulative actions.
The task of management is to choose an acceptable management method that maximizes efficiency Ф Bq , q max. Then the value of operational influence can be determined by the ratio Di f ik xik xik 1, where f ik – a function (table or algorithm) that reflects the difference in scores xik xik1 in the amount of operational influence, for example, the volume and number of compromising newspaper articles or news releases on the TV channel. If xik xik1 , then Di f ik xik 1 xik . The effectiveness l of influence El in period k is determined in different ways, in particular, by the ratio: wlk wlk 1 xlk xlk 1 ,if (wlk wlk 1) ( xlk xlk 1) El k wxllkk 11 wxlklk , if (wlk 1 wlk ) (xlk 1 xlk ) , where wlk – influence assessment in the period k , xlk – the magnitudes of the produced influence of l type in the period k , l 1, L – influence type. 4
Experimental study & discussion based on example of
Ukrainian mass media Considering the network-centered concept involves data analyzing and gathering from different regions for obtaining results on manipulative influences, it is proposed to calculate the influence of the mass media and its efficiency as an average of 3 regions for 4 newspapers and 3 manipulation methods selected by experts on previous stages. The influence of selected mass media presented in Tab. 2, 4, 6, 8; the effectiveness of influence showed in Tab. 3, 5, 7, 9. The value of operational influence will be determined by the number of articles (expert estimate). n/a w10 w20 11 n/a w30 9 n/a w40 The tables present the influence of mass media and the value of manipulative influence.
In fig. 2 graphically depicts the ratio of the value of operational influence, that is, the number of articles, to the value of the effectiveness of manipulative influence. The smallest value of operational influence, namely, with the smallest number of articles that used manipu-lative methods, showed the mass media “Facty”: when the number of articles – 2, the effectiveness of manipulative influence equal to 28%. The other mass media “Segodny”, when the number of articles – 2; the effectiveness of manipulative influence equal to 14%. 5
In the paper the quantitative evaluation method of mass media manipulative influence on public opinion was developed. The method by means of evaluating financial expenditures, defining goals, objectives and strategies for manipulating, selecting mass media and classified methods of manipulation, based on the generated databases of causes, goals of the criteria, focus groups and mass media, allows to calculate the quantitative parameters that characterize the magnitude of manipulative mass media influences on public opinion. This method, in compare with analogs, could quantity evaluate a manipulative influence which realized by modern mass media and using manipulation influence methods on public opinion. The obtained results will be useful in information security field for evaluation harmful mass media influence on public opinion or on consciousness individuals. In the next research, it is going to conduct an experimental study of the developed method for its verification, correctness confirmation, as well as the establishment of the practical application possibility for raising the information and psychological safety level of citizens, society and the state. 6