Persuasion and Argumentation From Latin (persuadere) and Greek (peíto): convincing, changing...
-
Upload
marsha-strickland -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of Persuasion and Argumentation From Latin (persuadere) and Greek (peíto): convincing, changing...
Persuasion and Argumentation
• From Latin (persuadere) and Greek (peíto): convincing, changing one’s mind, inducing, enticing, impressing, seducing
• Persuasive communication intends:
• (1) to change (adjust) audience’s values, beliefs, and attitudes and
• (2) to elicit action (a desired behavior).
The process of forwarding arguments is
called argumentation. • Argumentation is at once:
• advocacy of a particular belief, preference, or policy
• the inquiry of finding the best answers to a problem or a controversy.
• a debate: a battle, a struggle between opinions and positions.
Methods of Persuasion
• Logos: “the argument proper.” Proper reasoning and good evidence
• Ethos: the character of the speaker (credibility)
• Pathos: producing the right attitude in the hearer (emotional/motivational appeals)
• Also: Cognitive dissonance theory, reactance theory
Elaboration Likelihood Model
• What happens when a person receives a persuasive message?
• Distinct routes of processing:
• Central route (Elaboration occurs)
• Peripheral route (Nonelaboration)
Elaboration Likelihood Model
• Central route:
• The strength of the argument
• Peripheral:
• Credibility
• Liking
• Number of arguments
Conditioning
• Classical (association).• Operant (reinforcement)Positive reinforcement (favorable stimulus to
cause/increase behavior)Negative reinforcement (removal of aversive
stimulus to cause behavior)Positive punishment (aversive stimulus to decrease
behavior)Negative punishment (removal of favorable stimulus
to decrease behavior)
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
• Any two cognitive elements will have one of three kinds of relationships:
• Irrelevant (I like ice cream and I am aware of dangers of drunk driving)
• Consonant (I like ice cream and I know that dairy products are good for the body)
• Dissonant (I like ice cream and I am aware of the dangers of high cholesterol)
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
• Inconsistency between two cognitins gives rise to the uncomfortable psychological state of “cognitive dissonance”
• Because dissonance is so very uncomfortable to us, we will do almost anything to reduce the dissonance in order to achieve consonance
Three ways in which dissonance can be reduced
1. One might change one or more of the cognitive elements
(a) change the original behavior: stop eating ice cream or reduce frequency of eating ice cream
(b) or reject the new information: it is not true that cholesterol is bad for you
Three ways in which dissonance can be reduced
2. New elements might by added
Eating ice cream is extremely enjoyable
Ice cream alone is not that bad; there are worse things with cholesterol
3. One might come to see the elements as less important
The research on cholesterol is inconclusive.
Stereotyping
• Cognitive frameworks consisting of knowledge and beliefs about specific social groups (suggesting that all members of a group possess certain traits)
• Allow to make quick judgments
• Self-confirming role
• Prejudice, favoritism
Using Listeners Needs
• Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
• Physiological needs
• Safety
• Social
• Self-esteem
• Self-actualization
Understanding audiences
• Target Audiences
• General Public
War in Iraq: Favor or OpposeHow public opinion changes quickly….
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2003 2004 2005 2008
FavorOppose
Marijuana should be legal
• .
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
YESNO
Learning about the U.S. in context of other countries
Government has responsibility to reduce income differences
UK US NL NZ CAN
Definitely yes
43 18 39 35 28
Probably yes
38 28 40 30 33
Probably not
10 25 13 15 20
Definitely no
7 27 6 18 17
Sexual relations before marriage
UK US NL DK CAN
Always wrong
11 30 7 6 12
Almost always wrong
7 11 3 3 7
Some-times
14 20 20 9 15
Not wrong at all
66 38 70 83 65
Same sex relations
F US NL
Always wrong
38 62 16
Almost always wrong
9 6 5
Some-times
17 7 12
Not wrong at all
36 24 67
There is hell
UK US NL DK JAP
YES 13 55 13 8 6
Maybe
NO 34 12 48 60 21
Believe in God
UK US NL DK JAP
NO 41 18 48 55 55
Some-times
14 5 8 11 32
YES with doubts
23 15 18 20 9
YES without a doubt
26 63 26 14 4
Europe vs. U.S. on death penalty
• 1997: 75% of Americans supported death penalty
• 2011: 60% of Americans support death penalty.
• 2008: about 30% of Europeans support death penalty
Support for death penalty
Taiwan 80%
Russia 67%
The U.S. 63%
Japan 58%
UK 49%
France 41%
Mexico 38%
Germany 27%
Denmark 18%
Spain 17%
Norway 16%
Divorce by areas
Area % are or have been divorced
South 27%Midwest 27%West 26%Northeast 19%
Divorces by religion
Religion % have been divorced
Born-again Christians 27%Other Christians 24%Atheists, Agnostics 21%
Marriage
How the best- and least-educated Americans approach marriage and
child-rearing
Divorced in 10 years
College educated High school dropouts
Married in 1975-79 29% 38%Married in 1990-94 16% 46%
Out-of-wedlock children 4% 15%
A person has the right to suicide if he/she is tired of living
• .
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
YESNO
Types of propositions
Types of propositions
• Propositions of fact assert that something is or exists
• Propositions of value assert that something has a value (is good, right, correct, efficient, moral).
• Propositions of policy assert that something should be done (that an action needs to be taken, policy enacted, etc.)
Persuasive Speech on a Question of Fact
Specific Purpose: To persuade my audience that another major earthquake will
hit California by the year 2025.
Main Points:
I. Many geological signs indicate that a major earthquake may happen
soon.
II. Experts agree that a major earthquake could hit California any day.
Persuasive Speech on aQuestion of Value
Specific Purpose: To persuade my audience thatcapital punishment is morally andlegally wrong.
Main Points: I. Capital punishment is immoral
II. Capital punishment violates the constitutional ban on “cruel and unusual punishment.”
Challenges in arguing values
• What are the criteria for the values?• Can you convince the audience that the
audience should accept your criteria?• For example: • What are the criteria for “cruel and
unusual?”• What are the criteria for “moral”?
Persuasive Speech on a Question of Policy
Specific Purpose: To persuade my audience thataction should be taken now tosolve the nation’s shortage of nurses.
Main Points: I. The shortage of nurses has become a serious national problem.
II. The problem can be solved by offering nurses better salaries and better working conditions.
Hierarchy of Propositions
• The policy proposition is the final element in a decision-making process.
• Proposition of fact: Person x engaged in a
sexual relationship with a minor.• Proposition of value: Person X is guilty of a
crime…• Proposition of policy: Person X should be
punished by a fine, jail term, etc.
Hierarchy of Propositions
• IF, Propositions of fact: oil is becoming more expensive and nuclear energy is cheaper and readily available in the United States.
• THUS• Proposition of value: Nuclear energy is superior
to other types of energy (coal, oil, etc.)• THEREFORE,
Proposition of policy: We should build more nuclear plants..
Steps in Developing a Speech on the Question of Policy
• 1. Identify the “problem” to be resolved• The first step in developing a policy is to show
that there is a need for taking an action
• 2. Identify the causes of the problem• The question of causation is a question of
culpability. Who is at fault? Whom or what should we blame?
The nature of the Problem
• The Magnitude (the problem is severe)
• The Extent (growing, widespread)
The origins of the problem
• What is the cause of the problem?
• Is this the real cause of the problem?
• Is the cause structural or attitudinal?
Identify (or invent) available policies and select the best one.
1. What is the mechanism of the policy?
How does it work?
2. Is the policy solving/minimizing the
problem?
3. Is the policy affordable?
4. Is the policy enforceable?
What are you proposing to do?
• Are you addressing causes or symptoms of the problem?
• What ‘behaviors’ are to be enacted that are not presently being enacted?
Mechanism
• How it is going to work?
• Is the solution available and acceptable?
Financing
• How are you planning to pay for it?
• Is the solution affordable?
• Who will benefit from the policy? Who will pay the costs?
Enforcement
• What means are used to ensure compliance?
Expected results
• Does the policy eliminate the causes (or only symptoms) of the problem?
• Does the policy have unintended effects?
• Is the policy workable in the long run?
Opposing Policy Propositions
Refute the Reason for Change
Challenge the Problem Refute the Reason for Change
• The problem is not severe
• The problem is stable or declining
• The problem is of little importance for the audience
The problem is not severe
0
1020
3040
5060
7080
90100
1998
Welfare recipientsWelfare fraud
The problem is stableExample: suicides per 100,000
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1970 1980 1990 1993
Suicide
Challenge “problem causation”
• What is the cause of the problem?
• Is this the real cause of the problem?
• Is the cause structural or attitudinal?
Refute the Solutions
• Identify Barriers
• Dispute Workability
• Present Disadvantages
Identify Barriers
• Policy is not available
E.g., technology is not available
• Policy is not acceptable
E.g., policy will not pass constitutional scrutiny
Dispute Workability
• The policy is not affordable
• The policy is difficult to implement
• The policy cannot be enforced
Present Disadvantages
• The policy has unintended effect
It makes things worse
It creates more problems
Refute evidence
• Inaccurate/False/Insufficient
• Incomplete
• Inconsistent
• Not recent enough
• Sources Biased
• Sources Unreliable
Identify logical fallacies
• Hasty Generalization
• Forcing a Dichotomy
(false dilemma)
• Ad Hominem
• Appeal to Authority/Tradition/People
• Circular reasoning