Com 135 Ch 17: Using Persuasion Strategies

Front 1

Credibility-

Back 1

the audience perception of speaker’s competence, trustworthiness, and dynamism
-Aristotle used the term ethos to refer to a speaker’s credibility

Front 2

Competence-

Back 2

to be credible, a speaker should be considered informed, skilled, or knowledgeable about the subject he or she is talking about

Front 3

Trustworthiness-

Back 3

a second major factor that influences your audience’s response to your speech

Front 4

Dynamism-

Back 4

a third factor in credibility is the speaker’s energy often projected through delivery
--Charisma is a form of dynamism

Front 5

--Speakers establish their credibility in 3 stages:

Back 5

1. Initial Credibility is the impression of your credibility your listeners have even before you speak
2. Derived Credibility is the perception of your credibility your audience forms as you present yourself and your message
--Enhancing your credibility as you speak include:
- Establishing common ground with your audience by indicating in your opening remarks that you share the values and concerns of your audience
- Supporting your key arguments with evidence
- Presenting a well-organized and well-delivered message
3. Terminal Credibilty is the perception of your credibility your listeners have when you finish your speech

Front 6

--Aristotle said that any persuasive speech has two parts:

Back 6

1. you state your case
2. you prove your case

Front 7

1. Inductive Reasoning-

Back 7

reasoning that arrives at a general conclusion from specific instances or examples
-- using this classical approach, you reach a general conclusion based on specific examples, facts, statistics, and opinions
-- according to contemporary logicians, you reason inductively when you claim that an outcome is probably true because of specific evidence

Front 8

Testing the Validity of Inductive Reasoning

Back 8

--To judge the validity of a generalization arrived at inductively, keep the following questions in mind
1. Are there enough specific instance to supper the conclusion?
2. Are the specific instance typical?
3. Are the instances recent?

Front 9

--Reasoning my Analogy-

Back 9

a special type of inductive reasoning, that compares one thing, person, or process with another, to predict how something will perform and respond

Front 10

2. Deductive Reasoning-

Back 10

reasoning that moves from a general statement of principle to a specific certain conclusion (opposite of inductive)
--can be structured in the form of syllogism- a way of organizing an argument into three elements:
1. Major premise- a general statement that is the first element of a syllogism
2. Minor premise- a more specific statement about an example that is linked to the major premise
3. Conclusion- the logical outcome of a deductive argument, which stems from the major premise and the minor premise

Front 11

Fallacy:

Back 11

False reasoning that occurs when someone attempts to persuade without adequate evidence or with arguments that are irrelevant or inappropriate

Front 12

Casual Fallacy

Back 12

• Making a faulty casual connection
• For example, saying the football team won because you sang the school anthem

Front 13

Bandwagon Fallacy

Back 13

Reasoning that suggests that because everyone else believes something or is doing something, than it must be valid or correct
• Just because everyone believes it is true does not believe that it is true

Front 14

 Either/Or Fallacy

Back 14

• The oversimplification of an issue into a choice between only two outcomes or possibilities

Front 15

 Hasty Generalization

Back 15

• A conclusion reached without adequate evidence
• For example, because I said so

Front 16

 Ad Hominem

Back 16

• An attack on irrelevant facts or information used to distract someone from the issue under discussion
• For example, attacking the person you are debating against directly

Front 17

 Appeal to Misplaced Authority

Back 17

• Use of the testimony of an expert in a given field to endorse an idea or product for which the expert does not have the appropriate credentials or expertise
• For example, a newscaster endorsing the use of a specific recipe

Front 18

 Non Sequitur

Back 18

• Latin for “it does not follow”; an idea or conclusion that does not logically relate to or follow from the previous idea or conclusion
• Using random information to support a cause

Front 19

1) Problem-Solution

Back 19

a) Most basic organizational pattern
i) Make audience aware of a problem then tell them exactly how to solve it
b) Good if speaking to an audience who doesn’t know that there is a problem
c) Popular in political speeches
d) Applies cognitive dissonance

Front 20

2) Refutation

Back 20

a) Prove that arguments against you are false
b) Most likely used when your position is being attacked
c) Important to present both sides of an issue because listeners will likely think of both
d) Must be prepared if question/answer after
i) Facts, data, statistics, etc.

Front 21

3) Cause and Effect

Back 21

a) Can start with effect and work back to cause to convince listeners that the problem is significant
b) Goal is to convince listeners that one even caused another- But great challenge
i) Must prove that no other factors responsible
c) Many times causal fallacies can occur

Front 22

4) The Motivated Sequence (Alan Monroe… AKA MONROE SEQUENCE- what we used for the persuasive speech)

Back 22

a) Attention = Attention Getter
i) Startle audience
b) Need= Main Point 1
i) Why your topic should concern listeners
c) Satisfaction = Main Point 2
i) Identify how your plan will satisfy need
d) Visualization = Main Point 3
i) Give audience a sense of what it would be like if your solution were or were not adopted (positive or negative visualization approach)
e) Action= Conclusion
i) How audience can do to implement your solution
(1) Must be simple, clear, and easy
f) Can modify motivated sequence to suit the needs of topic and audience
i) i.e. if receptive audience don’t need to spend time on the need step
ii) If audience neutral attention and need steps should be emphasized