North Korean Policy Elites - Defense Technical Information Center

ationally process it and draw reasonably appropriate conclusions. This is the model of the
“thinking person.” In recent years, research has supported another, more common-sense view;
namely, that most of the time people do not think very carefully about what they read, hear, and
see. They are exposed to it, they may attend to some of it, but somehow their interpretative
powers fall short of the ideal. Many a marketer has lamented the public’s weak response to his
creative offerings. Do most communications in fact fail to have any impact?
One of the newer cognitive models, the elaboration likelihood model, assumes that
people process information on two levels. 108 Information relating to important issues (such as
buying a house or a car) is carefully attended to and “elaborated” upon. Other information goes
in one ear and out the other. The effect of this “unelaborated” information is not nearly as strong
as the effect of elaborated information, but cumulatively, even this lightly processed information
has an effect. For example, not one of the thousands of automobile advertisements one sees in a
lifetime may motivate a person to go out and buy the advertised car; but when car-buying time
comes around, some automobile makes or models may be more favored than others because of
the cumulative effect of these “ignored” advertisements. It is quite possible that the same thing
happens with North Korean propaganda. Any given propaganda item may be easily dismissed as
blatantly false, especially by the elite, but the cumulative effect may shape a North Korean’s
attitude toward his own country and other countries, and thereby provide a cognitive context for
interpreting information. 109
How to summarize the main points about information reception and interpretation?
Getting information to people involves choosing appropriate messages and channels, and then
getting the information through the physical and cognitive filters that protect people from being
overwhelmed by their information environment. The difficult task is to present information in
such a way that it will be accepted by people who already have firm ideas that serve them
reasonably well. When information is presented that challenges basic beliefs, thereby triggering
108 The original source is Richard E. Petty and John T. Cacioppo, “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of
Persuasion,” pages 123-305 in Leonard Berkowitz, (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 19.
New York: Academic Press, 1986.
109 Symbolic convergence theory sounds depressingly dry, but its associated research methodology, “fantasy theme
analysis,” could be of interest to analysts of North Korea. The key observation here is that members of a group or
society use stories or fantasies to create and reinforce an identity, to provide guidelines on how to view outsiders,
to promote norms of behavior, and to motivate members to work toward group goals. An analysis of these stories,
often about the group’s founder or heroes, can provide a better understanding of how the group sees itself and
what it views as important. No society has a more elaborate repertory of (regime-manufactured) stories than North
Korea. Although these stories are usually viewed by outsiders as the regime’s rather crude attempt to gain
legitimacy, the stories can be examined as a lens through which the North Korean people view communications
coming from the outside world. See E. G. Bormann, “Symbolic Convergence Theory and Group Decision
Making,” pages 219-236 in R. Y. Hirokawa and M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and Group Decision Making.
Beverly Hills: Sage, 1986.
III-37