Slide 1 Methods of Persuasion/Ch 16 Introduction to Public Speaking 17 Methods of Persuasion C h a p...

Slide 1Methods of Persuasion/Ch 16Methods of Persuasion/Ch 16 Introduction to Public Speaking

Introduction to Public Speaking

1717

•Methods of Persuasion

•Methods of Persuasion

C h a p t e r



Methods of PersuasionMethods of Persuasion

• Building credibility(ethos)

• Using evidence• Reasoning

(logos)• Appealing to emotions

(pathos)

• Building credibility(ethos)

• Using evidence• Reasoning

(logos)• Appealing to emotions

(pathos)



EthosEthos

The name used by Aristotle for what modern students of communication refer to as credibility.

The name used by Aristotle for what modern students of communication refer to as credibility.



CredibilityCredibility

The audience's perception of whether a speaker is qualified to speak on a given topic.

The audience's perception of whether a speaker is qualified to speak on a given topic.



Factors of CredibilityFactors of Credibility

• Competence• Character

• Competence• Character



CompetenceCompetence

How an audience regards a speaker’s intelligence, expertise, and knowledge of the subject.

How an audience regards a speaker’s intelligence, expertise, and knowledge of the subject.



CharacterCharacter

How an audience regards a speaker’s sincerity, trustworthiness, and concern for the well-being of the audience.

How an audience regards a speaker’s sincerity, trustworthiness, and concern for the well-being of the audience.



Types of CredibilityTypes of Credibility

• Initial• Derived • Terminal

• Initial• Derived • Terminal



Initial CredibilityInitial Credibility

The credibility of a speaker before she or he starts to speak.

The credibility of a speaker before she or he starts to speak.



Derived CredibilityDerived Credibility

The credibility of a speaker produced by everything she or he says and does during the speech.

The credibility of a speaker produced by everything she or he says and does during the speech.



Terminal CredibilityTerminal Credibility

The credibility of a speaker at the end of the speech.The credibility of a speaker at the end of the speech.



Tips for Enhancing Credibility

Tips for Enhancing Credibility

• Explain your competence• Establish common ground

with your audience

• Deliver your speeches fluently, expressively, and with conviction

• Explain your competence• Establish common ground

with your audience

• Deliver your speeches fluently, expressively, and with conviction



LogosLogos

The name used by Aristotle for the logical appeal of a speaker. The two major elements of logos are evidence and reasoning.

The name used by Aristotle for the logical appeal of a speaker. The two major elements of logos are evidence and reasoning.



EvidenceEvidence

Supporting materials used to prove or disprove something.

Supporting materials used to prove or disprove something.



Tips for Using EvidenceTips for Using Evidence

• Use specific evidence• Use novel evidence• Use evidence from credible

sources• Make clear the point of your

evidence

• Use specific evidence• Use novel evidence• Use evidence from credible

sources• Make clear the point of your

evidence

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/novel

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/novel



ReasoningReasoning

The process of drawing a conclusion on the basis of evidence.

The process of drawing a conclusion on the basis of evidence.



Four Types of ReasoningFour Types of Reasoning

• Reasoning from specific instances

• Reasoning from principle• Causal reasoning• Analogical reasoning

• Reasoning from specific instances

• Reasoning from principle• Causal reasoning• Analogical reasoning



Reasoning from Specific Instances

Reasoning from Specific Instances

Reasoning that moves from particular facts to a general conclusion.

Reasoning that moves from particular facts to a general conclusion.



Reasoning from Specific Instances Example:Reasoning from Specific Instances Example:

Contrary to what the chemical industry argues, limiting pesticide use does not threaten the food supply. (1.)Sweden has cut back on pesticides by 50 percent over the last few years with almost no decrease in its harvest. (2.)The Campbell Soup Company uses no pesticides at all on tomatoes grown in Mexico, and they reap as much fruit as ever. (3.) Many California farmers who practice pesticide-free agriculture have actually experienced increases in their crop yields.

Contrary to what the chemical industry argues, limiting pesticide use does not threaten the food supply. (1.)Sweden has cut back on pesticides by 50 percent over the last few years with almost no decrease in its harvest. (2.)The Campbell Soup Company uses no pesticides at all on tomatoes grown in Mexico, and they reap as much fruit as ever. (3.) Many California farmers who practice pesticide-free agriculture have actually experienced increases in their crop yields.

1 example+1 example+1 example

= conclusion



Guidelines for Reasoning from Specific Instances

Guidelines for Reasoning from Specific Instances• Avoid hasty generalizations• If your evidence does not

justify a sweeping conclusion, qualify your argument

• Reinforce your argument with statistics or testimony

• Avoid hasty generalizations• If your evidence does not

justify a sweeping conclusion, qualify your argument

• Reinforce your argument with statistics or testimony



Reasoning from PrincipleReasoning from Principle

Reasoning that moves from a general principle to a specific conclusion.

Reasoning that moves from a general principle to a specific conclusion.



Reasoning from Principle Example:Reasoning from Principle Example:

Reasoning must be valid and all of the premises must be true.

1.To be elected President of the United States, a person must be at least 35 years of age.

2.Bill Clinton was elected President of the United States.

3.Therefore, Bill Clinton was at least 35 years of age when elected.

Reasoning must be valid and all of the premises must be true.

1.To be elected President of the United States, a person must be at least 35 years of age.

2.Bill Clinton was elected President of the United States.

3.Therefore, Bill Clinton was at least 35 years of age when elected.



Guidelines for Reasoning from Principle

Guidelines for Reasoning from Principle

• Make sure listeners will accept your general principle (premise)

• Provide evidence to support your minor premise

• Make sure listeners will accept your general principle (premise)

• Provide evidence to support your minor premise



Causal ReasoningCausal Reasoning

Reasoning that seeks to establish the relationship between causes and effects.

Reasoning that seeks to establish the relationship between causes and effects.



Causal Reasoning Example:Causal Reasoning Example:

Because the ice was on the step, I fell and broke my leg.Because the ice was on the step, I fell and broke my leg.



Guidelines for Causal Reasoning

Guidelines for Causal Reasoning

• Avoid the fallacy of false cause

• Do not assume that events have only a single cause

• Avoid the fallacy of false cause

• Do not assume that events have only a single cause



Analogical ReasoningAnalogical Reasoning

Reasoning in which a speaker compares two similar cases and implies that what is true for the first case is also true for the second.

Reasoning in which a speaker compares two similar cases and implies that what is true for the first case is also true for the second.



Analogical Reasoning Example:Analogical Reasoning Example:

Almost every industrialized nation in the world except for the United States has a national curriculum and national tests to help ensure that schools throughout the country are meeting high standards of education. If such a system can work elsewhere, it can work in the United States as well.

Almost every industrialized nation in the world except for the United States has a national curriculum and national tests to help ensure that schools throughout the country are meeting high standards of education. If such a system can work elsewhere, it can work in the United States as well.



Guidelines for Analogical Reasoning

Guidelines for Analogical Reasoning

Above all, make sure the two cases being compared are essentially alike

Above all, make sure the two cases being compared are essentially alike



FallacyFallacy

An error in reasoning.An error in reasoning.



FallaciesFallacies

• Hasty generalization• False cause• Invalid analogy • Red herring

• Hasty generalization• False cause• Invalid analogy • Red herring

• Ad hominem• Either-or• Bandwagon• Slippery slope

• Ad hominem• Either-or• Bandwagon• Slippery slope



Hasty GeneralizationHasty Generalization

A fallacy in which a speaker jumps to a general conclusion on the basis of insufficient evidence. (associated with reasoning from specifics)

A fallacy in which a speaker jumps to a general conclusion on the basis of insufficient evidence. (associated with reasoning from specifics)



Example: Hasty GeneralizationExample: Hasty Generalization

“Last year alone three members of our state legislature were convicted of corruption. We can conclude, then, that all of our state's politicians are corrupt.”

“Last year alone three members of our state legislature were convicted of corruption. We can conclude, then, that all of our state's politicians are corrupt.”

1 member+ 1 member+ 1 member

= all politicians



False CauseFalse Cause

A fallacy in which a speaker mistakenly assumes that because one event follows another, the first event is the cause of the second. (associated with causal reasoning)

A fallacy in which a speaker mistakenly assumes that because one event follows another, the first event is the cause of the second. (associated with causal reasoning)



Example: False CauseExample: False Cause

“I'm sure the stock market will rise this year. It usually goes up when the American League wins the World Series.”

“I'm sure the stock market will rise this year. It usually goes up when the American League wins the World Series.”



Invalid AnalogyInvalid Analogy

An analogy in which the two cases being compared are not essentially alike. (associated with analogical reasoning)

An analogy in which the two cases being compared are not essentially alike. (associated with analogical reasoning)



Example: Invalid AnalogyExample: Invalid Analogy

“Of course Lisheng can prepare great Italian food; his Chinese cooking is fabulous.”

“Of course Lisheng can prepare great Italian food; his Chinese cooking is fabulous.”



Red HerringRed Herring

A fallacy that introduces an irrelevant issue to divert attention from the subject under discussion.

A fallacy that introduces an irrelevant issue to divert attention from the subject under discussion.



Example: Red Herring Example: Red Herring

“Why should we worry about endangered animal species when thousands of people are killed in automobile accidents each year?”

“Why should we worry about endangered animal species when thousands of people are killed in automobile accidents each year?”



Ad HominemAd Hominem

A fallacy that attacks the person rather than dealing with the real issue in dispute.

A fallacy that attacks the person rather than dealing with the real issue in dispute.



Example: Ad Hominem Example: Ad Hominem

“The governor has a number of interesting economic proposals, but let’s not forget that she comes from a very wealthy family.”

“The governor has a number of interesting economic proposals, but let’s not forget that she comes from a very wealthy family.”



Either-OrEither-Or

A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist.

A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist.



Example: Either-Or Example: Either-Or

“The government must either raise taxes or reduce services for the poor.”

“The government must either raise taxes or reduce services for the poor.”



BandwagonBandwagon

A fallacy that assumes that because something is popular, it is therefore good, correct, or desirable.

A fallacy that assumes that because something is popular, it is therefore good, correct, or desirable.



Example: Bandwagon Example: Bandwagon

“The President must be correct in his approach to domestic policy; after all, polls show that 60 percent of the people support him.”

“The President must be correct in his approach to domestic policy; after all, polls show that 60 percent of the people support him.”



Slippery SlopeSlippery Slope

A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented.

A fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented.



Example: Slippery Slope Example: Slippery Slope

“Passing federal laws to control the amount of violence on television is the first step in a process that will result in absolute government control of the media and total censorship over all forms of artistic expression.”

“Passing federal laws to control the amount of violence on television is the first step in a process that will result in absolute government control of the media and total censorship over all forms of artistic expression.”



PathosPathos

The name used by Aristotle for what modern students of communication refer to as emotional appeal.

The name used by Aristotle for what modern students of communication refer to as emotional appeal.



Emotional AppealsEmotional Appeals

Appeals that are intended to make listeners feel sad, angry, guilty, afraid, happy, proud, sympathetic, reverent, etc.

Appeals that are intended to make listeners feel sad, angry, guilty, afraid, happy, proud, sympathetic, reverent, etc.



Tips for Generating Emotional Appeal

Tips for Generating Emotional Appeal

• Use emotional language• Develop vivid examples• Speak with sincerity and

conviction

• Use emotional language• Develop vivid examples• Speak with sincerity and

conviction



Using Emotional Appeal Ethically

Using Emotional Appeal Ethically

• Make sure emotional appeal is appropriate to the speech topic

• Do not substitute emotional appeal for evidence and reasoning

• Make sure emotional appeal is appropriate to the speech topic

• Do not substitute emotional appeal for evidence and reasoning



1. The more favorably listeners view a speaker’s competence and character, the more likely they are to accept what the speaker says.

2. Because it moves from a general principle to a specific conclusion, reasoning from principle is the opposite of reasoning from specific instances.

3. Research shows that skeptical listeners are more likely to be persuaded by evidence they are already familiar with than by evidence that is new to them.

1. The more favorably listeners view a speaker’s competence and character, the more likely they are to accept what the speaker says.

2. Because it moves from a general principle to a specific conclusion, reasoning from principle is the opposite of reasoning from specific instances.

3. Research shows that skeptical listeners are more likely to be persuaded by evidence they are already familiar with than by evidence that is new to them.

True-False QuizTrue-False Quiz



4. It is usually inappropriate for persuasive speakers to refer to their personal experience in an attempt to bolster their credibility.

5. The red herring fallacy refers to statements that introduce an irrelevant issue to divert attention from the subject under discussion.

6. A speaker can have high credibility for one audience and low credibility for another audience.

4. It is usually inappropriate for persuasive speakers to refer to their personal experience in an attempt to bolster their credibility.

5. The red herring fallacy refers to statements that introduce an irrelevant issue to divert attention from the subject under discussion.

6. A speaker can have high credibility for one audience and low credibility for another audience.




7. Arguments guilty of the ad hominem fallacy attack the person rather than dealing with the real issue in dispute.

8. Studies have shown that speakers with low initial credibility need to use more evidence than speakers with high initial credibility.

9. According to your textbook, emotional appeals are often appropriate in persuasive speeches on questions of policy.

7. Arguments guilty of the ad hominem fallacy attack the person rather than dealing with the real issue in dispute.

8. Studies have shown that speakers with low initial credibility need to use more evidence than speakers with high initial credibility.

9. According to your textbook, emotional appeals are often appropriate in persuasive speeches on questions of policy.




10.The following statement is an example of reasoning by analogy: “The United Nations charter establishes the right of all people to live free of political repression. The government of North Korea subjects its people to political repression. Therefore, the government of North Korea is violating the U.N. charter.”

10.The following statement is an example of reasoning by analogy: “The United Nations charter establishes the right of all people to live free of political repression. The government of North Korea subjects its people to political repression. Therefore, the government of North Korea is violating the U.N. charter.”




Review Methods of Persuasion

Review Methods of Persuasion

Slide 1 Methods of Persuasion/Ch 16 Introduction to Public Speaking 17 Methods of Persuasion C h a p...

Documents

Transcript of Slide 1 Methods of Persuasion/Ch 16 Introduction to Public Speaking 17 Methods of Persuasion C h a p...