Chapter 16: METHODS OF PERSUASION

       BUILDING CREDIBILITY
       USING EVIDENCE
       REASONING
       COMMON FALLACIES
       MOTIVATIONAL APPEALS

SPECIFIC METHODS of persuasion

When is an audience persuaded?
When...

...there is a perception of credibility
...they are won over by evidence
...they are convinced by reasoning
...their emotions are touched

BUILDING CREDIBILITY

COMPETENCE: influenced by perception of the speaker
including the speaker's:
* sociability, dynamism, physical appearance, competence, character

COMPETENCE: perception of knowledge, intelligence

CHARACTER: sincerity, trustworthiness, concern for audience
with these come 3 kinds of credibility:

INITIAL CREDIBILITY: before you begin speaking
* We saw you speak before and have opinions and expectations

DERIVED CREDIBILITY: produced during speech
* everything you say and do
* all the supporting material you present
* evidence, reasoning, emotional appeal

TERMINAL CREDIBILITY: what you have immediately after the speech

* credibility important to every facet of speaking
* fluctuates during your speech
* fluctuates during semester

INITIAL credibility: we saw you speak
DERIVED: how well you do; support, reasoning, appeals
TERMINAL: carries into next speech

Do all you can to enhance your credibility

* appear capable and trustworthy
* be organized
* use good supporting evidence; sound reasoning
* use clear, vivid language
* use dynamic delivery
* advertise your competence

• connect with audience
• show you have common ground
• recognize their values
• acknowledge their objections
• speak with conviction

---

USING EVIDENCE

EXAMPLES: illustrate and highlight the material; gets the audience involved
use many brief or extended examples

STATISTICS: numbers to back up claims
* specific or cumulative
* enhances credibility
* explain statistics; interpret them; use comparison

TESTIMONY: the words of someone we can believe in
* expert & peer
* quotes / paraphrasing

Two major concerns:
* make sure reasoning is sound
* get listeners to agree

TYPES OF REASONING

• DEDUCTIVE

• reasoning from a general conclusion to specific supporting cases
  • example: you believe your company should provide childcare
  • general conclusion: providing childcare will improve employee satisfaction
  • specific cases: cite several other companies that do provide childcare and evidence of their employee satisfaction
• often phrased in this manner:
  • major premise: people who crash diet instead of changing eating habits do not retain weight loss.
  • minor premise: you want to retain weight loss
  • conclusion: avoid crash dieting
• often more appropriate for audiences likely to be sympathetic with the general conclusion

• INDUCTIVE

• reasoning from specific cases to a general conclusion
  • example: you believe your company should provide childcare
  • specific cases: cite several other companies that do provide childcare and evidence of their employee satisfaction
  • conclusion: propose that providing childcare here will improve employee satisfaction
• often more appropriate for audiences likely to be hostile with the conclusion

• ANALOGICAL

• reasoning by analogy
  • used to explain and clarify
  • used to show "practicality"
  • does not provide absolute proof, because compared items may be alike but are not identical.
• ask of your analogical reasoning:
  • are objects of comparison essentially alike
  • are they more alike than different?
  • are differences significant?

• CAUSAL

• reasoning that implies a causal link between items
• if using this reasoning, be sure that:
  • events occur together consistently
  • cause consistently precedes effect
  • cause sufficient to produce effect itself
  • a third factor is not involved

FALLACIES TO AVOID

• HASTY GENERALIZATION

• Drawing conclusion on too small a sample.
  • example: " A survey of students in an inner-city school found that 20% of the students carry handguns. We must have a state-wide implementation of gun detectors at all our state schools."
  • example: arguing for the closure of a food chain because of an incident of salmonella poisoning at one store.

• BEGGING THE QUESTION

• Asserts that something is because it is; restates the idea as the reason.
  • example: "Mary is a good driver because she has never had an accident"

• SLIPPERY SLOPE

• assumes that once thing happens, it will invariable create a "cascade" effect of events
  • example: Domino theory to justify the Vietnam war. " If Vietnam falls to communism, all of Southeast Asia will be lost."
  • example: Feminism will lead to the destruction of the American Family
  • example: smoking marijuana will lead to stronger drugs

• RED HERRING

• an argument where the speaker introduces unrelated misdirecting material that while it might engage or enlist the audience, it really confuses the primary issue.
  • example: "To persuade my audience that wearing helmets should be mandatory for motorcyclists"
  • excerpt: " ...the real problem is not the lack of helmets; it's that bikers don't ride well and too many drivers don't look out for them...
    • If the issue is requiring helmets, how they drive is not directly related
  • example: banning handguns: "Guns don't kill people; people kill people"
    • Not only is this reasoning by slogan, it misdirects from banning handguns to murder, violence and social issues.
  • example: pro-choice advocates discrediting the anti-abortion movement by calling proponents "terrorists."

• FALSE DIVISION or false dilemma or false dichotomy

• creating an either or division where there is none
  • example: "the only way to reduce national debt is reduce spending or increase. taxes"
  • example: America, love it or leave it.
  • example: you either are an environmentalist or a capitalist
  • example: you are either pro-life or a murderer

• NON SEQUITOR

• with these, the conclusion does not directly relate to or directly follow from the evidence.
• POST HOC, ergo propter hoc: saying one event caused another because it followed it; coincidental events interpreted as cause/effect. Superstitions often do this:
  • example: "nearly all heroine users started with using marijuana; clearly, using marijuana leads to harder drugs."
  • example: cracked a mirror, later twisted ankle, therefore breaking the mirror caused the twisted ankle

• AD POPULUM

• an argument "to the people" often used as an evasion: an assertion that popular opinion is a justification of the claim. Absolutes based on small sample where it is asserted "everyone acts/feels certain way"
  • example: "The drop in Clinton's popularity is proof that he is an ineffective president."
  • example: Bicyclists should not be required to wear helmets; 985 of cyclists polled are against them.

• AD HOMINEM

• an argument "against the man" often used as an evasion: attacking the person who raises an issue, not the issue itself.
  • example: "Newt Gingrich can't ask Janet Reno to appoint a special counsel to look into ethics violations because he has violated ethics guidelines himself!"
  • example: Senator Jennings Randolph arguing against the ERA by calling the advocates a "small band of bra-less bubbleheads."
1. AD IGNORATIAM
   • Asserting something is true because no one can prove it as false.
     • example: "Since no one has disproved that UFO's exist, they must!"

• STATISTICAL FALLACIES

• myth of the mean (or illusion of the average) is where statistics hide the reality; true lies.
  • example: arguing that a community does not need aid because "the average monthly income is well over $6,000" because high salaries skew the number and in reality many families are far below the poverty line.

• LANGUAGE FALLACIES

• Weasel words: using misdirecting language to seem to say something more appealing:
  • example: "Spiffo removes virtually all food stains" is more appealing than the more truthful "Spiffo removes many food stains"
  • example:
• Parity statement: a kind of weasel word that appears to claim superiority but actually means they are the same (or have parity)
  • example: "No product removes food stains better than Spiffo!'
  • example:
• Reasoning by slogan: Using a catchy phrase as proof.
  • example: "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."

• APPEALS TO TRADITION

• Asserting that something must be done a certain way because that's the way its always been done.
  • example: a tobacco grower responding to Clinton's plan to curb teen age smoking asserted that "...the government is trying to wreck to industry which is older than the government itself!"

• ANALOGICAL FALLACY

• Asserting that something because things are similar that they are equal
  • example: "because she is good at soccer, she must be good at football."
  • before you use analogical reasoning to practicality, ask yourself if there is essential similarity

---

MOTIVATIONAL APPEALS: appealing to emotions

Vance Packard, 1964: The Hidden Persuaders
        -- Described eight compelling needs (still very much used by advertisers)

We have compelling needs for

...EMOTIONAL SECURITY:
* we seek security in an unsafe world
        -- use visualization of your solution

...REASSURANCE OF WORTH:
* hurried, impersonal world>> feelings of unimportance
        -- reassure listeners of their contribution to solution

...EGO GRATIFICATION:
* attention beyond recognition of worth
        -- making audience feel special

...CREATIVE OUTLETS:
* desire to build and create; express individuality
        -- help audience visualize creation of solution and their contributions

...LOVE OBJECTS:
* outlets for our own loving feelings
        -- stories and extended examples dealing with real people who need it

...SENSE OF POWER:
* our society preaches it
        -- how can audience's contribution be empowering?

...need for ROOTS:
* audiences away from home
        -- appeal to need for roots or traditional family values

...need for IMMORTALITY:
* fear of dying
        -- inspire audience to action in a way they can make lasting contribution or legacy

Hugh Rank
1970's : National Council of Teachers of English hired him to find ways to teach individuals to be more intelligent consumers of communication

Hugh noticed that persuaders used two strategies: they intensified messages by
playing them up: showing product strong points and competition's weaknesses
playing them down: downplayed own product's weak points and competitor's advantages

Tony Shwartz: The Responsive Cord (1973)
persuaders delivered messages through two methods: transportation and evoked recall
transportation: delivering message to receiver in traditional way we have studied
evoked recall: pulling the embedded response out of receiver
* evoking memories; emotions
        -- he argued that experiential meanings not stored as symbols
        -- messages stored as feelings: ease or unease
motivate, through drama
play out stored message in receiver's mind
        -- with music, color, odors, sound effects, tone of voice

List from your book, appeal to:
...FEAR: war, illness, disaster
...COMPASSION: underprivileged, disadvantaged
...PRIDE: in country, school, family
...ANGER: "mad as hell and not going to take it anymore!"
...SHAME: not getting involved, doing best: guilt-tripping
...REVERENCE: for deity, traditions and institutions

LANGUAGE OF APPEAL
        -- use emotion-laden words

DISCOVERY: arouses curiosity
EASY: we've come to expect it
GUARANTEE: more likely to take action when sure of result
HEALTH: our most valued possession: keyed into fear of mortality
LOVE: we all need it
MONEY: we all want it
NEW: makes ideas attractive
PROVEN: security
RESULTS: will it work?
SAFETY: is the action safe, add to security
SAVE: conserving strength and resources
YOU: connect speech to audience; don't depersonalize

ETHICS REMINDER!

* important ethical implications with examples, statistics, testimony
* emotional appeals and language highly persuasive
* strong supporting evidence highly persuasive

what are responsibility of speaker?

8 basic guidelines:

1-be candid/ honest, enhances credibility
        -- don't plagiarize
        -- statistics can clarify, and can easily mislead
2-don't make arguments you can't support with evidence
3-don't oversimplify complex issues
4-don't use emotional appeals that are insupportable
        -- evidence/reasoning
5-dont't pretend to be sure when you're not
6-let audience make up their own minds
        -- avoid manipulation (emotional appeal)
        -- avoid misleading (faulty reasoning)
7-sometimes: harmony more important than speaking mind
        -- creating divisions is not persuasion