COMM 312 Final Exam

fear appeals

"you should do what I want you do or else terrible/fearful things will happen to you" effective, motivates action, change towards the direction of the persuasive message -Highly intense, vivid messages, illustrate potential harms -Assess how much fear a person was experiencing

message vividness

-appeal to our emotions -image provoking -concrete language- not much jargon or flowery; language doesn't get in the way of the visual -often studied in visual messages consequences: -gain and hold our attention -memorable -emotionally arousing -not inherently persuasive persuasive when: combined w/ other things the persuader is trying to do -prompt cognitive elaboration in ways consistent w/ the message -meet some need of the listener

source-oriented persuasion

-assumes that all receivers are alike -decides for receivers what they need, want, know, value, etc. -selects specific persuasive goals for any one occasion on the basis of persuader's own timetable -communicates at receivers by means of a "canned" presentation -promotes solutions on the basis of their supposed intrinsic merits

humor

-intermixing humor into a persuasive message doesn't make it persuasive -can promote positive affect -can be a distraction; if you want to counter argue, humor can minimize our inclination/ability to -most effective when they compliment another persuasive strategy -way of humanizing an identity that has been devalued; laugh together -used to spread hate; form of self persuasion, take pleasure in my hate

message-sidedness

-one-sided messages: only offer POV of the person making the argument -two-sided messages: person producing the message provides an alternative POV Drawn to people who are like us; if you view the world in a complex way, drawn to 2 sided messages; education level, need for elaboration People in initial agreement prefer one sided messages

comforting hierarchy

1. denial of individual perceptivity- the speaker condemns the feelings that exist in the situation for the person addressed 2. implicit recognition of individual perspectivity- speaker provides some implicit acceptance of and/or positive response to the feelings of others, but does not explicitly mention, elaborate, or legitimize those feelings -divert attention -non feeling centered explanation of the situation 3. explicit recognition and elaboration of individual perspectivity- speaker explicitly acknowledges, elaborates, and legitimates feelings of the other

asymmetrical conflict

A conflict between antagonists having unequal power

symmetrical conflict

A conflict between persons or groups with relatively equal power to reward or punish the other

false analogy

Arguing on the basis of a comparison of unrelated things. compare 2 unlikes as if they were sufficiently alike to be treated as analogous

statistics

Collection of methods for planning experiments, obtaining data, organizing, summarizing, presenting, analyzing, interpreting, and drawing conclusions based on data.

empathy

Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives comforting

various instrumental and relational effects of comforting

Immediate instrumental effects -users of sophisticated comforting messages rated more sensitive -sophisticated comforting messages rated more sensitive and effective -counselors using sophisticated messages evaluated as more sensitive and helpful Long term instrumental effects -mothers w/ sophisticated comforting abilities produced children w/ this ability -exposure to sophisticated comforting promoted cognitive development -complex messages led to formation of sophisticated impressions of message producer Immediate relational effects -sophisticated comforting ability related to liking among peers -sophisticated comforting ability related to better self-image of message producer Long term relational effects -children less rejected by peers -college students lacking skill were more likely to be disliked by peers

post hoc ergo procter hoc

Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X. assuming that, because something preceded an event, it must be its cause

Selective Judgement

The extent to which people's attitudes bias how they draw conclusions about the meaning or relevance of information.

coactive persuasion

The speaker tries to show the audience how their ideas are related to his/hers, gently leading the audience to agree with his/her position. ways that persuaders work to move towards persuadees psychologically so that they will be moved, in turn, to accept the persuaders' position/proposal for action logic of "rhetorical proof" adaptation bridge gaps in understanding and differences

narrative

The telling of a story or an account of an event or series of events.

social conflict

a clash over at least partially incompatible interests

ad hominem

a fallacy that attacks the person rather than dealing with the real issue in dispute name calling rather than addressing the argument

terministic screens

a screen composed of terms through which humans perceive the world, and that direct attention away from some interpretations and toward others resources of language; deflecting attention from other possible views

cascades

a way conspiracy theories spread domino/snowball effect; power, desire to want to be accepted, group mentality

composition

arrangement of words

vocalics

auditory channel (rate, volume, pitch, voice quality, articulation) paralanguage vocal cues play a role in projecting images of self

avoiding defensiveness

clarification, reframing, bridge differences coactively, humor to defuse hostility, neutral description of situation, problem orientation, empathy, minimization of differences

approaches to building acceptable premises

coactive persuasion addresses controversial matters by appeals to premises the audience can accept -in conflict situations where there are sharp differences in opinion -prefer inducements over coercion; talk, reason w/ audience, arguments/evidence -less concerned than winning arguments (showing they're right) than winning belief -arguments begin from general premises the audience can accept, emphasize points of agreement, common ground appeals yes-yes technique yes-but technique reasoning from perspective of the other objectivist privatist combatist

relationship between credibility and content of the message

coactive persuasion combines images of similarity between persuader and persuadee while promoting images of persuader's unique expertise/trustworthiness

superrepresentation

coactive persuasion combines images of similarity between persuader and persuadee while promoting images of the persuader's unique expertise and trustworthiness similarity and credibility move towards audience psychologically by establishing relational bonds interpersonal similarity results in attraction (values, taste) towards the persuader as a person but not credibility (beliefs, expertise) seem similar and different enough, overall superrepresentative of the audience; opinion leaders

listener adapted persuasion

coactive persuasion is listener centered (audience centered, outline of ideas to cover but not interested in getting a message word for word, look at audience and their reactions, if they understand) rather than self-centered (message centered) CP are more persuasive to the audience, more likeable, more aware of differences in various audiences and adapt

peritrope

coactive persuasion makes full use of the resources of human connection (turn tabling)

repetition

comfortable with the familiar

disagreement

conflict (clash of incompatible interests) is more than a disagreement, difference of opinion, or academic controversy

productive conflict

conflict that is managed effectively -decide why to fight -decide whether to fight -decide when to fight -decide how to fight

false dichotomy

considering only two extremes when there are other possibilities illogically reduce complex matters to an either-or

reflection enhancing discipline

discipline strategies that encourage the child to think about the consequences of their behavior for other people and to view those consequences as a reason to change their behavior teach moral principles treat the child as an agent of action

downplaying

downplay the negatives (typification)

compliance gaining strategies

effect change in overt behavior; interpersonal encounters; coercion and material inducement, power strategies need persuasion; conversational constraints -social appropriateness: nice, civil, proper, pleasant, courteous -efficiency: direct, immediate, relevant

conspiracy theory

effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who attempt to conceal their role (at least until their aims are accomplished) -belief that there is no such thing as unintended consequences -inclination to see events as a larger struggle between good and evil -once a story is believed, it seems to stay believed -follow a simple heuristic: consequences are intended -explain the unexplainable -rationalize emotional reactions -appeal to our love of a good story -makes us feel better about a lack of control -reaffirm preexxisting ideological beliefs (crippling epistemology)

resources of ambiguity

every utterance is the end product of a set of conscious/unconscious decisions from among an array of possible choices; there are multiple ways to label something peritrope, surroundings, close physical settings, medium

fallacies

fails to stand up to careful scrutiny; appears convincing/compelling but upon examination shows cracks

Leventhall parallel process model

fear is a threat, people will respond in different ways; cope with fear of the threat; human beings don't always respond in adaptive rational responses -danger control -fear control

resistance to temptation

higher resistance as an outcome of Reflection Enhancing Discipline

proxemics

how space and spatial relationships communicate (eye contact, how close you get to another, how loud/soft your voice becomes) zones of communication, vary by culture; spatial positioning power, level of involvement with others, pos/neg sentiment

motivated reasoning

idea that it's important not just to get the right outcome but also to get a preferred outcome, regardless of correctness selective judgement selective perception selective memory selective exposure

persuasion dialogue

ideal rhetoric is dialogic, not monologic, placing conversants on equal footing 2+ people get together to puzzle out an issue; may have strong opinions, free to express; difference is expected/welcomed conversants see matters differently but their object isn't to win anything at the expense of the other demands of the subject matter may have multiple goals; consensus is not a required outcome; raise questions; talk spins out to related issues positions are presented skillfully but not manipulatively one speaks, other listens carefully, try to see things from other's perspective while resisting temptation to take everything at face value emphathic listening + critical listening cooperative exchange; questions for clarification, objections; but no one seeks to dominate or put the others down I put forward my case, you try to improve it, I do the same for you if I can

powerful and powerless language

implies willingness to take a stance -powerless speech expresses lack of confidence in one's position -powerless speech implies an unwillingness to take a stand hesitation forms, tag questions, qualifiers

genuineness

in Rogerian terms, authenticity or congruence; the awareness of one's true inner thoughts and feelings and the ability to share them honestly with others

influence on cognitive complexity

increased cognitive complexity in children as an outcome of RED put others' thoughts/feelings in front of the child, look at the social world in more complex ways, think about friends with multiple categories/beliefs, enhance social/cognitive development

influence on comforting

increased comforting abilities in children as an outcome of RED

affective perspective taking

inferring how another feels by imagining themselves in that person's place

straw man fallacy

instead of dealing with the actual issue, it attacks a weaker version of argument misrepresents the opponent's argument, presenting them in weakened form so that they could be more easily knocked down misrepresentation of the argument, real case goes unrefuted

message intensity

intense language- a message which is highly evaluative and intended to be emotional; appeal to emotions, uses images to manipulate with visually intensity

enthymeme

invites the reader to supply and endorse premises that are missing from the argument but left implicit truncated argument that rests of a premise or premises it assumes its audience will accept virtually all persuasive discourse is enthymematic

association

link to something already loved/desired or hated/feared by audience glittering generalities- words that seek to make us approve/accept w/o examining evidence; name calling

euphemism

make unpleasant reality more acceptable

moral reasoning

morality based on consequences for other people -avoid punishment -in terms of community (rules, laws) -consequences for other people

crippled epistemology

most of what we know doesn't come from our direct experience idea that if we get all our knowledge about the world from a few, isolated sources, and the information they give us is incorrect, we'll be unable to tell that it is incorrect because that is the only information we have

warmth

non possessive warmth unconditional positive regard

omission

omit information of the bad points cardstacking- selecting only info that supports the persuader's POV; hide/conceal info

principle of reactivity

on divisive public issues, attempts at direct persuasive communication b/w antagonists are often destructive, reinforce us vs them attitudes if egos are attacked, attitudes harden negative spirals

open and closed societies

open societies- societies where the press is free, and checks/balances are in force (democracies) closed societies- societies where information is tightly controlled by those in power (authoritarian regimes, dictatorships)

mixed motive conflict

paradox in social conflicts: adversaries are motivated simultaneously to cooperate/compete with each other have much to lose by acting combatively, much to gain through cooperation winning with others (win win) is preferable to winning at expense of others (win lose) benefits will more likely accompany use of cooperative, coactive means of influence; cooperation can breed spirit of harmony on other issues and reduce need for offensive capacities cooperation default but not preferred strategy in all cases -purely coercive influence entails high costs; CP costs nothing -b/c conflicts involve reciprocal influence, each side must calculate repercussions of its actions in possible retaliation costs -use of purely combative strategies may block the resolution of other important issues -strategies of purely combative nature can often enrage outsiders, who then bring their own influence to the situation

intensifying

play up positives

propositions of fact, value and policy

propositions are debatvle assertations, 3 types -proposition of policy: debatable assertations about what should or should not be done -proposition of fact: debatable assertations of what is true or false -proposition of value: debatable assertations about what is good/bad, moral/immoral

receiver-oriented persuasion (coactive)

receiver oriented, take place largely on the message in recipients' terms different strokes for different folks tailor messages, assumes all receivers are unique, learn from receivers what they want/need, selects specific persuasive goals, adapt messages, solution based on capacity to resolve receivers' special problems

protection motivation model of fear

similar to ELM model; getting a message recipient to increase motivation to increase protective action; inform/reinforce the belief that the recipient can change their behavior and benefits will accrue -response efficacy -self efficacy

comforting accepting

sophisticated comfort more accepting

non-judgemental

sophisticated comfort more evaluatively neutral

comforting involvement

sophisticated comforting evidences more involvement

comfort evaluatively neutral

sophisticated comforting more evaluatively neutral

comforting cognitive orientation

sophisticated comforting possesses a cognitive orientation

jargon

specialized language of a trade or profession

haptics

tactile channel of communication, arena of touch

narrowcasting

targeting media programming at specific populations within society

cognitive complexity

the ability to construct a variety of frameworks for viewing an issue

bureaucratese

the often unintelligible language used by bureaucrats to avoid controversy and lend weight to their words

causality

the relationship between cause and effect

common causal fallacy

treating one among many causal factors as the sole cause

reification

viewing an abstract, immaterial concept as if it were a concrete thing Language does our thinking for us think in terminologies not exclusively our own political socialization process, dominant versions of right/wrong, meanings reified, treated as mundane realities rather than as social constructions arise in discourses that normalize/naturalize, obscuring role of power in formation; dominant conception at a historical moment determines how we understands the deviant and ourselves, choices we make

win-win, win-lose, lose-lose orientations

win-lose: the 2 parties each seek to win at the other's expense win-win: work cooperatively for mutually satisfactory outcomes lose-lose: destructive conflict; often a result of both parties aiming for win-lose ~increase in size/number of things believed to be at stake ~participants are willing to bear greater costs to "win" ~each side exempts itself from norms of ethical conduct they impose on each other ~hostility intensifies ~suspicion and combativeness ~reliance on power and tactics of threat, coercion, deception ~communication impoverished and unreliable ~focus on the immediate, less range of perceived alternatives, thought is polarized, susceptible to fear or hope inspired rumors, one's own behavior seen as more benevolent/legitimate