HIDDEN PSYCHOLOGICAL MECHANISMS OF MANIPULATION OF MASS CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE TEXTS OF MODERN MEDIA

Dolganina V.V.¹, Koltsova I.V.², Shirvanyan A.E.³

Dolganina V.V.

Stavropol State Pedagogical Institute
e-mail: vera.dolganina@xmail.ru

Koltsova I.V.

Stavropol State Pedagogical Institute
e-mail: kycher-1979@mail.ru

Shirvanyan A.E.

Stavropol State Pedagogical Institute
e-mail: arevik-83@mail.ru

Introduction

In the modern world, the audience's attention is becoming the primary resource and "currency" of the future. An individual's ability to manage their own attention and critically perceive information directly correlates with their level of cognitive freedom. In a climate of information overload, the media are one of the most powerful tools for psychologically controlling attention and, consequently, manipulating the consciousness of the masses. Currently, we are seeing an increase in negative trends associated with the formation of simplified stereotypes in the mass consciousness, the erosion of value orientations, and the introduction of certain behavioral models, which highlights the need to identify the hidden mechanisms of such influence.

 

Methodology and methods

The theoretical and methodological basis of the study is formed by works in the field of psychology of influence (S. Buzarnescu [2], E.L. Dotsenko [4],
R.V. Patyukova [7]), cognitive linguistics (V.I. Zabotkina [5],
E.M. Pozdnyakova [5], L.A. Furs [8]), and theories of mass communications
(G. Schiller [9], H. Naom [10]).

The work used a range of research methods:

— theoretical analysis of scientific literature on the problem of manipulation of mass consciousness;

— systematization and classification of identified mechanisms and strategies of influence;

— elements of conceptual analysis for describing cognitive mechanisms (metaphor, metonymy, specification);

— interpretative analysis to identify implicit meanings and psychological «targets» of influence.

The aim of the article is to theoretically analyze the hidden psychological mechanisms underlying the manipulation of mass consciousness through the texts of modern media.

 

Theoretical review

The concept of manipulation is at the center of contemporary social and humanitarian research. In the works of Russian researchers, manipulation is understood as a form of spiritual influence, hidden domination carried out by force, and control of a person's inner world [1]. The most comprehensive definition is provided by E.L. Dotsenko [4], who views manipulation of consciousness as "a type of psychological influence in which the manipulator's skill is used to covertly introduce into the psyche of the recipient goals, desires, intentions, relationships, or attitudes that do not coincide with those the recipient currently possesses." He also emphasizes that this influence is aimed at changing the direction of another person's activity and is performed so skillfully that it goes unnoticed [4, p. 52].

The key characteristic of manipulation is its hidden nature: as G. Schiller emphasized [9], «to achieve success, manipulation must remain unnoticed.» In the linguistic tradition, manipulation is considered as one of the types of speech influence, and
O.N. Bykova [3] defines linguistic manipulation of public consciousness with the help of the media as one of the most pressing and least studied problems of the modern culture of speech communication.

An important theoretical distinction is that between manipulation and propaganda. While propaganda aims to overtly shape public opinion and often includes direct appeals or calls to action, manipulation involves influence that is unaware of the recipient [2]. In real media practice, however, these phenomena are often intertwined and mutually reinforcing.

Hidden mechanisms of manipulation in modern media are aimed at suppressing critical thinking and programming audience behavior through appeals to emotions rather than logic. Modern research in cognitive linguistics allows us to identify the underlying mechanisms of information processing that are activated by manipulative influence. L.A. Furs [8], using data from news publications, identifies cognitive mechanisms such as specification, contrast, gradation, conceptual metonymy, metaphor, and metaphtonymy, as well as instances of interaction between various mechanisms. Let's examine each of these in more detail.

The mechanism of specification involves intentionally narrowing or, conversely, expanding the scope of a concept to create a desired assessment. The author of the text can present a specific case as a pattern (generalization) or, conversely, describe a general problem through a single, emotionally charged episode. As a result, the reader develops a distorted perception of the scale of the phenomenon.

Opposition structures the worldview according to the binary principle of "us versus them." In news reports, this is realized through a rigid division of participants into conflicting groups, where one side is imbued with positive connotations and the other with negative ones. This polarized perception blocks the ability to see the complexity of the situation, imposing a simplified model of reality.

Gradation is a technique based on varying the intensity of a characteristic or evaluation, often through the selection of words with varying degrees of expressiveness (euphemisms or dysphemisms). By gradually increasing or decreasing the intensity of a word throughout the text, the author manipulates the audience's emotional state, leading them to a predetermined conclusion.

Conceptual metonymy transfers an entire complex of meanings (a frame) from one entity to another based on their contiguity. A classic example is replacing specific people with the name of a country or city ("The Kremlin believes," "Kyiv banned"). This technique depersonalizes responsibility or, conversely, imbues an abstract concept with human qualities.

Metaphor serves as a tool for modeling reality, comprehending complex phenomena through simple and understandable images (such as medical, military, and theatrical metaphors). Metaphor doesn't simply embellish a text; it sets a framework for perception, dictating to the audience how to think about a problem and what solutions will be considered "natural.".

Metaphtonymy is a complex hybrid of metaphor and metonymy, where one trope merges into the other. In journalism, this creates a multilayered image that is difficult to critically analyze, as it operates on several cognitive levels simultaneously.

V.I. Zabotkina and E.M. Pozdnyakova [5] propose examining manipulation through the lens of conceptual projections and cognitive biases. The researchers are developing a multi-domain integrative mega-model of media manipulation, the application of which facilitates an understanding of cognitive vulnerabilities in mass communication. This approach helps explain why the same techniques are effective for wide audiences—they appeal to universal characteristics of cognitive information processing.

The effectiveness of manipulative influence is also determined by the psychological characteristics of perception. R.V. Patyukova and
N.N. Olomskaya [7] identifies such techniques as mental programming, disinformation, omission, mass suggestion, and rumor-mongering. Implicit information—that portion of the text's content that isn't directly expressed but can be extracted by the recipient—plays a key role in this process. It is precisely thanks to implicit meanings that manipulation remains hidden and effective.

At the macro level, the analysis of manipulation strategies proposed by
H. Naom [10] allows us to systematize approaches to managing public consciousness. Among them, we can highlight:

A distraction strategy in which the public is distracted from important socio-economic issues by a flood of irrelevant information.

The problem-reaction-solution strategy, where a problem is artificially created to provoke the desired reaction from society, which is then used to pass unpopular measures.

A gradual implementation strategy (or "boiling the frog"), which involves slowly and imperceptibly introducing unwanted changes.

Infantilization of the audience, that is, addressing the people as children, using primitive arguments and symbols.

An appeal to emotion rather than reason, which blocks the ability to critically analyze.

From a psychological perspective, manipulation is a situation created to influence the behavior of an individual or group. According to
S. Buzarnescu [2] argues that manipulation distorts the truth through false arguments, appealing to irrational areas of consciousness, which operates at a mass level regardless of the actual state of affairs. In a context where society is overwhelmed by information from biased sources, the existence of independent communication channels is more important than ever.

Conclusions

The conducted theoretical analysis allows us to draw a conclusion about the complex, multi-level nature of hidden psychological mechanisms of manipulation of mass consciousness in the texts of modern media.

Cognitive mechanisms (specification, contrast, gradation, conceptual metaphor, and metonymy) create vulnerable information processing structures. They don't simply distort individual facts; they restructure the recipient's very model of reality, creating perceptual frameworks that benefit the manipulator.

Linguistic techniques and strategies (infantilization of the audience, distraction, the "problem-reaction-solution" strategy) serve as tools for implementing cognitive distortions at the textual level. They are aimed at simplifying a complex picture of the world and blocking rational analysis.

Psychological mechanisms (reducing critical thinking through appeals to emotions, stereotypes, and implicit meanings) ensure the "entry" of manipulative attitudes into individual consciousness and their reinforcement. Influencing the emotional sphere makes information less susceptible to logical verification.

A promising direction for further research is the empirical verification of the described mechanisms using specific media texts (content analysis, experiment), as well as the study of ways to increase the audience’s cognitive resilience to manipulative influence through the development of media literacy skills.

Literature

• Bessonov B.N. Ideology of spiritual suppression. – M.: Moscow University Publishing House, 2008. – 296 p.
• Buzarnescu S. Speech manipulation as a tool for controlling consciousness // Russian Studies without Borders. – 2020. – Vol. 4. – No. 4. – P. 54–62.
• Bykova O.N. Language manipulation // Theoretical and applied aspects of speech communication: Bulletin of the Russian Rhetorical Association. – Krasnoyarsk, 1999. – Issue 1 (8). – P. 99–103.
• Dotsenko E.L. Psychology of manipulation: phenomena, mechanisms and defense. – St. Petersburg: Rech, 2003. – 304 p.
• Zabotkina V.I., Pozdnyakova E.M. Manipulator and manipulated: distortion of cognitive processes in media discourse // Issues of cognitive linguistics. - 2025. - No. 4. - P. 44-56.
• Moiseenko D.A. Hidden means of influencing mass consciousness in media texts [Electronic resource] // Bulletin of the Russian New University. Series "Man in the Modern World". - 2019. - No. 3. - URL: http://vestnik-rosnou.ru/чел-в-средном-мире-human-modern-world/2019/3/86 (date of access: 02.03.2026). - DOI 10.25586/RNU.V925X.19.03.P.086.
• Patyukova R.V., Olomskaya N.N. Methods and techniques of linguistic manipulation in media texts // Bulletin of the Volga University named after V.N. Tatishchev. - 2020. - No. 4. - P. 115-122.
• Furs L.A. Cognitive mechanisms of manipulative influence in media discourse // Bulletin of the Russian State University for the Humanities. Series "Literary criticism. Linguistics. Cultural studies". - 2025. - No. 3. - P. 227-234.
• Schiller G. Manipulators of consciousness / translated from English – M.: Mysl,
  – 326 pp.

10. Naomi H. (2000). The gentle art of verbal self-defense at work. Prentice Hall Press. 320 p.

References

1. Bessonov BN. (2008). Ideology of spiritual suppression[The ideology of spiritual suppression]. Moscow University Press. 296 p.
2. Buzzarnescu S. (2020). Speech manipulation as a tool for mind control. Russistika bez granits, 4(4), pp. 54-62.
3. Bykova ON. (1999). Linguistic manipulation. In Theoretical and applied aspects of speech communication: Bulletin of the Russian Rhetorical Association(Iss. 1, pp. 99-103).
4. Dotsenko EL. (2003). Psychology of Manipulation: Phenomena, Mechanisms, and Defenses[The psychology of manipulation: Phenomena, mechanisms, and protection]. 304 p.
5. Zabotkina V.I., & Pozdnyakova, E.M. (2025). The manipulator and the manipulated: Distortion of cognitive processes in media discourse. Questions of cognitive linguistics, (4), pp. 44-56.
6. Moiseenko DA. (2019). Hidden means of influencing mass consciousness in media texts. Bulletin of the Russian New University. Series "Chelovek in the Modern World"«, (3). http://vestnik-rosnou.ru/человек-в-современном-мире-human-modern-world/2019/3/86. doi:10.25586/RNU.V925X.19.03.P.086
7. Patyukova RV, & Olomskaya, NN. (2020). Methods and techniques of linguistic manipulation in media texts. Bulletin of Volzhsky University named after V.N. Tatishchev, (4), pp. 115-122.
8. Furs LA. (2025). Cognitive mechanisms of manipulative influence in media discourse. Russian State University of the Russian Federation Bulletin. Series: Literary Studies. Linguistics. Cultural Studies«, (3), pp. 227-234.
9. Schiller, H. (1980). Manipulators of consciousness[The mind managers]. Mysl. (Original work published 1973)
10. Naomi H. (2000). The gentle art of verbal self-defense at work. Prentice Hall Press. 320 p.