WSU COMSTRAT 301 - Foundations of Persuasion Study Guide for final
Appeal to Ignorance
Asking an audience to accept the truth of a claim because no proof to contrary exists
Context:
Audience size and type → communicator role → cultural context → social context → political context
False Dichotomy
Gives only two alternatives when more exist, thus oversimplifying the issue
Legitimate Power:
Has a "right" (by formal appointment or general societal "acceptance")
Interactive technologies
Have brought the line between persuader and puersadee ( no longer the like labor and management --> more like driver and pedestrian
What is a fallacy?
a breakdown in logic that uses faulty arguments or deceptions to reach a flawed conclusion
What is the difference between Manipulation and Coercion
Manipulation assumes free choice; it is mildly duplicitous form of persuasion. Coercion occurs when choice of freedom are compromised
Centerpieces of Persuasion
Meanings, multiple and shifting, inhabiting the rich tableau of the human mind
Is an argument one-sided?
No, an argument has more than one side- the evidence for an argument may be purely, but good argumentation is highly rooted in solid logos
Fallacies of language
Pathos ex: ambiguity and evocation emotionally loaded language, technical jargon
Persuasion vs Coercion
Persuasion deals with reason and verbal appeals while coercion employs force
The Post Hoc Argument: (also, "Post Hoc Propter Hoc;"
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc;" "Too much of a coincidence," the "Clustering Illusion"): The classic paranoiac fallacy of attributing an imaginary causality to random coincidences, concluding that just because something happens close to, at the same time as, or just after something else, the first thing is caused by the second. E.g., "AIDS first emerged as a epidemic back in the very same era when Disco music was becoming popular--that's too much of a coincidence: It proves that Disco caused AIDS!" Correlation does not equal causation.
General Categories of Fallacy:
-Fallacies of Reason - Fallacies of Appeal -Fallacies of Language
Equivocation
Using a term in two or more different sense within a single argument
Values
Values: lasting characteristic of what is important; a driving force in one's life - Values influence our attitudes -Values are guiding principles in one's life
Unique aspects of modern contemporary persuasion
Volume, speed, institutionalization, subtly, complexity, digitalization, and remixing of modern messages
Message Framing
What aspects of the message are emphasized over others, through the subject is the same; which "side of the fence" you're on ex: statistics/numbers; "1 in 4 teens will use drugs" means that 75% won't, but which one would be more effective in an anti-drug campaign? - loss-framed vs gained framed
Are attitudes learned?
Yes, attitudes are developed over the course of socialization in childhood and adolescence
Are attitudes a core dimension of persuasion?
Yes, persuaders seek to shape, reinforce, mold and change attitudes.
Charisma
a certain quality of the individual personality by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men treated as endowed with superhuman, supernatural, or at least exceptional powers and qualities
Propaganda
a form of communication in which leaders of a ruling group have near or total control over the transmission of information, typically relying on mass or social media to reach target audience members, using language and symbols in a deceptive and manipulative fashion ex: Korean Gov, Nazi Germany, Communist during Chinese Revolution - describes the nature and structure of their social environments, for members are exposed only to one perspective -deceptive and only shows a sliver of the facts only allowing people to hear what propagandists want people to hear -typically only demonstrated in mass media and social media
Symbol
a form of language in which one entity represents a concept or idea, communicating rich psychological and cultural meaning
definition of attitude
a learned, global evaluation of an object (person,place, or issue) that influences action and thought
Message Sidedness
a most-sided refutational message is most effective (if space and time permit); encourages cognitive dissonance
Persuasion is not Manipulation if...
a persuaders whose motives are honest and transparent
Propaganda refers to...
a persuasive communication with which the individual attributes hostile intent
Manipulation
a persuasive technique that occurs when a communicator hides his or her true persuasive goals, hoping to mislead the recipient by delivering an overt message that disguises its true intent ex: flattery, sweet talk and false promises
Need for Cognition
a stable individual difference in people's tendency to engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activity -the need to understand the world and to employ thinking to accomplish this goal
Book definition of persuasion
a symbolic process in which communicators try to convince other people to change their own attitudes or behaviors regarding an issue through the transmission of a message in an atmosphere of free choice
coercion
a technique for forcing people to act as the coercer wants them to act- presumably contrary to their preferences - usually employs a threat of some dire consequence if the actor does not do what the coercer demands or a willingness to do harm to the message receiver ex: terrorism it employs threats of dire consequence and physical force to compel individuals to behave as the coercer wants them to behave - victims are used as a means of altering the behavior of a larger audience
Forced Teaming
a way to establish premature trust because a we are in this together attitude is hard to rebuff without being rude
Message structure
conclusion drawing: be clear about consequences
lattitudes of acceptance
consists of all of all acceptable and unacceptable positions on an issue that an individual finds acceptable , including the most acceptable position
Latitudes on noncommitment
consists of positions on which individual has preferred to remain noncommittal
Ethos
credibility, "Good Person", source and character → appealing to or establishing credibility and trustworthiness is an argument → ethos does not mean ethical
External variables of theory of planned behavior
demographic variables, attitudes towards target, personality traits, other individual difference variables —> behavioral fields & evaluations of behavioral outcomes → attitudes → intention to the perform the behavior → behavior
Two types of beliefs
descriptive and prescriptive
hasty generalization fallacy
draws a broad conclusion from inadequate evidence ex: stereotyping
Pathos
emotional appeals, fallacies of language - propositions of value → appealing to emotions/ and nor heuristics, designed to invoke passions of the listener - appealing to emotions is very persuasive
Reasoned Action Model/ Theory of Planned Behavior
emphasizes that attitudes won't predict behavior if people don't think they have control over the action
Social Judgement Theory
emphasizes that receivers do not evaluate a message purley on the merits of the arguments. Instead, the theory stipulates that people compare the advocated position with their attitude and then determine whether they should accept the position advocated in the message - so named because it emphasizes people's subjective judgments about social issues
Rhetorical approaches DO NOT offer....
evidence about the effects that persuasive communications exert in everyday situations
Key aspect of persuasion
self-persuasion
Shaping is....
shaping/molding one's attitudes towards a brand, product, or company
Red Herring
sidetracks an issue by presenting a totally unrelated issue. (Also known as "ignoring the questions") - ex: why worry about pandas becoming extinct when we should be worried about the homeless → someone who introduces an irrelevant issues hopes to distract the reader just as red herring can distract dogs from scent
Values include
universal values, like freedom, and self-enhancing values (achievement)
Message Content Evidence
use credible evidence, but don't overdo it; "trappings of evidence" (i.e. the over-use of evidence) becomes a heuristic cue
Persuasion allows for....
-a free flow of information that allow people to have access to perspective that challenge the government or ruling groups -allows people to question the persuader and offer contrasting opinions
Foot-in-the-door:
-compliance gaining strategy -make a small request that is likely to gain compliance, and then make a larger and more difficult request (which is the action you truly wanted done to begin with) → how does it work? It plays on people's need for consistency in their behaviors - there is an underlying social norm to be "helpful"
What is an argument?
"argument' is not a bad thing, nor does it even need to be cantankerous - to argue is not necessarily "fighting" (usually involves heated emotions)
Message Content: transportation theory:
"wrapped up in the story," relates to parasocial interaction; CAN be highly effective, BUT usually isn't possible with a short-term messaging campaign effort
descriptive norms consist of
(a) beliefs about how frequently important others engage in the behavior (b) identification, the degree to which an individual identifies with these significant others
Based on contemporary approaches we say coercion occurs when the influence agent:
(a) delivers a believable threat of significant physical or emotional harm to those who refuse the directive (b) deprives the individual of some measure of freedom or autonomy (c) attempts to induce the individual to act contrary to their preferences
Social Judgement theory concepts
(a) latitudes of acceptance, rejection, and noncommitment (b) assimilation and contrast (c)ego-involvement
injunctive norms consist of
(a)injunctive normative beliefs, or beliefs that individuals who are important to the person endorse behavior (b)motivation to comply the person's motivation to go along with these significant others
Rhetoric (lecture)
(noun) -the art of effective or persuasive speaking or writing, especially the use of figures of speech and other compositional techniques - language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content
Fallacies of Appeal
-emotionally loaded language ex: appeal to emotion (pathos), appeal to to ignorance, bandwagon fallacy, appeal to authority, and appeal to tradition
Confirmation Bias:
- A fallacy of logos, the common tendency to notice, search out, select and share evidence that confirms one's own standpoint and beliefs, as opposed to contrary evidence. This fallacy is how "fortune tellers" work--If I am told I will meet a "tall, dark stranger" I will be on the lookout for a tall, dark stranger, and when I meet someone even marginally meeting that description I will marvel at the correctness of the "psychic's" prediction. In contemporary times Confirmation Bias is most often seen in the tendency of various audiences to "curate their political environments, subsisting on one-sided information diets and [even] selecting into politically homogeneous neighborhoods" - Confirmation Bias (also, Homophily) means that people tend to seek out and follow solely those media outlets that confirm their common ideological and cultural biases, sometimes to an degree that leads a the false (implicit or even explicit) conclusion that "everyone" agrees with that bias and that anyone who doesn't is "crazy," "looney," evil or even "radicalized." See also, "Half Truth," and "Defensiveness."
The Affective Fallacy (also The Romantic Fallacy; Emotion over Reflection; "Follow Your Heart"):
- An extremely common modern fallacy of Pathos, that one's emotions, urges or "feelings" are innate and in every case self-validating, autonomous, and above any human intent or act of will (one's own or others'), and are thus immune to challenge or criticism. -In this fallacy one argues, "I feel it, so it must be true. My feelings are valid, so you have no right to criticize what I say or do, or how I say or do it." This latter is also a fallacy of stasis, confusing a respectful and reasoned response or refutation with personal invalidation, disrespect, prejudice, bigotry, sexism, homophobia or hostility. A grossly sexist form of the Affective Fallacy is the well-known crude fallacy that the phallus "Has no conscience" (also, "A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do;" "Thinking with your other head."), i.e., since (male) sexuality is self-validating and beyond voluntary control what one does with it cannot be controlled either and such actions are not open to criticism, an assertion eagerly embraced and extended beyond the male gender in certain reifications of "Desire" in contemporary academic theory.
Social Media and Persuasion
- Blurs the line between persuader and persuadee further - changing typography of persuasion (tweets, posts, hashtags rather than face to face) - social media posts can induce someone to look at the world differently CON: posts that are culturally insensitive can inflame old prejudices, unspeakable impacts, and terrorist can harness this technology to recruit new members
Formal Bases of Power
- Legitimate Power - Reward Power -Coercive Power
Fallacies of reason
- Logos (logic) -hasty generalization, non-sequitur, circular argument, false dichotomy, ad hominem, card stacking, red herring, slippery slope, false-cause, false analogy
Compliance-gaining begins with an understanding of power
- Power can be formal and informal - Formal Power requires having an actual position of authority, whereas informal power does not
Persuasion definition 1
- a communication process in which the communicator seeks to elicit a desired response from his receiver (Andersen, 1971)
Persuasion definition 2
- a conscious attempt by one individual to change attitudes, beliefs, or behavior of another individual or group of individuals through the transmission of some message (Bettinghause & Cody, 1982)
Attitude is...
- a psychological construct - a mental and emotional entity that inheres in, or characterizes, the person
Persuasion definition 4
- a successful intentional effort at influencing another's mental state through communication in a circumstance in which the persuadee has some measure of freedom (O'Keefe, 2016)
Persuasion definition 3
- a symbolic activity whose purpose is to effect internalization or voluntary acceptance of new cognitive states or patterns of overt behavior through the exchange of messages (Smith, 1982)
Socialization
- attitude shaping in a positive light - influential social agents model a variety of pro-social values and attitudes such as: self-discipline, altruism, and religion
Contemporary social media effects:
- can involve simple catchphrases - diffuse more quickly and widely than previous technologies - enable others to participate in meaning conferral - are capable of mobilizing individuals across national boundaries
Social Media Can:
- exert a variety of positive effects on beliefs and attitudes -expose individuals to a multitude of communicators, some offering viewpoints that contrast with user's political attitudes - certain messages on certain platforms can further peoples confirmation bias -certain messages that add to ne's confirmation bias make for an echo chamber * aggravated by core formal features of brevity and speed
deontological theory
- judt because something gives many pleasure doesn't make it right. The mere fact that the majority, however big, favors a certain law, however intensely, does not make the law just
the basic syllogism:
- major premise: monkeys have tails, but apes do not - minor premise ( a specific case that relates to the generalization): the macaque has a tail - conclusion (what can he deduced from the two premises): Therefore, the Macaque is a monkey, not an ape -You can be tricked: Major premise: monkeys have tails, but apes do not - minor premise: a cat has tails - conclusion: therefore, a cat is a monkey, not at ape
Contemporary Technologies
- make it possible for people to later content of persuasive messages, giving messages meanings they did not have and that the original communicator did not intend - empowers receivers and gives them opportunities to challenge powerful persuaders in innovative ways - makes it playful
Persuasion Involves the Transmission of a Message
- may be verbal or nonverbal - can be relayed interpersonally through mass media or social media networking sites -may be reasonable or unreasonable, factual or emotional the message can consist of arguments or simple ques -there must be a message for communication as opposed to social influence - media broadcasting in news change people's perceptions of the world - art, books, movies, plays, and songs has a strong influence on how we think and feel about life - artistic portrayals can transport people into different realities and change the way they see life
Changing
- most important persuasive impact and one that comes most frequently - communications can markedly change attitudes
Rhetoric
- now referred to as persuasion - was an exalted component of civilization, one linked with eloquence, learning and high moral character -the need to educate for citizenship. Concerned with the practical and ethical requirements of civic life, the ancient rhetoricians aspired to equip young people with the skills and knowledge they would need to be citizens in a free society - refers to the use if argumentation, language, and public address to influence audiences
Key attributions of persuasion
- operates as a process, not product -relies on symbols -involves the communicators intent to influence -entails self-persuasion -requires transmission of message -assumes free choice
People Persuade Themselves
- people persuade themselves to change attitudes or behavior - communicators provide the arguments - they set up the bait - we make the change or refuse to yield - you can't force people to be persuaded - you can only activate their desire and show them logic behind your ideas
Persuasion involves what?
- persuaders awareness that he or she is trying to influence someone else - requires that the "persuadee" make a conscious or unconscious decision to change his mind about something
Persuasion Involves an attempt to influence
- persuasion does not always or inevitable succeed - fails to influence attitudes or behaviors - persuasive communications do not always influence target audience - persuasion involves deliberate attempt to influence another person -persuaders must intend to change another individual's attitudes or behaviors and must be aware that they are trying to accomplish a goal persuasion represents a conscious attempt to influence the other party, along with accompanying awareness that the persuadee has a mental state susceptible to change - it is a type of social influence - persuasion occurs within a context of intentional messages that are initiated by a communicator in the hope of influencing the recipient useful to stimulate that persuasion involves some sort of deliberate effort to change another's mind
5 components of persuasion (book definition)
- persuasion is a symbolic process - persuasion involves an attempt to influence - people persuade themselves - persuasion involves the transmission of a message - persuasion requires free choice
Persuasion is a symbolic process
- persuasion takes time, consists of multiple steps, and actively involves the recipient of the message - think of the persuader as the teacher moving people step-by-step to a solution, helping them appreciate why the advocated position solves the problem best - use of symbols are persuaders tools, harnessed to change attitudes and mold opinions -persuasion does not operate on a literal level
Reinforcing
- persuasive communications are not designed to convert people, but to reinforce a position they already hold - people have a strong variety of attitudes and attitudes are hard to change, thus persuaders join 'em, not beat 'em
Informal bases of power include:
- referent power - Expert Power
Persuasion Requires Free Choice
- self-persuasion is the key to successful influence, then an individual must be free to alter her own behavior or to do what he wishes in a communication setting - it is hard to say where coercion ends and where persuasion begins - a person is free when they have the ability to act otherwise-to do other than what the persuader suggests-or to reflect critically on his choices in a situation - the concept of freedom that underlies is a relative, not an absolute, concept
Kairos
- the timing of the argument - offering the argument at the "right time" - can involve "knowing when the market/target audience "is ripe" for your message (i.e. observation and research)
For children to understand persuasion:
- they must understand that other people can have desires and beliefs -recognize that the persuadee has a mental state that is susceptible to change -demonstrate a primitive awareness that they intend to influence another person -realize that the persuadee has a perspective different from theirs, even if they cannot put all this into words (Bartsch &London 200; Lapierre, 2015)
What did Sophists do?
- traveled from city to city - educated those for a fee
Political Correctness ("PC"):
-A postmodern fallacy, a counterpart of the "Name Calling" fallacy, supposing that the nature of a thing or situation can be changed by simply changing its name. E.g., "Today we strike a blow for animal rights and against cruelty to animals by changing the name of 'pets' to 'animal companions.'" Or "Never, ever play the 'victim' card, because it's so manipulative and sounds so negative, helpless and despairing. Instead of being 'victims,' we are proud to be 'survivors.'" (Of course, when "victims" disappear then perpetrators conveniently vanish as well!) - Occasionally the fallacy of "Political Correctness" is falsely confused with simple courtesy, e.g., "I'm sick and tired of the tyranny of Political Correctness, having to watch my words all the time--I want to be free to speak my mind and to call out a N----- or a Queer in public any time I damn well feel like it!"
Utilitarianism
-offers a series of common-sense solutions to moral dilemmas -contains an elaborate set of postulates that can help people to decide whether particular actions are morally justified.
Borderline Cases of Coercion and Persuasion
1. art 2. movies 3. music 4. entertainment TV shows 5. news 6. heart-rendering photos
Persuasion examples
1. friends attempt to influence another's opinion of movies 2. loved one's anti-drug appeal 3. advertising 4. public health service messages 5. political campaigns 6. sales and telemarketing
6 types of socratic questions:
1. questions for clarification: why do you say that? 2. questions that probe assumptions: how could you verify that assumption 3. questions that probe reason with evidence: "what would be an example?" 4. questions about viewpoints: "what is another way to look at it?" 5. questions that probe implications: "what are the consequences?" 6. question about the question: "why do you think I asked this question/Why did you ask that question"
Examples of Coercion
1. threatening messages 2. employers directives 3. interrogation 4. communication in dangerously abusive relationships 5. ban on smoking 6. enforcement of seat belt laws
Attitudes
A Focal Point for Change: why are attitudes more often the focus of behavioral change than values, beliefs, or behavior - Attitudes are learned evaluations of or toward something - Attitudes are learned - Attitudes are evaluated - Attitudes are not always consistent - Valence plays a factor (strength and direction) - mental state
Shifting the Burden of Proof:
A classic fallacy of logos that challenges an opponent to disprove a claim rather than asking the person making the claim to defend his/her own argument. E.g., "These days space-aliens are everywhere among us, masquerading as true humans, even right here on campus! I dare you to prove it isn't so! See? You can't! You admit it! That means what I say has to be true. Most probably, you're one of them, since you seem to be so soft on space-aliens!" A typical tactic in using this fallacy is first to get an opponent to admit that a far-fetched claim, or some fact related to it, is indeed at least theoretically "possible," and then declare the claim "proven" absent evidence to the contrary. E.g., "So you admit that massive undetected voter fraud is indeed possible under our current system, and could have happened in this country at least in theory, and you can't produce even the tiniest scintilla of evidence that it didn't actually happen! Ha-ha! I rest my case." See also, Argument from Ignorance. (para. 118)
The Dunning-Kruger Effect:
A cognitive bias that leads people of limited skills or knowledge to mistakenly believe their abilities are greater than they actually are. (Thanks to Teaching Tolerance for this definition!) E.g., "I know Washington was the Father of His Country and never told a lie, Pocahontas was the first Native American, Lincoln freed the slaves, Hitler murdered six million Jews, Susan B. Anthony won equal rights for women, and Martin Luther King said "I have a dream!" Moses parted the Red Sea, Caesar said "Et tu, Brute?" and the only reason America didn't win the Vietnam War hands-down like we always do was because they tied our generals' hands and the politicians cut and run. See? Why do I need to take a history course? I know everything about history!" (para. 44)
Tu Quoque ("You Do it Too!"; also, Two Wrongs Make a Right):
A corrupt argument from ethos, the fallacy of defending a shaky or false standpoint or excusing one's own bad action by pointing out that one's opponent's acts, ideology or personal character are also open to question, or are perhaps even worse than one's own. E.g., "Sure, we may have tortured prisoners and killed kids with drones, but we don't cut off heads like they do!" Or, "You can't stand there and accuse me of corruption! You guys are all into politics and you know what we have to do to get reelected!" Unusual, self-deprecating variants on this fallacy are the Ego / Nos Quoque Fallacies ("I / we do it too!"), minimizing or defending another's evil actions because I am / we are guilty of the same thing or of even worse. E.g., In response to allegations that Russian Premier Vladimir Putin is a "killer," American President Donald Trump (2/2017) told an interviewer, "There are a lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country's so innocent?" This fallacy is related to the Red Herring and to the Ad Hominem Argument. (para. 137)
The Identity Fallacy (also Identity Politics; "Die away, ye old forms and logic!"):
A corrupt postmodern argument from ethos, a variant on the Argumentum ad Hominem in which the validity of one's logic, evidence, experience or arguments depends not on their own strength but rather on whether the one arguing is a member of a given social class, generation, nationality, religious or ethnic group, color, gender or sexual orientation, profession, occupation or subgroup. In this fallacy, valid opposing evidence and arguments are brushed aside or "othered" without comment or consideration, as simply not worth arguing about solely because of the lack of proper background or ethos of the person making the argument, or because the one arguing does not self-identify as a member of the "in-group." E.g., "You'd understand me right away if you were Burmese but since you're not there's no way I can explain it to you," or "Nobody but another nurse can know what a nurse has to go through." Identity fallacies are reinforced by common ritual, language, and discourse. However, these fallacies are occasionally self-interested, driven by the egotistical ambitions of academics, politicians and would-be group leaders anxious to build their own careers by carving out a special identity group constituency to the exclusion of existing broader-based identities and leadership. An Identity Fallacy may lead to scorn or rejection of potentially useful allies, real or prospective, because they are not of one's own identity. The Identity Fallacy promotes an exclusivist, sometimes cultish "do for self" philosophy which in today's world virtually guarantees self-marginalization and ultimate defeat. A recent application of the Identity Fallacy is the fallacious accusation of "Cultural Appropriation," in which those who are not of the right Identity are condemned for "appropriating" the cuisine, clothing, language or music of a marginali
Moving the Goalposts (also, Changing the Rules; All's Fair in Love and War; The Nuclear Option; "Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing"):
A fallacy of logos, demanding certain proof or evidence, a certain degree of support or a certain number of votes to decide an issue, and then when this is offered, demanding even more, different or better support in order to deny victory to an opponent. For those who practice the fallacy of Moral Superiority (above), Moving the Goalposts is often perceived as perfectly good and permissible if necessary to prevent the victory of Wickedness and ensure the triumph of one's own side, i.e, the Righteous. (para. 79)
Appeal to Emotion
A general category of many fallacies that use emotional appeal more than reason in order to attempt to persuade. It is a type of manipulation used in place of well-supported argument
Worst-case Fallacy
A pessimistic fallacy by which one's reasoning is based on an improbable, far-fetched or even completely imaginary worst-case scenario rather than on reality. This plays on pathos (fear) rather than reason, and is often politically motivated. E.g., "What if armed terrorists were to attack your county grain elevator tomorrow morning at dawn? Are you ready to fight back? Better stock up on assault rifles and ammunition today, just in case!"
Hero-Busting (also, "The Perfect is the Enemy of the Good"):
A postmodern fallacy of ethos under which, since nothing and nobody in this world is perfect there are not and have never been any heroes: Washington and Jefferson held slaves, Lincoln was (by our contemporary standards) a racist, Karl Marx sexually exploited his family's own young live-in domestic worker and got her pregnant, Martin Luther King Jr. had an eye for women too, Lenin condemned feminism, the Mahatma drank his own urine (ugh!), Pope Francis is wrong on abortion, capitalism, same-sex marriage and women's ordination, Mother Teresa loved suffering and was wrong on just about everything else too, etc., etc Also applies to the now near-universal political tactic of ransacking everything an opponent has said, written or done since infancy in order to find something to misinterpret or condemn (and we all have something!). An early example of this latter tactic is deftly described in Robert Penn Warren's classic (1946) novel, All the King's Men. This is the opposite of the "Heroes All" fallacy, below. The "Hero Busting" fallacy has also been selectively employed at the service of the Identity Fallacy (see below) to falsely "prove" that "you cannot trust anyone" but a member of "our" identity-group since everyone else, even the so-called "heroes" or "allies" of other groups, are all racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, or hate "us." E.g., In 1862 Abraham Lincoln said he was willing to settle the U.S. Civil War either with or without freeing the slaves if it would preserve the Union, thus "conclusively proving" that all whites are viciously racist at heart and that African Americans must do for self and never trust any of "them," not even those who claim to be allies.
Gaslighting:
A recently-prominent, vicious fallacy of logic, denying or invalidating a person's own knowledge and experiences by deliberately twisting or distorting known facts, memories, scenes, events and evidence in order to disorient a vulnerable opponent and to make him or her doubt his/her sanity. E.g., "Who are you going to believe? Me, or your own eyes?" Or, "You claim you found me in bed with her? Think again! You're crazy! You seriously need to see a shrink." A very common, though cruel instance of Gaslighting that seems to have been particularly familiar among mid-20th century generations is the fallacy of Emotional Invalidation, questioning, after the fact, the reality or "validity" of affective states, either another's or one's own. E.g., "Sure, I made it happen from beginning to end, but but it wasn't me doing it, it was just my stupid hormones betraying me." Or, "You didn't really mean it when you said you 'hate' Mommy. Now take a time-out and you'll feel better." Or, "No, you're not really in love; it's just infatuation or 'puppy love.'" The fallacy of "Gaslighting" is named after British playwright Patrick Hamilton's 1938 stage play "Gas Light," also known as "Angel Street."
Infotainment (also Infotainment; Fake News; InfoWars);
A very corrupt and dangerous modern media-driven fallacy that deliberately and knowingly stirs in facts, news, falsities and outright lies with entertainment, a mixture usually concocted for specific, base ideological and profit-making motives. Origins of this fallacy predate the current era in the form of "Yellow" or "Tabloid" Journalism. This deadly fallacy has caused endless social unrest, discontent and even shooting wars (e.g., the Spanish American War) over the course of modern history. Practitioners of this fallacy sometimes hypocritically justify its use on the basis that their readers/listeners/viewers "know beforehand" (or should know) that the content offered is not intended as real news and is offered for entertainment purposes only, but in fact this caveat is rarely observed by uncritical audiences who eagerly swallow what the purveyors put forth. See also Dog-Whistle Politics. (para. 66)
Ambiguity
An argument that accommodates multiple meanings, contains vagueness that avoids commitment, and/or contains simple represntations
Dog-Whistle Politics:
An extreme version of reductionism and sloganeering in the public sphere, a contemporary fallacy of logos and pathos in which a brief phrase or slogan of the hour, e.g., "Abortion," "The 1%," "9/11," "Zionism,""Chain Migration," "Islamic Terrorism," "Fascism," "Communism," "Big government," "Taco trucks!", "Tax and tax and spend and spend," "Gun violence," "Gun control," "Freedom of choice," "Lock 'em up,", "Amnesty," etc. is flung out as "red meat" or "chum in the water" that reflexively sends one's audience into a snapping, foaming-at-the-mouth feeding-frenzy. Any reasoned attempt to more clearly identify, deconstruct or challenge an opponent's "dog whistle" appeal results in puzzled confusion at best and wild, irrational fury at worst. "Dog whistles" differ widely in different places, moments and cultural milieux, and they change and lose or gain power so quickly that even recent historic texts sometimes become extraordinarily difficult to interpret. A common but sad instance of the fallacy of Dog Whistle Politics is that of candidate "debaters" of differing political shades simply blowing a succession of discursive "dog whistles" at their audience instead of addressing, refuting or even bothering to listen to each other's arguments, a situation resulting in contemporary (2017) allegations that the political Right and Left in America are speaking "different languages" when they are simply blowing different "dog whistles."
Who invented rhetoric?
Ancient greeks
Be Socrates
Ask questions: summarize person argument, ask for evidence, challenge assumptions, find an exception
Beliefs
Beliefs are something thought to be true or untrue - Behavior is the action outcome
Communicator Factors of Persuasion
Charisma, Authority, Credibility, Context
Appeal to Authority
Cites an authority or "expert" who has no claim to expertise about the subject. This fallacy attempts to transfer prestige from one area to another
Message Primacy and Recency
Concerns the order of information/visuals; people usually best remember either the first or last thing they saw/heard
Appeal to Tradition:
Defined the way things are being done is how they have been dine traditionally, therefore correct and do not merit change → ex: marijuana has been illegal federally for a long time, and should remain that way
Fundamentals of the message:
Designed to influence with a particular outcome in mind. In your campaign proposal, what are you thinking you may want to change? : Knowledge, Awareness, Attitudes, Perceived Norms (injunctive or descriptive)
The message itself: Language:
Includes oration, rhetoric → rate and tone of speech → powerless vs. powerful language (gender differences) → some language invokes reactance by message receiver- you do not want this effect
Two broad areas of Persuasion
Interpersonal persuasion and persuasion in social science context (e.g. pr and health communication
Credibility:
Key elements- expertise of the communicator, trustworthiness of the communicator ( it possible to lack expertise, but still be trustworthy) - Goodwill ("perceived caring")v- communicator credibility vs. credibility of the sources provided by the speaker/communicator → Verifiability is key when "citing sources". That is, and "outsider" should be able to access or locate your sources if you want to be perceived as most credible.
Social Attractiveness:
Likeability, perceived similarity (with the speaker) (aka homophily), Physical Attractiveness: contextual factors, gender-based factors
Dump-and Chase:
Rejecting the refusal by asking "Why not?" Then, once a reason is given, you follow up with messaging or reasoning to overcome the objection. (Can be done repeatedly.) → be careful - if you push the person to anger or feeling "bullied," this technique will not work → how does it work: it plays on people's felt need to explain themselves when asked which then fuels the persuader's ability to keep going - MK sidenote: you never "owe" an explanation to anyone, and are never obligated to keep explaining yourself
Expert Power
Rooted in person's advanced knowledge about a subject matter or field of expertise ; derived from education and experience
Communications exert 3 different types of persuasion effects
Shaping, Reinforcing, and Changing Responses
Appeal to the People (bandwagon Fallacy)
Something is right, appropriate, justified, or true because everyone is doing it
Who taught rhetoric?
Sophists - named after the word, sophos, for knowledge -traveling teachers in rhetoric - goal was to teach people to intelligently manage their affairs for success in public life
Card Stacking:
States only facts that support the point being made and ignores all other important evidence - ex: "we all need term limits. Look at all the really bad and ineffective public officials who have been in office too long!" → this person arguing for term limits only presents the failures of those who serve more than eight years
Gish Gallop:
The Gish Gallop is the fallacious debate tactic of drowning your opponent in a flood of individually-weak arguments in order to prevent rebuttal of the whole argument collection without great effort. It's essentially a conveyor belt-fed version of the on the spot fallacy, as it's unreasonable for anyone to have a well-composed answer immediately available to every argument present in the Gallop. The Gish Gallop is named after creationist Duane Gish, who often abused it. (para. 2)
Reward Power:
The ability to give or withhold rewards for particular actions or performances
Coercive Power:
The ability to penalize others for particular actions or performances
Playing on Emotion (also, the Sob Story; the Pathetic Fallacy; the "Bleeding Heart" fallacy, the Drama Queen / Drama King Fallacy):
The classic fallacy of pure argument from pathos, ignoring facts and evoking emotion alone. E.g., "If you don't agree that witchcraft is a major problem just shut up, close your eyes for a moment and picture in your mind all those poor moms crying bitter tears for their innocent tiny children whose cozy little beds and happy tricycles lie all cold and abandoned, just because of those wicked old witches! Let's string'em all up!"
E" for Effort (also Noble Effort; I'm Trying My Best; The Lost Cause):
The common contemporary fallacy of ethos that something must be right, true, valuable, or worthy of respect and honor solely because one (or someone else) has put so much sincere good-faith effort or even sacrifice and bloodshed into it. (See also Appeal to Pity; Argument from Inertia; Heroes All; or Sob Story). An extreme example of this fallacy is Waving the Bloody Shirt (also, the "Blood of the Martyrs" Fallacy), the fallacy that a cause or argument, no matter how questionable or reprehensible, cannot be questioned without dishonoring the blood and sacrifice of those who died so nobly for that cause. E.g., "Defend the patriotic gore / That flecked the streets of Baltimore..." (from the official Maryland State Song). See also Cost Bias, The Soldier's Honor Fallacy, and the Argument from Inertia. (para. 45)
Zero Tolerance (also, Zero Risk Bias, Broken Windows Policing, Disproportionate Response; Even One is Too Many; Exemplary Punishment; Judenrein):
The contemporary fallacy of declaring an "emergency" and promising to disregard justice and due process and devote unlimited resources (and occasionally, unlimited cruelty) to stamp out a limited, insignificant or even nonexistent problem. E.g., "I just read about an actual case of cannibalism somewhere in this country. That's disgusting, and even one case is way, way too many! We need a Federal Taskforce against Cannibalism with a million-dollar budget and offices in every state, a national SCAN program in all the grade schools (Stop Cannibalism in America Now!), and an automatic double death penalty for cannibals; in other words, zero tolerance for cannibalism in this country!" This is a corrupt and cynical argument from pathos, almost always politically driven, a particularly sinister variety of Dog Whistle Politics and the "We Have to do Something" fallacy.
The Appeal to Nature (also, Biologizing; The Green Fallacy):
The contemporary romantic fallacy of ethos (that of "Mother Nature") that if something is "natural" it has to be good, healthy and beneficial. E.g., "Our premium herb tea is lovingly brewed from the finest freshly-picked and delicately dried natural T. Radicans leaves. Those who dismiss it as mere 'Poison Ivy' don't understand that it's 100% organic, with no additives, GMO's or artificial ingredients It's time to Go Green and lay back in Mother's arms." One who employs or falls for this fallacy forgets the old truism that left to itself, nature is indeed "red in tooth and claw." This fallacy also applies to arguments alleging that something is "unnatural," or "against nature" and thus evil (The Argument from Natural Law) e.g. "Homosexuality should be outlawed because it's against nature," arrogating to oneself the authority to define what is "natural" and what is unnatural or perverted. E.g., during the American Revolution British sources widely condemned rebellion against King George III as "unnatural," and American revolutionaries as "perverts," because the Divine Right of Kings represented Natural Law, and according to 1 Samuel 15:23 in the Bible, rebellion is like unto witchcraft.
The Non Sequitur:
The deluded fallacy of offering evidence, reasons or conclusions that have no logical connection to the argument at hand (e.g. "The reason I flunked your course is because the U. S. government is now putting out purple five-dollar bills! Purple!").
The Ad Hominem Argument (also, "Personal attack," "Poisoning the well"):
The fallacy of attempting to refute an argument by attacking the opposition's intelligence, morals, education, professional qualifications, personal character or reputation, using a corrupted negative argument from ethos. E.g., "That so-called judge;" or "He's so evil that you can't believe anything he says." See also "Guilt by Association." The opposite of this is the "Star Power" fallacy.
The Big ``But" Fallacy (also, Special Pleading):
The fallacy of enunciating a generally-accepted principle and then directly negating it with a "but." Often this takes the form of the "Special Case," which is supposedly exempt from the usual rules of law, logic, morality, ethics or even credibility E.g., "As Americans we have always believed on principle that every human being has God-given, inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, including in the case of criminal accusations a fair and speedy trial before a jury of one's peers. BUT, your crime was so unspeakable and a trial would be so problematic for national security that it justifies locking you up for life in Guantanamo without trial, conviction or possibility of appeal." Or, "Yes, Honey, I still love you more than life itself, and I know that in my wedding vows I promised before God that I'd forsake all others and be faithful to you 'until death do us part,' but you have to understand, this was a special case..." See also, "Shopping Hungry," and "We Have to do Something!" (para. 26)
The Straw Man (also "The Straw Person" ""The Straw Figure"):
The fallacy of setting up a phony, weak, extreme or ridiculous parody of an opponent's argument and then proceeding to knock it down or reduce it to absurdity with a rhetorical wave of the hand. E.g., "Vegetarians say animals have feelings like you and me. Ever seen a cow laugh at a Shakespeare comedy? Vegetarianism is nonsense!" Or, "Pro-choicers hate babies and want to kill them!" Or, "Pro-lifers hate women and want them to spend their lives barefoot, pregnant and chained to the kitchen stove!" A too-common example of this fallacy is that of highlighting the most absurd, offensive, silly or violent examples in a mass movement or demonstration, e.g. "Tree huggers" for environmentalists, "bra burners" for feminists, or "rioters" when there are a dozen violent crazies in a peaceful, disciplined demonstration of thousands or tens of thousands, and then falsely portraying these extreme examples as typical of the entire movement in order to condemn it with a wave of the hand. See also Olfactory Rhetoric. (para. 127)
The Argument from Ignorance (also, Argumentum ad Ignorantiam):
The fallacy that since we don't know (or can never know, or cannot prove) whether a claim is true or false, it must be false, or it must be true. E.g., "Scientists are never going to be able to positively prove their crazy theory that humans evolved from other creatures, because we weren't there to see it! So, that proves the Genesis six-day creation account is literally true as written!" This fallacy includes Attacking the Evidence (also, "Whataboutism"; The Missing Link fallacy), e.g. "Some or all of your key evidence is missing, incomplete, or even faked! What about that? That proves you're wrong and I'm right!" This fallacy usually includes fallacious "Either-Or Reasoning" as well: E.g., "The vet can't find any reasonable explanation for why my dog died. See! See! That proves that you poisoned him! There's no other logical explanation!" A corrupted argument from logos, and a fallacy commonly found in American political, judicial and forensic reasoning. The recently famous "Flying Spaghetti Monster" meme is a contemporary refutation of this fallacy--simply because we cannot conclusively disprove the existence of such an absurd entity does not argue for its existence
The Free Speech Fallacy:
The infantile fallacy of responding to challenges to one's statements and standpoints by whining, "It's a free country, isn't it? I can say anything I want to!" A contemporary case of this fallacy is the "Safe Space," or "Safe Place," where it is not allowed to refute, challenge or even discuss another's beliefs because that might be too uncomfortable or "triggery" for emotionally fragile individuals. E.g., "All I told him was, 'Jesus loves the little children,' but then he turned around and asked me 'But what about birth defects?' That's mean. I think I'm going to cry!" Prof. Bill Hart Davidson (2017) notes that "Ironically, the most strident calls for 'safety' come from those who want us to issue protections for discredited ideas. Things that science doesn't support AND that have destroyed lives - things like the inherent superiority of one race over another. Those ideas wither under demands for evidence. They *are* unwelcome. But let's be clear: they are unwelcome because they have not survived the challenge of scrutiny." Ironically, in contemporary America "free speech" has often become shorthand for freedom of racist, offensive or even neo-Nazi expression, ideological trends that once in power typically quash free speech. Additionally, a recent (2017) scientific study has found that, in fact, "people think harder and produce better political arguments when their views are challenged" and not artificially protected without challenge. (para. 56)
What is the study of Persuasion?
The study of attitudes and how to change them
Utilitarianism
The theory, proposed by Jeremy Bentham in the late 1700s, that government actions are useful only if they promote the greatest good for the greatest number of people.
Appeal to Tradition
The way things are being done is how they have been done traditionally, are therefore correct and do not merit change
Perspective beliefs
aka mental prescriptions of what should happen in life
Interactivity
allows endless two-way communication between senders and receivers to transform the meaning of messages so they no longer comport with the original communication - producing an infinite amount sender-receiver interactions
what is a norm
an individual's belief about the appropriate behavior in a situation
Compliance-Gaining:
an intentional effort to alter someone else's behavior or decision-making → it is "persuasion," but more specifically rooted in behavior or actions
Compliance Gaining book definition
any interaction in which a message source attempts to induce a target individual to perform some desired behavior that the target otherwise might not perform
Logos
argumentation, reasoning/validity, propositions of fact, fallacies of reason- appealing to logic and reasoning - often considered the "gold standard" for sound argumentation and "winning" a debate → the audience's ability to evaluate the logic and reasoning provided in an argument is also key (it is easy to dupe an ignorant, uninformed, cognitively lazy, or biased audience with flawed logic)
Main difference between persuasion and coercion
atmosphere of free choice: assumes the individual is capable of resisting an influence attempt or of willing persuading them to alter an attitude about an issue
Modern Persuasion concepts NOT introduced by Aristotle
attitude, beliefs, cognitive processing, cognitive dissonance, social judgments, and interpersonal compliance
ELM routes
central and peripheral
Communicators do not...
change people's minds; people decide to later their own attitudes or to resist persuasion
What is Burkes theory?
focused less on the classical traditions of Greece and Rome than on the enduring power of symbols and emotional identification. Drawing on philosophy and psychoanalysis, he showed how good and evil communicators could persuade people through identification with the audience. People were "symbol-using" creatures and Burke suggests that audience members were not necessarily passive recipients of messages, but could play an active role in the persuasion process
What is the difference between a formal debate and what passes for "debating" today?
formal debates have a certain structure to allow for all sides to be heard, and also allow time for rebuttal in real time
Are syllogisms inductive or deductive?
generally deductive in nature (generalization to specific)
Attitudes are evaluations because
having attitude means that you have categorized something and make a judgement of its net value or worth
Values
ideals, guiding principles in one's life, or overarching goals that people strive to obtain
Modern day Eloquence (Jamieson)
in the past: associated with memorable oratory modern: centers on visual experience, sound bites, and dramatic stories -speakers are regarded as eloquent not when they employ arguments but when they emote and excel at telling folksy stories
latitudes of rejection
include those positions that the individual those positions that the individual finds objectionable, including the most objectionable position
How has digital technology changed the nature of persuasion?
increased complexity, blurring lines among information, entertainment and influence
Contrast
individuals push a somewhat disagreeable message away from their attitude, assuming that it is more different than it really is
two components of perceived norms
injunctive norms and descriptive norm
Rhetorical approaches offer
intriguing insights on the basic arguments employed in contemporary persuasion
the socratic method
investigating one's assumptions using open needed inquires
Utilitarianism thus seems wrong bc...
it places consequence ahead of other considerations, such as fairness and truth. - it assumes that what is right is that which produces most good -gives short shrift to other values such as fairness and justice
Perception of bias
knowledge bias, reporting bias, social actractivness
Emotionally Loaded Language
language or tone that appeals to emotion, including appeals to ear, envy, hatred, pity, pride, and more in the absence of reason -strongly related to fallacies of appeal, but with focus more on the actual words and tone used -a fallacy occurs when emotion is used instead of a reasoned argument or to obscure the fact that no compelling and rational reason exists for one's position
Communication Scholars focus on
look at persuasion in two-person units (dyads), and examining the influences of media on health and politics
a deontological or duty-based theory emphasizes...
moral duties, universal obligations, and according respect to individuals ends in and of themselves
Beliefs
more cognitive than values or attitudes. Beliefs are cognitions about the world-subjective probabilities that an object has a particular attribute or that an action will lead to a particular outcome
Motivation Process
motivation and ability determine processing strategy -involvement: individuals are high in involvement when they precieve that an issue is personally relevant or bears directly on their own lives. They are low in involvement when they believe that an issue has little or no impact on their own lives --> there has to be a motivation to be persuaded
low-balling
occurs when a persuader induces someone to comply with a request and then "ups the ante" by increasing the cost of compliance
Circular Argument
one assumes the truth of a premise or claim, draws a conclusion from the premise, and then uses the conclusion to prove the initial premise
Foundations of Persuasion
operates as a process, not product relies on symbols involves communicators intent to influence entails self-persuasion requires transmission of a message assumes free choice
Door-in-the-face:
opposite of foot-in-the-door → make a large/unreasonable request that the receiver is likely to deny, followed by a much smaller request that the receiver is likely to agree to (which is the action you truly wanted dine to begin with) → how does it work: it plays on people's sense of guilt, injustice norms/social responsibility: person may believe they will not be judged negatively by continuing to not comply
Attitudes and values organize what?
our social world - they allow us to categorize people, places, and events
peripheral route
people examine the message quickly or focus on simple cues to help them decide whether to accept the position advocated in the message -these can include a communicators physical appeal, glib speaking style, or pleaseant association between the message abd music playing in the background
Assimilation
people pull a somewhat congenial message toward their own attitudes than it really is
Control beliefs & perceived
perceived control → intention to perform behavior → behavior ^ use the model to map out behavior that you think you should change about yourself, or that people in society should change
injuctive norms
perceptions of what other people think we should do
descriptive norms
perceptions of what others have done, are doing or are likely to do in the future
Pre-Giving
persuaders gives the target a reward or gift, or does the individual a favor- subsequently our persuaders asks for help or presents a message that requires the target to return the favor - pregiving assumes that the recipient will feel pressured by the reciprocity norm that emphasizes reciprocal concessions
sophistic:
persuasion is a means to an end - very outcome-driven -success is more important than truth
aristotelian:
persuasion is the end, rather than the mean - rational decision making is the primary goal- drive by critical thinking
Surviving a Socratic Interrogation:
prepare for class (or topic on hand), remain calm, answer questions honestly, be as clear as possible, admit when you are stumped
Elaboration Likelihood Model
provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the effects of a host of source, message, and receiver factors on persuasion -the model tells us when people should be particularly likely to elaborate, or not elaborate, on persuasive messages
non sequitur
provides evidence which does not really prove a point
perceived norm
refers to acceptable, recommended behavior in a society --> perceived social pressure to perform a particular action
"That's not all"
relies on a semantic ploy, the suggestion that the buyer is getting something for nothing
referent power:
rooted in the respect and admiration from others that has been honed over time; reputation or the "likeability factor"
Self-Persuasion
says we are free to change our lives in any way that we wish
What does "the medium is the message" mean?
startled and captivated people by altering them to the ways in which the medium - television, radio, and print - was more important than the content of the communicator's speech
Theory of Planned Behavior
stems from reasoned action model/theory of reasoned action
The message itself
structure, framing, language
Normative beliefs & motivation to comply
subjective norm → intention to perform the behavior → behavior
Deontological theory assumes
that to, the extent that we can appreciate another's true intentions, the morally right act is one that is performed for the right reason
Message Content: Narrative
the "story" told by the media message
Ego-involvement
the arousal,singly or in combination, of the individuals commitments or stands in the context of appropriate situations
Social Influence
the broad process in which the behavior of one person alters the thoughts or actions of another - can occur when receivers act on cues or messages that were not necessarily intended for their consumption
Accessibility
the degree to which attitude is automatically activated from memory "getting in touch with your feelings"
5 canons of rhetoric:
the discovery phase (gathering evidence that is valid or seemingly valid) - Arrangement: the distribution of or order of arguments - Expression: fitting language to the invented material - Memory: Having a firm mental grasp of matter and words - Delivery: effective use of voice and body suitable to the subject major ( included practicing facial expressions, postured, gestures and even theatrics
Social Psychologists focus on
the individual, exploring peoples attitudes and susceptibility to persuasion
the deontological approach argues
the moral value of an act derives not from the consequence it produces, but in the intention from which the act is performed
descriptive beliefs
the perceptions of the world that people carry in their heads
Fear-then-relief
the persuader deliberately places the recipient in a state of fear, only to quickly eliminate the threat, and replace it with a mild request for compliance
Authority
the power or right to give orders, make decision, and/or enforce obedience (or perception thereof) → early socialization plays a key role- the "trapping of authority", or the "aura of legitimacy" → psychological power of the situation
Knowledge Bias:
the presumption that a communicator has biased view of an issue, based on various characteristics of the communicator
Reporting Bias:
the presumption that a communicator is taking their position just to make points with the audience; that the speaker has opted not to disclose certain information
Telos
the purpose of the argument: involves research and knowledge of your target audience: who are you wanting to persuade and why?
the social judgement theory emphasizes
the ways in which people use pre existing attitudes to filter incoming messages, interpreting persuasive arguments in light of what they already believe
why were the sophists controversial?
they emphasized the power of language - law was considered conventional, while "truth" was treated as relative - seen as manipulative
Unsolicited Promise
to convince of intention but are not guarantees
When is inductive reasoning most often used?
to predict future events or likely outcomes
Disrupt-then-reframe:
uses an odd request, action, or piece of information to distract the receiver from the potential costs or negative attributes of an action → how does it work: it plays upon people's momentary confusion and the temporary vulnerability that comes with it → the "reframe" part needs to follow however, to be most effective - don't just "disrupt" and leave it at that → it is a cognitive "window of opportunity" to insert the reframing to gain compliance
Slippery Slope
uses one weakness in a position to assume that the whole is doomed to failure. The sheer negativity of the possible effects is supposed to persuade (Also called "Domino theory/domino fallacy" - ex: "we have to win in Iraq or all of the Middle East could fall to terrorist governments"
Utilitarianism emphasizes
utility and consequences -actions are judged based on whether they produce more positive than negative consequences -ethos - the moral act is the one that promotes the greatest good for the greatest number of people
Technical Jargon - gibberish fallacy
when incomprehensible jargon or confusing gibberish is used to give the appearance of a strong argument, in place of good evidence and reasoning
central route
when people process information centrally, they carefully evlauate message arguments, consider implications of communicators ideas and relate information to their own knowledge, values and biases
Token Endorsement Fallacy
where, in the words of scholar Lara Bhasin, "Individual A has been accused of anti-Semitism, but Individual B is Jewish and says Individual A is not anti-Semitic, and the implication of course is that we can believe Individual B because, being Jewish, he has special knowledge of anti- Semitism. Or, a presidential candidate is accused of anti-Muslim bigotry, but someone finds a testimony from a Muslim who voted for said candidate, and this is trotted out as evidence against the candidate's bigotry." The same fallacy would apply to a sports team offensively named after a marginalized ethnic group, but which has obtained the endorsement (freely given or paid) of some member, traditional leader or tribal council of that marginalized group so that the otherwise-offensive team name and logo magically become "okay" and nonracist. (para. 5)
Do credible sources influence attitude?
yes
Do attitudes influence behavior?
yes - they guide our actions and steer us in the direction of doing what we believe
