Notes on Persuasion
On Being Persuaded: Some Basic Distinctions
A definition of persuasion is explored, acknowledging the complexities and ongoing debates surrounding the term.
The analysis does not aim to resolve all definitional controversies but to provide a general frame of reference.
The chapter seeks to establish broad definitional boundaries for "being persuaded" and identify persistent issues.
Being Persuaded: The Central Elements
Persuasion is distinguished from coercion, with coercion involving guns or economic sanctions and persuasion relying on symbols.
Persuasive discourse is often indirectly coercive, depending on the credibility of threats and promises.
The effectiveness of persuasive messages is influenced by the persuader's ability to dispense rewards or punishments (means control).
Persuasion is valued in democratic societies as a more ethical method of influence compared to coercion.
Coercive potential determines the relative impact of most persuasive messages in real-world social conflicts.
Marwell and Schmitt's (1967) list of 16 compliance-gaining strategies includes promise, threat, and aversive stimulation, which rely on the persuader's ability to dispense rewards or punishments.
Persuasion relies on symbolic transactions, particularly the manipulation of symbols.
Language is inherently symbolic, making verbal utterances central to persuasion.
The distinction between symbolic and non-symbolic acts in the nonverbal realm can be ambiguous.
Restricting persuasion to symbolic transactions avoids the unmanageable generality of including any act that modifies behavior.
Language is usually integral to persuasive transactions, with nonverbal behavior reinforcing the meaning and credibility of verbal messages.
The imposition of a symbolic criterion aligns with the theoretical and empirical concerns of persuasion scholars.
The conviction/persuasion duality distinguishes between persuasion that relies on emotions and conviction that relies on logical proof and reason.
The conviction/persuasion duality suggests conviction derives its force from people's rationality.
Attempts to differentiate between logical and emotional appeals have been difficult because ordinary language is laden with emotional overtones.
Persuasive discourse is conceived of as an amalgam of logic and emotion, with messages differing in the relative amount of each element.
The distinction between conviction and persuasion rests on value concerns about how influence ought to be accomplished.
Influence from rational messages is ethically preferable to emotional appeals that