1. A Holistic View of Persuasion
ELEMENTS OF PERSUASION: A HOLISTIC APPROACH
Utterance Comprehension
Subjective, contextual reasoning
A natural element of persuasion (Madsen, 2012) is utterances since these are used to convey ideas and will often feature as a prominent element of persuasive attempts. Note, however, that utterances are not limited to spoken language. Ideally, it should encapsulate other types of attempts to manipulate belief structures as well such as body language, facial expressions and so on.
The conception of utterances in this framework is broadened to not only the linguistic content, but also extra-linguistic enrichment (Sperber & Wilson, 1995; Carston, 2002), bodily dynamics as foundation for language (Cowley, 2011), and action (Austin, 1963).
Main Points
Utterances may be enriched by context.
Utterances should not be reduced to linguistic content.
Utterances may be understood as bodily and phenomenological.
Compared with traditional accounts of reasoning, which rely on premises of truth-conditionally dichotomous logic (e.g. Eemeren & Grotendorst, 2004; Priest, 2008), a subjective approach to reasoning may be considered as an alternative and consequently as a fundamental aspect of persuasion.
There are a variety of contextual, probabilistic models (e.g. Schum, 1981; Jones & Love, 2011). However, here I propose the Bayesian approach (Hahn & Oaksford, 2007a, 2007b; Harris et al., 2012) as one alternative to logical accounts.
Main Points
Reasoning faculties may not conform with normative logic.
Priors concerning probabilistic content may be subjective.
Context may influence how these priors are elicited.
Phenomenological position
Human beings exist in a context, which may constantly shape and influence them. The philosophical traditional of phenomenological investigations (Cassirer, 1929; Merleau-Ponty, 1968; take the subject as the point of departure and attempts to describe how context may influence her. For the present framework, this is particularly interesting given the contextual nature of the main elements described in this theory of persuasion.
Also, recent phenomenological research indicates the potential connection between cognitive sciences and phenomenology (Zahavi, 2002; Gallagher & Zahavi, 2008)
Main Points
Phenomenology may expand upon concepts used.
The tradition may provide insight into contextual factors.
Imagining the speaker
Joint action/The context
An utterance can never stand alone since it will always be conveyed by some speaker. This speaker may influence our perception of the utterance and thus significantly influence our perception of the persuasive attempt. For example, if I am given advice on a house, it matters whether the speaker is my brother or the salesman trying to get a commission.
Mentalizing (Frith, 1992; Amadio & Frith, 2006; Hooker et al., 2008) is a theory concerning how humans ascribe intentions and other knowledge to other human beings. In the framework being developed here, this is particularly important when assessing persuasive attempts since it will influence estimations of probabilistic strength.
Main Points
Utterances cannot stand alone
There is always a speaker who influences the perception
The final element is concerned with how human beings make use of their immediate surroundings to guide action and perceive physical situations (Sebanz et al., 2006; Vesper et al., 2010; Pezzulo, forthcoming). The theory of joint actions stipulates that humans make use of subtle cues to direct their attention and understanding of the situation in order to make use of this as beneficially as possible.
For this framework, this entails theoretical and empirical notions pertaining to how human beings make use of context to drive their probabilistic estimations and make sense of the surrounding situation. Given the contextual nature of the theory being developed here, this is a central element of processing persuasive attempts.
Main Points
Contextual cues may influence estimations of prior probabilities
Interactivity is central to communication and persuasion
Jens Koed Madsen, Cognitive, Perceptual & Brain Sciences, UCL Supervisors: Nick Chater, David Lagnado, and Adam Harris