ppt课件-messagestructure-csufullerton.pptVIP

ARRANGING AND ORGANIZING PERSUASIVE MESSAGES Persuasion and Message Structure Cicero’s five canons of speech Inventio: the invention and discovery of arguments Elocutio: eloquence, fluency, command of language, and language style Memoria: memory, mnemonic devices Pronuntiatio: delivery factors, rate, pitch, voice quality, and articulation Dispositio: the effective and orderly arrangement of ideas explicit vs. implicit conclusions: which should you use? Is it better to spell things out for the listener? The source might be seen as more frank, forthright Less risk the listener would reach the wrong conclusion Or let the listener figure it out for him or herself? Less condescending, patronizing Less risk the message would be perceived as restricting the listener’s free choice So what I’m asking you to do is… explicit vs. implicit conclusions: draw your own conclusions Generally speaking, implicit conclusions work best more participatory, involving greater conclusion comprehension self-generated conclusions less risk of psychological reactance especially true for receivers with high involvement (Cruz, 1998) also better with hostile audiences or counter-attitudinal messages Exceptions to the general rule: difficult, complex messages messages that could be easily misconstrued listeners with little knowledge, low involvement quality vs. quantity of arguments the role of receiver “involvement” according to the ELM model Petty Cacioppo (1984): for receivers with low involvement, it is the quantity of arguments that counts for receivers with high involvement it is the quality of arguments that counts. More than 100 scientific studies support the conclusion that global warming is a very real phenomenon quality vs. quantity of arguments When receivers have low involvement, quantity counts. When receivers have high involvement, quality counts. message repetition: “You can say that again” Mere exposure effect: repeated exposure to an unfamiliar stimulus increases liking for t