Page 61 - How_Children_Learn_To_Hate_Their_Parents

The Message May Be More Important Than the Messenger:
The link between the communicator and the listener is rather apparent in the anecdote above, but credibility is not even a prerequisite for attitude change. It has been shown that even non- credible communicators can produce influence on listeners if the message given is consistent. The message may be remembered and the communicator, and the fact that the communicator was not credible may be forgotten (Cook & Flay, 1978; Grunder, 1978; Pratkanis, 1988). This is sometimes referred to as a “sleeper effect.” The fact that people will believe things without being able to remember where the heard it or who said it is important. Apparently, who said it and whether it was said by someone whose opinion is trusted fades before the message does.
In relation to children refusing to visit their parents, there can be many communicators around children delivering the same message. A parent’s boyfriend, girlfriend, or social friend who may have no credibility to a child whatsoever may repeat the same message the parent does in casual conversation around the child. If the message is consistent with other messages the child hears, the credibility of the source may be irrelevant and the message given another reinforcer of negative perceptions about the co- parent.
Credibility and trustworthiness go hand in hand. Here is where the subtle effects of parent’s statements to children may have powerful effects on their choice to visit or not visit with a parent.
The preferred parent often communicates to their children with “double messages.” Here are a few examples.
61