Question

social psychologist betsy levy paluck has used radio dramas in post - genocide rwanda to test how mass media can reshape intergroup relations. in one widely cited experiment, some villages received a serialized program whose storylines modeled cooperation between formerly hostile groups, while others received a health - themed program with no reconciliation content. surveys and behavioral games suggested that the reconciliation drama did little to alter listeners private feelings toward other groups, but it substantially shifted what they believed their neighbors considered acceptable, making public expressions of intolerance seem less normal. paluck argues that policymakers who judge such interventions solely by whether they \change hearts\ risk missing their most immediate effect: the quiet redefinition of social rules that govern what people dare to say and do in public.
10
mark for review
based on the text, paluck would most likely agree with which statement?
a because her rwandan radio experiment showed little movement in private attitudes, paluck believes that policymakers should devote their resources to non - media strategies rather than relying on dramas to influence behavior.
b unless a media program uproots listeners long - standing prejudices, it cannot claim to have improved intergroup relations, no matter how much it shifts public expectations about what remarks are appropriate.
c a reconciliation campaign that leaves peoples inner feelings unchanged may still matter if it quietly alters what they think their neighbors will tolerate saying or doing toward other groups in public.
d lasting reconciliation, in palucks view, begins with transforming individuals deepest convictions; changes in what people think counts as socially acceptable will follow naturally after those inner attitudes have been revised.

Explanation:

• Option A: The text says the drama had a substantial effect on public behavior norms, so Paluck wouldn't suggest abandoning media strategies. Eliminate A.
• Option B: Paluck argues that focusing only on "changing hearts" (private attitudes) misses the immediate effect on public social rules. So she doesn't think uprooting prejudices is necessary for improving intergroup relations. Eliminate B.
• Option C: The experiment showed the reconciliation drama didn't change private feelings but changed what people thought neighbors found acceptable, redefining social rules. This matches Paluck's argument that such interventions matter even without changing hearts.
• Option D: Paluck says policymakers who judge by "changing hearts" miss the immediate effect, implying lasting reconciliation doesn't start with transforming inner convictions. Eliminate D.

Answer:

C. A reconciliation campaign that leaves people’s inner feelings unchanged may still matter if it quietly alters what they think their neighbors will tolerate saying or doing toward other groups in public.