Created with Sketch.
59 minutes | 3 days ago
#37: Influence with Robert Cialdini
Dr. Robert Cialdini is an internationally recognized expert on the science of influence. His book Influence is one of the most influential business and psychology books of all time, selling over five-million copies worldwide. As a social psychologist, Cialdini has conducted foundational research on compliance, social norms, and helping behavior. But he is perhaps best known for boiling influence down to several key principles.He just released an updated and expanded edition of Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, and it’s well worth checking out! I was excited to talk with him about the new book, how he started studying influence, what made him write a book for the public at a time when academics stayed within their university walls, and how we can be effective communicators of social science findings. Things we mention in this episode:“Basking in reflected glory” (Cialdini et al., 1976)The “full cycle” approach to social psychology (Cialdini, 1980; Mortensen & Cialdini, 2010)Observing littering in a natural environment to study psychological questions (Cialdini & Baumann, 1981)Belonging to a group feels personal when your personal identity and group identity are fused (Swann & Buhrmester, 2015)People who are highly identified with a political party are more willing to hide evidence of tax fraud by a politician from their party (Ashokkumar, Galaif, & Swann, 2019)---------------Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/influence-with-robert-cialdini/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
43 minutes | 17 days ago
#36: Negotiation with Kwame Christian
Kwame Christian is an attorney and negotiation expert. He's the director of the American Negotiation Institute where he and his team offer training and consultation for a variety of negotiation needs. He serves as a professor for Otterbein University's MBA program and Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law.In his podcast, Negotiate Anything, Kwame talks to experts in negotiation and persuasion to bring insights to a wide audience. In our conversation, he shares that the podcast has been downloaded over 3 million times!He is also the author of the book Finding Confidence in Conflict: How to Negotiate Anything and Live Your Best Life. In it, he shares how to overcome obstacles that get in the way of effective conversations. For a glimpse, check out his TEDx Dayton talk, "Finding Confidence in Conflict."You can find the negotiation guides Kwame mentions in this episode at the ANI website: https://americannegotiationinstitute.com/negotiation-guides/In our conversation, Kwame helps define what negotiation is, the reason why people struggle with it, and how we can use practice and psychology to get better at it.---------------Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/negotiation-with-kwame-christian/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
42 minutes | a month ago
#35: Ambivalence with Iris Schneider
Dr. Iris Schneider studies the psychology of "ambivalence," which is when we can see both the pros and cons of something. Oftentimes research shows that ambivalence can be problematic, getting in the way of people being able to form a coherent view on something. However, Dr. Schneider suggests that there can be benefits to ambivalence if we're able to see it not as a challenge to overcome but a state to be embraced. Things we mentioned in this episode.For some good general resources for reading about the psychology of ambivalence, see: van Harreveld, Nohlen, & Schneider (2015); Schneider & Schwarz (2017)You can see people’s ambivalence by tracking the movement of their mouse as they choose whether something is “good” or “bad” (Schneider et al., 2015)Only a third of people’s everyday decisions are between two alternative options (Fischoff, 1991)Some people just tend to be more ambivalent than others, and it’s related to having less bias (Schneider et al., 2020; Simons et al., preprint)Lots of characteristics of people’s opinions can be considered either valuable or problematic, depending on your perspective (e.g., Rydell et al., 2006; Tormala et al., 2011)Identity-based motivations guide people’s interpretation of difficulty (e.g., Oyserman, 2015) Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/ambivalence-with-iris-schneider/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
48 minutes | a month ago
#34: Opinions of Ourselves with Ken DeMarree
Ken DeMarree studies how opinion science applies how we see ourselves. He’s an associate professor of psychology at the University at Buffalo. In our conversation, we talk about how opinion science can be used to understand things like self-esteem, how people sometimes desire opinions they currently disagree with, and how some people just tend to be pretty confident in their views. Things we mention in this episode:California’s Self-Esteem Task Force (Guardian; NYT; The Cut)The psychology of strong opinions can help us understand how people see themselves (DeMarree et al., 2007)More “accessible” self-esteem is more durable and impactful (DeMarree et al., 2010)Seeing yourself in both positive and negative ways makes your self-esteem more susceptible to influence (DeMarree et al., 2011)When we want an opinion we don’t already have, it makes us conflicted (DeMarree et al., 2014; 2017)Some people just tend to be more confident in their views than others (DeMarree et al., 2020) Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/opinions-of-ourselves-with-ken-demarree/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
49 minutes | 2 months ago
#33: Liking What Helps You with David Melnikoff
David Melnikoff studies how our goals affect how we feel about things. When stuff helps us reach a goal, we like it…even if it’s not the kind of thing we’d ordinarily like. In our conversation, we talk about what psychologists mean when they talk about people’s “attitudes,” how goals can affect those attitudes, and why all of this means that people can sometimes come to like immoral people. Things that come up in this episode:What is an “attitude”? (For more on this concept, check out this webpage.)“Instrumentality” and “action valence” affect how we feel about someone in the moment (Melnikoff, Lambert, & Bargh, 2019)Morality isn’t always a valued quality in other people (Melnikoff & Bailey, 2018) Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/liking-what-helps-you-with-david-melnikoff/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
46 minutes | 2 months ago
#32: Moralizing and Attention with Ana Gantman
Dr. Ana Gantman studies how people process moral stuff. She’s an assistant professor at Brooklyn College, and she finds that our attention is often drawn more quickly to morally relevant stimuli in our environment. More recently, she’s been looking into how our moral judgments collide with bureaucracy and how we can use moral psychology to address issues surrounding consent and sexual assault. Things we mention in this episode:The “moral pop-out” effect where moral stuff grabs our attention (Gantman & Van Bavel, 2014; Brady, Gantman, & Van Bavel, 2020)Moral pop-out seems to work like a motivational state because it goes away when needs for justice are satisfied (Gantman & Van Bavel, 2016)Using EEG to study the time course of moral perception (Gantman et al., 2020)The books The Utopia of Rules and Bullshit Jobs by David GraeberHow “phantom rules” can be selectively enforced when someone’s violated other social norms. Taking “consent pledges” before a party can get college students to moralize consent (The Daily Princetonian)Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/moralizing-and-attention-with-ana-gantman/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
51 minutes | 3 months ago
#31: The Language of Opinion with Matt Rocklage
Dr. Matt Rocklage studies the words we use to express opinions. He’s an assistant professor of marketing the University of Massachusetts-Boston. In our conversation, Matt talks about the Evaluative Lexicon, which is a tool he developed to quantify the language of opinion. Take an online review, feed it into the Evaluative Lexicon, and it’ll tell you how much the person liked or disliked the product and how much their emotions played a role in their opinion. His research with this tool has shown just how potent emotion can be and how we should approach studying language in psychology. Things we mention in this episode:The “Evaluative Lexicon” (Rocklage & Razio, 2015; Rocklage et al. 2018); you can learn more at: http://www.evaluativelexicon.com/ Emotion-based opinions tend to be stronger (Rocklage & Fazio, 2016; 2018; Rocklage & Luttrell, in press)The role of emotion in consumer reviews (Rocklage & Fazio, 2020)People turn to emotional language more when trying to be persuasive (Rocklage, Rucker, & Nordgren, 2018) Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/language-of-opinion-with-matt-rocklage/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
31 minutes | 3 months ago
#30: "Us vs. Them" with Jay Van Bavel
Jay Van Bavel studies how our social identities shape the way we see ourselves and the people around us. He’s an associate professor of psychology at New York University. In an upcoming book, he and his colleague, Dominic Packer, present social identity theory. It’s a classic theory in social psychology that has inspired tons of research and continues to give insight into the modern world. At its root, it’s the idea that people often adopt an “us vs. them” mindset, which fuels lots of conflict between groups. In our conversation, Jay shares the basic tenets and controversies surrounding social identity theory and the direction his own research lab is going.For a quick overview of Social Identity Theory, featuring Dr. Van Bavel, you can check out this YouTube video [13:36] I made.Things we mention in this episode:Dominic Packer’s research on identity and dissent.The pioneering work of John Turner and Henri Tajfel and the development of social identity theory.Marilynn Brewer’s “Optimal Distinctiveness Theory”Jay’s research on how social identities affect our thought and behavior in domains like politics (e.g., Van Bavel & Pereira, 2018) and social media (Brady, Crockett, & Van Bavel, 2020).According to Facebook’s global creative director, Andrew Keller, the average person scrolls through 300 feet of mobile content a day.Lilliana Mason’s book (Uncivil Agreement) applying social identity to politics. Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/social-identities-with-jay-van-bavel/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
55 minutes | 4 months ago
#29: Hype with Michael F. Schein
Michael F. Schein is a writer, speaker, and founder of the marketing agency, MicroFame Media. In his new book, The Hype Handbook, he explores the antics of historically successful “hype artists”—cult leaders, music promoters, propagandists, etc.—to extract 12 common strategies that get people excited about and committed to new ideas.In our conversation, we talk about how “hype” is or is not the same as “persuasion,” how much we’re able to learn from stories of historical hype artists, and the ethical and practical limits of hype.Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/hype-with-michael-f-schein/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
43 minutes | 4 months ago
#28: When Money Buys Happiness with Lara Aknin
Lara Aknin studies what makes people happy. In particular, she’s spent a lot of time looking at how being generous can improve one’s well-being. She is an associate professor of social psychology at Simon Fraser University, and you heard her a couple weeks ago on Opinion Science. Her work was featured on our episode on gift-giving, but she has so much interesting work that it seemed setting aside a whole episode for our entire conversation.Things that come up in this episode:College students were happier when spending money on others vs. on themselves (Dunn, Aknin, & Norton, 2008; for a replication see Aknin et al., 2020)The positive effects of spending on others extends around the world (Aknin et al., 2013), in small rural societies (Aknin et al., 2015; Aime et al., 2017), with children (Aknin, Hamlin, & Dunn, 2012), and among ex-offenders (Aknin et al., 2018).Giver-focused gifts promoted greater relationship closeness than recipient-focused gifts (Aknin & Human, 2015)For reviews of the effects of “prosocial spending,” see Aknin et al. (2018) and Dunn et al. (2020) Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/when-money-buys-happiness-with-lara-aknin/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
92 minutes | 4 months ago
BONUS: "Best" of Opinion Science (2020)
Although 2020 will be remembered mostly for annoyances and deeply tragic events, one thing that kept me going this year was starting this podcast. Being able to talk with friends, people I've long admired, and people I had only recently met was a real joy.I wanted to put together an episode with some notable moments in Opinion Science this year. It's not truly a "best of" per se because I really am attached to every episode! Although I was learning on the fly how to podcast, there's aspects of all of this year's episodes that I value.So instead, I've chosen some particularly meaningful episodes for me, fan favorites, and moments that highlight what this show is all about.If you're new to the show, this is a great place to start! And if you've been listening since the beginning, join me on some fun memories from this year.-AndyFeatured 2020 episodes:Episode 1: Word of Mouth with Jake TeenyEpisode 6: Film Criticism with Alissa WilkinsonEpisode 9: Systemic Racism with Phia SalterEpisode 15: Political Campaigning with Joe Fuld (*Hear the new season of his podcast)Episode 16: Implicit Bias with Mahzarin BanajiEpisode 19: Political Humor as Persuasion with Danna Young (*See her new TED Talk)Episode 20: The Cognitive Dissonance EpisodeEpisode 22: Political Persuasion with Alex CoppockEpisode 23: Polling Young Voters with Kristen Soltis Anderson
45 minutes | 5 months ago
#27: Giving and Getting Good Gifts
It’s that time of year when winter holidays send people on a buying spree as they collect gifts to give to every friend, family member, and acquaintance. And you’d think that after so many years of giving gifts for all sorts of holidays, we’d be pretty good at it. Right? Well, not according to research in psychology. In this episode, we explore the psychology of why giving to others is such a good thing to do, and also where gift givers go wrong. Along the way, we’ll pick up some tips for how to approach giving in a smarter, more effective way.Many guests in this episode!We hear from Laura and Bethany Sanders about childhood gifting go awry. Laura Sanders is a stand-up comedian and illustrator, so check out her work!Dr. Lara Aknin is an associate professor of Social Psychology at Simon Fraser University. She studies what makes people happy.Dr. Jeff Galak is an associate professor of Marketing at Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business. He also runs the YouTube channel, “Data Demystified.”Dr. Julian Giviis an assistant professor of Marketing at West Virginia University's John Chambers College of Business and Economics. He studies gift-giving. Research in this episode:Part I: Why give to others? Lara Aknin and her colleagues found that college students were happier when giving money to other people vs. spending on themselves (Dunn, Aknin, & Norton, 2008). She has replicated this finding all over the world, with kids, and other populations (see Dunn et al., 2020).Part II: How gift-givers and gift-recipients disagree.A. Gift-givers focus on the moment of giving whereas recipients are thinking more long-term (Galak, Givi, & Williams (2016)B. Gift-givers think price matters more than receivers do (Flynn & Adams, 2009)C. Givers avoid repeatedly giving the same thing, but recipients don’t mind (Givi, 2020)D. People opt to give sentimental gifts less often than receivers would prefer (Givi & Galak, 2017); giving something as a gift can also imbue it with sentimentality and make the affection for the gift last longer (Yang & Givi, 2015)E. Just ask people what they want (Gino & Flynn, 2011)F. Giver-centric gifts make people feel closer to each other, even though we think recipient-focused gifts are the most appropriate (Aknin & Human, 2015)Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/gift-giving-psychology/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
48 minutes | 5 months ago
#26: Intersectional Role Models in STEM with India Johnson and Eva Pietri
Two guests! Drs. Eva Pietri and India Johnson stop by to share the important work they’re doing together on the power of role models for underrepresented groups in STEM fields.Things that come up in this episode:Women and racial and ethnic minorities are under-represented in STEM fields (National Science Board, 2020)Encouraging identity-safety in STEM among Black (Johnson, Pietri, Fullilove, & Mowrer, 2019; Pietri, Johnson, & Ozgumus, 2018) and Latina women (Pietri, Drawbaugh, Lewis, & Johnson, 2019)Using videos to enhance relatability of scientists (Pietri, Johnson, Majid, & Chu, in press)Extending these ideas to encourage women to identify with male scientists (Pietri, Drawbaugh, Johnson, & Colvin, in press) Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/intersectional-role-models-in-stem-with-india-johnson-eva-pietri/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
47 minutes | 6 months ago
#25: Geography of Bias with Eric Hehman
Dr. Eric Hehman studies the geography of bias. Lots of research has looked at the prejudice that lives in an individual person’s head, but Eric looks at the average amount of bias in particular location. On average, some counties have more implicit bias than others, and some states have more bias than others. But what does it mean? That’s what Eric and I talk about this week!Things we mention in this episode:Zippia’s collection of fun maps, including Thanksgiving sides, pickle fandom, and sandwich preferences. Regional implicit biases are related to police use of force against African Americans in that region (Hehman, Flake, & Calanchini, 2018)Inspiration for Eric’s focus on regional bias (Motyl et al., 2014; Rae & Olson, 2015; Rentfrow et al., 2013)How same-sex marriage legislation affected anti-gay bias one state at a time (Ofosu, Chambers, Chen, & Hehman, 2019)Validating region-based measures of bias (Hehman, Calanchini, Flake, & Leitner, 2019)Searching for environmental features that relate a region’s level of bias (Hehman, Ofosu, & Calanchini, 2020)The “bias of crowds” model of implicit bias (Payne, Vuletich, & Lundberg, 2017)Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/geography-of-bias-with-eric-hehman/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
48 minutes | 6 months ago
#24: Persuasion via Story-Telling with Melanie Green
Melanie Green studies stories. She’s a professor of Communication at University of Buffalo, and for years she’s been looking into whether stories can serve to persuade people. Are stories just entertainment or can they change our minds? In this episode, we talk about stories, her research on persuasion, and the experience of being transported by a story.Topics that come up in this episode:People differ in their “transportability,” which is associated with their receptiveness to narrative persuasion (Mazzocco et al., 2010)Narrative persuasion depends on transportation (Green & Brock, 2000)Meta-analyses of narrative persuasion studies (Braddock & Dillard, 2016; Oschatz & Marker, 2020; Zebregs et al., 2015)Research by Jeff Niederdeppe’s lab on story-telling in health communicationStories continue to be persuasive after proven false (Green & Donahue, 2011)People make judgments of a person’s warmth or competence depending on whether they tell stories (Clark, Green, & Simons, 2019)Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/persuasion-via-story-telling-with-melanie-green/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
50 minutes | 7 months ago
#23: Polling Young Voters with Kristen Soltis Anderson
Kristen Soltis Anderson is a pollster and co-founder of Echelon Insights. For five years, she co-hosted the podcast, The Pollsters, she hosts the SiriusXM show, The Trendline, and the Fox Nation show What Are the Odds? She also regularly appears on television to discuss the latest polls.She’s spent a lot of time looking at polls of Millennials in particular. In 2015, she published her first book, The Selfie Vote: Where Millennials Are Leading America (And How Republicans Can Keep Up), in which she reviews data on millennials’ tendency to vote for Democrats and the unique features of modern life that may be driving this shift.In this episode, we have a great conversation about her work, what political polling can reveal, and how young voters’ preferences may affect the 2020 U.S. election…and other elections to come.Some things that come up in this episode:Generation Z enjoys mocking Millennials (Buzzfeed)The Bennington College study of political attitudes over one’s lifetime (Newcomb, 1943; Alwin, Cohen, & Newcomb, 1992)Kristen’s new report on Generation Z and Millennials’ optimism for the future (Walton Family Foundation, 2020)Check out my new audio course on Knowable: "The Science of Persuasion."For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/polling-young-voters-with-kristen-soltis-anderson/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
41 minutes | 7 months ago
#22: Political Persuasion with Alex Coppock
Alex Coppock is an assistant professor of Political Science at Yale University. His research considers what affects people's political beliefs, especially the kinds of messages people regularly encounter--TV ads, lawn signs, Op-Eds, etc. In this episode, he shares the findings of a big, new study that just came out as well as what it means for how persuasion works. Things that came up in this episode:A new study testing dozens the efficacy of dozens of political ads (Coppock, Hill, & Vavreck, 2020)The long-lasting effects of newspaper op-eds on public opinion (Coppock, Ekins, & Kirby, 2018)The effects of lawn signs on vote outcomes (Green, Krasno, Coppock, Farrer, Lenoir, & Zingher, 2016)Framing effects in persuasion (for an overview, see Chong & Druckman, 2007)The sleeper effect (see here for an overview)For a transcript of this episode, visit: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/political-persuasion-with-alex-coppock/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
47 minutes | 7 months ago
#21: More Influence Than You Realize with Vanessa Bohns
Vanessa Bohns studies the difference between how much influence people have and how influence they think they have. On the podcast, we talk about her studies, why people underestimate their influence, and whether this means we should try asking for more than we do now.If you sit tight until next year, Dr. Bohns has a book coming out called You Have More Influence than You Think.A few things that come up in our conversation:For a general overview of Dr. Bohns’ research on this topic, you can check out this article in Harvard Business Review or her review in Current Directions in Psychological Science.People underestimate how many people they have to ask in order to get someone to agree to do something (Flynn & Bohns, 2008).People even underestimate their influence in getting people to do ethically questionable things (Bohns, Roghanizad, & Xu, 2014).We don’t realize how uncomfortable it is for people to say no to requests (Bohns & Flynn, 2010).The influence process is different between in-person versus emailed requests (Roghanizad & Bohns, 2017).People’s biases about influence even extend to how they think about unwanted romantic advances (Bohns & DeVincent, 2019).We break down the difference between the “spotlight effect” and the “invisibility cloak” bias.Tory Higgins’ “saying is believing” effect shows how much power audiences have (Higgins & Rholes, 1978).Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
2 minutes | 8 months ago
New Episodes on the Way!
Just a quick word about new episodes on the way and a switch to biweekly shows. Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
54 minutes | 8 months ago
BONUS: Good Accidents with Elliot Aronson
Elliot Aronson has seen a long and influential career in social psychology. Aronson got his PhD in 1959 from Stanford University, working with Leon Festinger on some of the first experiments testing dissonance theory. He authored a celebrated social psychology textbook, now in its twelfth edition, and he pioneered the research on the jigsaw classroom--"a cooperative learning technique that reduces racial conflict among school children, promotes better learning, improves student motivation, and increases enjoyment of the learning experience."Two weeks ago, I released a big episode on cognitive dissonance (check it out!), which pulled together interviews with several people who are experts in the field. Elliot Aronson was one of those experts, and I'm excited to share our full conversation with you this week. We talk dissonance but Elliot also shares how he became a social psychologist and what it takes to run a high-impact experiment.Check out Elliot's writing:The Role of Cognitive Dissonance in the Pandemic: A recent article in the Atlantic by Elliot Aronson and Carol TavrisThe Social Animal: Elliot's social psychology textbookMistakes Were Made (But Not By Me): A popular book about cognitive dissonance and other biases.Not By Chance Alone: Elliot's autobiographyAge of Propaganda: The Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion
Terms of Service
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
© Stitcher 2021