Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret, Grenoble IAE Graduate School of Management and Marie-Claire Wilhelm, Grenoble IAE Graduate School of Management
“Enabling demographic renewal”: the phrase used by President Emmanuel Macron to describe his plan to boost the birth rate and combat infertility has sparked strong reactions. The aim here is not to judge the merits of this plan, which was announced during his January 16, 2024, press conference. Our goal is to analyze what this phrase reveals about the difficulty decision-makers—particularly government officials—have in understanding the psychology of behavior (and behavioral change). Without this understanding, they prove incapable of determining which conditions and characteristics must be met for persuasive communication to be effective.
This tendency had already become apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic, with numerous statements and incentives or coercive measures that yielded mixed results (sometimes causing significant collateral damage, such as a sharp rise in anxiety that could even lead to symptoms reminiscent of post-traumatic stress disorder).
Emmanuel Macron’s statement regarding “demographic rearmament” to create “a stronger France” “by boosting the birth rate” could be perceived as reactionary. It sparked outrage among many political figures, particularly on the left of the political spectrum, but also more broadly among various feminist organizations and groups concerned with women’s and family rights. This choice of wording overshadowed certain measures that might have been received more favorably (for example, the plan to combat infertility that some reproductive specialists had been awaiting) and diminished the impact of a vision that could have had a positive connotation (life through future births).
Fear-mongering, war-mongering rhetoric
Regardless of any judgment on the merits of the case, the terminology used partly explains these reactions and signs of resistance. First of all, because of the warlike rhetoric. Historian Marine Rouch has thus identified “a ‘macho and warlike’ semantics that is by no means innocuous.”
The warlike nature of the metaphor has sparked numerous reactions
Already invoked during the COVID-19 pandemic, this war-like vocabulary—with its references in France to World War I and World War II—had made a strong impression at the time (“We are at war,” Emmanuel Macron had insisted). Implicitly and symbolically as well, the idea of rearmament evokes war and can be a source of anxiety—all the more so in the current context, where wars and armed conflicts are reigniting, all over the world and particularly on the European continent, fears we thought had been forgotten.
This choice is harmful, because bellicose rhetoric fosters anxiety-inducing imagery. When people are afraid, their unconscious response is often a psychological defense mechanism of avoidance or denial. In other words, it is a defensive reaction intended to reduce the psychological discomfort they feel, but which has the opposite effect of what is intended. In fact, coping with a stressful situation requires effort—particularly cognitive effort—and what is known as an adaptation strategy. A stressed individual may choose to ignore reality, distort it, or even discredit the source of the information in order to protect themselves psychologically. These reactions, of course, undermine persuasive effectiveness.
A patronizing and moralizing tone
The message was also perceived as patronizing. Some interpreted it as implying that women were not mature enough to make their own decisions regarding childbirth. This was seen as an “attempt to control women’s bodies” and a desire to “put women’s wombs at the service of the state.” “Leave our uteruses alone!” declared Anne-Cécile Mailfert, president of the Women’s Foundation.
This message was also conveyed through top-down communication, whose directive—even authoritarian—nature is evident in the term “pro-birth directives,” which has been used repeatedly in this context. As a result, the message—which was intended to be encouraging—had all the makings of triggering reactance (a psychological defense mechanism) because it appeared to threaten personal freedom. Green Party Representative Sandrine Rousseau reactedas follows:
"Every woman is free to choose whether or not to have children," and
"Women can do absolutely whatever they want with their bodies."
Furthermore, the statement came from a government official—a group toward which the French are becoming increasingly distrustful. This lack of trust in the speaker could only serve to strengthen resistance by undermining the perceived credibility of the source of the message.
The Delicate Use of Social Norms
Similarly, a moral component emerges from this motivational discourse. Whether invoked deliberately or unintentionally, individual responsibility is thus linked to a duty of reproduction for every French man and woman. This “good” behavior appears, more or less explicitly, as the key to claiming the status of a “good” citizen. However, encouraging compliance with social norms is inseparable from individual moral responsibility. Motivational messaging aimed at boosting the birth rate therefore seeks to lead recipients to conform to what is presented as the norm of the group or community. As a result, the target audience feels social pressure. Individuals exposed to this form of social influence will therefore seek to conform in order to gain social approval or avoid social disapproval.
[More than 85,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletters to better understand the world’s major issues. Subscribe today]
However, explicit or implicit references to social norms must be used with caution. On the one hand, some targets who have already internalized a moral norm consistent with their values—such as the norm of having children—may ultimately be put off by attempts at persuasion, particularly if those attempts are perceived as manipulative. They may also feel that their individual freedom is being threatened and develop situational reactance.
Furthermore, appealing to individual responsibility can conflict with the perception that the message being conveyed is patronizing. It is indeed paradoxical to ask the target audience to behave like responsible adults and, “at the same time,” deliver a message that is perceived as patronizing. Once again, the contradiction in perceived intentions undermines the desired persuasion.
Furthermore, there are two types of norms. On the one hand, there are prescriptive norms—based on the prospect of social rewards or sanctions. On the other hand, there are descriptive norms—which result from what members of the community do and what is considered “normal” behavior. This second type of norm relies heavily on example. However, on this point, Emmanuel Macron is unable to present himself as a role model. This weakens the effect of the descriptive norm and may seem paradoxical, as the feminist collective Nous Touteswas quick to point out:
"A 46-year-old cisgender man with no children who comes here to lecture us on how we should use our uteruses…"
Furthermore, invoking social or moral norms risks triggering negative emotions in those who cannot or will not follow them—guilt and shame, in particular. These are negative emotional responses that can, in turn, trigger defensive behaviors, avoidance, denial, or even the well-known “boomerang effect”— taking the exact opposite stance of what is being recommended.
Is trust the cornerstone of persuasion?
Consequently, as philosopher Cristina Bicchieri points out, if one hopes to persuade others by employing all these mechanisms of social influence, nothing should be overlooked. In particular, Bicchieri emphasizes the need to:
"Predicting how people will interpret a given context, which cues will stand out as salient, and how specific cues are linked to certain norms."
As David Simard, a researcher in the philosophy of health, points out, the French have a complex and ambiguous relationship with authority and the state. Prone to dissent, they value individual freedom but sometimes overlook its corollary: individual responsibility. Similarly, they resent being told what to do but are quick to criticize the government for failing to establish and/or enforce rules. This makes the task of motivational communication even more complicated, especially at a time when trust in elites, the media, science, and politicians seems to have been seriously eroded.
However, when it comes to health-related communication (which includes topics such as fertility and infertility), social psychologists Gabriele Prati, Luca Pietrantoni, and Bruna Zani have shown that this trust is a key factor in persuasive effectiveness.
If we hope to persuade the French to have more children, we must first and foremost restore their confidence… This seems to require, first and foremost, a better understanding of behavioral psychology.
Marie-Laure Gavard-Perret, Professor of Management, Grenoble IAE, CERAG Laboratory, specialist in social marketing and persuasive and preventive communication. Co-director of the Marketing in the Service of Society (M2S) Research Chair at Grenoble IAE, Grenoble IAE Graduate School of Management and Marie-Claire Wilhelm, Associate Professor at theUniversité Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble INP, CERAG, co-director of the “Marketing in the Service of Society” (M2S) Research Chair at Grenoble IAE, Grenoble IAE Graduate School of Management
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.