Upload
regina-stevens
View
213
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009
Public Speaking:An Audience-Centered Approach – 7th edition
Chapter 17Using
PersuasiveStrategies
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
“Speechis power:
Speechis 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 Logicand 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 Typesof Reasoning
• Inductive Reasoning.
• Deductive Reasoning.
• Causal Reasoning.
Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009
Understanding Typesof 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 Typesof 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 Typesof 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 Typesof 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 Typesof 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 Typesof 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 Typesof Reasoning
Structure of Deductive Reasoning• Syllogism – three-part argument:
Major Premise: widelyaccepted general statement.
Minor Premise: specificstatement that appliesto 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 Typesof Reasoning
Testing the Validity of
Deductive Reasoning
• Is major premise
(general statement)
true?
• Is minor premise
(specific instance) true?
Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2009
Understanding Typesof Reasoning
Deductive Reasoning: an exampleI. 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 Typesof 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 Typesof Reasoning
Causal Reasoning: an exampleCause to effect Effect 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 willsee 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 Reasoningwith 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 ReasoningReasoning FallaciesCausal “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 ReasoningReasoning FallaciesAd
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 Peopleand 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 Peopleand 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 Peopleand 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 Peopleand 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.