Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Public Speaking: An Audience-Centered Approach – 7 th edition Chapter 17 Using Persuasive Strategies This multimedia product and its contents are protected under copyright law. The following are prohibited by law: · any public performances or display, including transmission of any image over a network; · preparation of any derivative work, including the extraction, in whole or in part, of any images; · any rental, lease, or lending of the program. Steven A. Beebe & Susan J. Beebe

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 “Speech is power: Speech is to persuade, to convert, to compel.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Persuasion “…is the process of adjusting ideas to people and people to ideas.” - Donald C. Bryant, rhetoric scholar

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Establishing Credibility Also known as ethos. Audience’s perceptions of the speaker. Various dimensions:  Competence- knowledge & skill.  Trustworthiness- believability & honesty.  Dynamism- energy level.  Charisma- charm, talent & magnetism.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Enhancing Your Credibility Credibility established in three places:  Initial credibility: perceptions before speech.  Derived credibility: impressions formed during speech.  Terminal credibility: final impressions, after speech. Ways to boost credibility:  Well-stressed values and concerns shared with audience.  Well-documented evidence.  Well-organized ideas.  Well-managed delivery.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Using Logic and Evidence to Persuade Logos: formal system of rules to reach a conclusion. Aristotle:“always prove what you state.” Reasoning: drawing a conclusion from the evidence.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Inductive Reasoning. Deductive Reasoning. Causal Reasoning.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Inductive Reasoning Using specific examples or instances to reach a general or probable conclusion. Used when one can claim that an outcome is probably true because of specific evidence.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Testing the Validity of Inductive Reasoning Are there enough specific instances to support the conclusion? Are the specific instances typical? Are the instances recent?

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Inductive Reasoning: an example I. Students are sneezing in dorms & classrooms. (specific example 1) II. Professors are cancelling classes. (specific example 2) III. Campus Clinic has long waiting lines. ( specific example 3) IV. There must be a flu on our campus. (general conclusion)

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Reasoning by Analogy (a special type of inductive reasoning) Makes a comparison between two things, entities, processes, etc. If you conclude what is true for one can be true for the other, then the analog is strong.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Testing the Validity of Reasoning by Analogy Are similarities between both, greater than differences? Is the conclusion being drawn actually true?

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Deductive Reasoning Opposite of induction. Conclusion (generalization) is more certain than probable. The more valid or truthful the outcome, the more certain the conclusion. Start with widely accepted general claim, and then move towards specific conclusion illustrating general claim.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Structure of Deductive Reasoning Syllogism – three-part argument:  Major Premise: widely accepted general statement.  Minor Premise: specific statement that applies to the major premise.  Conclusion: logical outcome, minor premise exemplifies major premise. The more valid the major premise, the more valid the deduction.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Testing the Validity of Deductive Reasoning Is major premise (general statement) true? Is minor premise (specific instance) true?

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Deductive Reasoning: an example I.All tough drug laws introduced in medium- sized communities result in diminished drug-related crimes. (generally accepted statement) II. San Marcos, Texas is a medium-sized community. (specific case supporting general statement) III. San Marcos should institute tough drug laws. ( specific conclusion)

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Causal Reasoning Relating events to show connection. To conclude that one or more events caused another event. Can move from cause to effect. Can move from effect to cause.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Understanding Types of Reasoning Causal Reasoning: an example Cause to effectEffect to cause I.Interest rates have increased this week. II.The Dow Jones will decrease. (from a known fact to a predicted result) I.A major earthquake has occurred. II.The cause was a shift in a fault line. (from a known result to a predicted cause)

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Persuading the Diverse Audience Effectiveness depends on listeners’ background and cultural expectations. Some cultures prefer deduction; other cultures prefer induction. Use evidence that audience will see as valid and reliable. Use appropriate appeals to action, based on cultural norms. Use messages appropriate for audience. Use delivery that listeners find appropriate.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Supporting Your Reasoning with Evidence Use facts. Use valid true examples. Use opinions that enhance credibility. Use sound & reliable statistics. Use reluctant testimony: shows that someone has been convinced. Use new & specific evidence. Use evidence to tell a story.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Avoid Faulty Reasoning Be ethical & appropriate with evidence & reasoning. Fallacy: false reasoning when someone attempts to persuade without adequate evidence, or with arguments that are irrelevant or inappropriate.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Avoid Faulty Reasoning Reasoning Fallacies Causal“Hurricanes are caused by war” (a connection not related) Bandwagon“Everyone knows cell phones are safe” (popularity appeals) Either-Or“Either you’re with us or you’re against us” (only 2 choices) Hasty Generalization “Since my niece is failing, city schools are bad” (quick Conclusion)

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Avoid Faulty Reasoning Reasoning Fallacies Ad Hominem “What does a divorced man know about parenting?” (personal attack) Red Herring “Let’s not focus on the lawsuit against me; let’s talk about…” (changing the topic to distract) Misplaced Authority “Jessica Simpson says McMillan trucks are best” (not a true expert) Non Sequitur “Support me for Congress – I have 3 children” (ideas do not follow)

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Using Emotion to Persuade Can make people feel pleasure or displeasure. Can make people feel more aroused. Can make people feel dominance.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Tips for Using Emotion to Persuade Use details that help listeners visualize. Use emotion-arousing words (“freedom,” “9-11,” “mommy.”) Delivery should reflect emotions. Use pictures or images.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Tips for Using Emotion to Persuade Use appropriate metaphors & similes. Use right amount of fear appeals. Appeal to several emotions. Appeal to audience members’ myths. Myth: not necessarily false, but a belief of how people view their world. (e.g., Old West pioneers: strong & adventurous) Avoid unethical emotional appeals & appeals to listeners’ prejudices (demagoguery).

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Adapting Ideas to People and People to Ideas Persuading the receptive audience. Identify with them. Clearly state your objectivity. Tell them exactly what you want them to do. Ask them for an immediate show of support. Use emotional appeals effectively. Make it easy for them to take action.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Adapting Ideas to People and People to Ideas Persuading the neutral audience. Capture their attention early. Stress commonly shared beliefs. Relate topic to them, their friends, families and loved ones. Be realistic with the response you want.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Adapting Ideas to People and People to Ideas Persuading the unreceptive audience. Wait before telling them your purpose. Start with noting areas of agreement. Set realistic goals. Acknowledge how they might oppose you. Clearly tell them any experiences you have.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Adapting Ideas to People and People to Ideas Persuading the unreceptive audience. Consider understanding (not advocacy) as your goal.  Summarize common misconceptions people have.  State why misconceptions may seem reasonable.  Dismiss misconceptions, and provide evidence to support your point.  State accurate information you want them to remember.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Strategies for Organizing Persuasive Messages State your strongest arguments first. Do not bury key arguments in the middle. Save action calls for the end. Consider presenting both sides of an issue. State and refute counterarguments.

Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009 Strategies for Organizing Persuasive Messages Organizational Patterns Problem – Solution. Refutation. Cause and Effect. Motivated Sequence.  Attention.  Need.  Satisfaction.  Visualization.  Action.