1.1: Understanding Persuasion

Learning Objectives

1. Explain the pervasive nature of persuasion.
2. Distinguish between rhetoric and persuasion.
3. Analyze persuasion using O'Keefe's paradigm case model, identifying and applying its five common features.
4. Articulate the nuanced historical and scholarly understanding of persuasion.

What is Persuasion? (It's Trickier Than You Think)

For over two millennia, scholars have grappled with the concept of persuasion. Even Aristotle, arguably the father of rhetorical study, focused on discovering "the available means of persuasion" rather than offering a simple definition himself. This complexity can feel daunting!

Rather than providing one narrow definition that might oversimplify its multifaceted nature, this chapter will guide you through a comprehensive exploration of persuasion from various angles. We will:

• Examine the pervasive nature of persuasion in our everyday lives.
• Clarify the distinction between rhetoric and persuasion, terms often used interchangeably.
• Review scholarly definitions of persuasion
• Delve into O'Keefe's unique yet logical paradigm case model.

By the end of this chapter, you will have a more complete and nuanced understanding of what persuasion truly means and how it functions in our world.

The Pervasive Nature of Persuasion

What does persuasion mean to you? Can you think of any times that you have tried to persuade someone to do something? Some examples may include college students trying to persuade their instructors to provide them with an extension on an assignment, to accept a project that is already late, or to reconsider a poor grade. College students persuade their friends to take specific classes or recommend specific instructors. They may even persuade one another to live in a specific part of town, attend a particular party, or eat at a certain restaurant.

Persuasion is a key facet of communication that is evident in many interpersonal and familial relationships. Parents may try to persuade their children to clean up their room, pick a certain major, or abide by a curfew. Romantic partners persuade one another to decorate their home in a particular way, apply to a new job, or move to a new city. Persuasion is also pervasive in professional environments. Potential employees need to persuade future employers of their skills and abilities to secure a job offer. Conversely, employers need to persuade potential employees of the benefits of working at their organization to ensure they accept the job. Many professions, including advertising, sales, and politics, are dependent on the ability to leverage persuasion to achieve desired outcomes.

We also need to consider the channels of persuasion that are influencing our choices. The advent of print media (e.g., newspapers, magazines), electronic media (e.g., radio, television, the Internet), and, more recently, social media (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, TikTok) provide additional avenues through which persuasion occurs. These mediated sources of persuasion include specific appeals to buy products or services (e.g., advertising), as well as the more nuanced persuasion to adopt and promote a particular lifestyle, behavior, or popular opinion abounding on different platforms.

This all suggests that persuasion is utilized in almost all areas of our lives. However, most of us have never specifically thought about how much time we spend persuading others and being persuaded ourselves. It is important to realize, however, that this does not mean you are already persuasion experts. You have likely learned quite a bit about what works and what does not by trial and error; however, there is a long, rich history of the academic study of persuasion. Scholars across philosophy, psychology, communication, advertising, political science, health, and others have systematically studied persuasion for centuries. Aristotle, an ancient Greek philosopher who lived nearly 2,400 years ago, wrote extensively about how to persuade others. Around 300 years later, Cicero, a Roman statesman and philosopher, wrote several books on his beliefs about persuasion and rhetoric. Another 100 years after that, Quintilian, a Roman educator and rhetorician, opened a school on rhetoric and oral persuasion. More recently, social scientists have conducted thousands of experiments over decades to study persuasion and have developed rich theories to describe, explain, predict, and control the persuasion phenomenon. We will examine several of these theories in future chapters in this text.

Making the Distinction: Rhetoric and Persuasion

It's common to hear people use "persuasion" and "rhetoric" as if they mean the same thing, but that's not quite right. Think of it like this: playing soccer and scoring a goal aren't the same; scoring a goal is what you do when you play soccer. Similarly, rhetoric is the broad art of using language skillfully in speaking and writing. Its ultimate aim is often to persuade someone. So, if rhetoric is the method or the means, then persuasion is the desired outcome or the goal.

Understanding this difference helps us look at how the study of persuasion began.

The idea of studying persuasion as a distinct skill emerged not long after the birth of democracy itself – and that's no accident. The ancient Greeks were pioneers in recognizing the crucial role of skilled communication, including rhetoric and persuasion, for a well-functioning democracy. They believed that for citizens to freely exchange ideas, debate, and reach agreements in the political arena, the ability to persuade was essential. It allowed for decisions based on discussion and free choice, rather than force or conflict.

As people gained more freedom to make choices and participate, the power to persuade became incredibly important. However, the study of rhetoric wasn't always popular. Some philosophers, like Plato, worried that rhetoric could be used to trick people, simply make them feel good, or promote selfish interests.

Fortunately for future scholars of communication, Aristotle saw things differently. Many believe he wrote his famous work, Rhetoric, to defend this important art. He argued for a more complex view of public speaking that could appeal to both logic and human emotions, showing that rhetoric was far more than just flattery or a way to hide injustice. Aristotle saw rhetoric as the skill of identifying all the available ways to persuade, distinguishing it from simpler forms of debate. While he acknowledged that rhetoric could be misused, he championed it as a vital tool for public discussion, engaging both our minds and our feelings.

Scholarly Definitions of Persuasion

The word "persuasion" originates from the Latin persuadere, meaning "to strongly urge." However, the ancient Greek term for persuasion, Peithō (Πειθώ), carried a deeper, more nuanced meaning. Peithō referred not only to "Persuasion" or "Winning Eloquence" but was also personified as a goddess or spirit embodying charm, allure, and the power of seductive speech. Unlike mere force (Bia), Peithō represented influence achieved through communication that respected the audience's freedom of choice, appealing to both their intellect and emotions. This concept highlighted the crucial role of consensual influence in Greek society and democracy.

Given this rich history and the complexity of human interaction, it's not surprising that there are many scholarly definitions of persuasion. While no single definition fully captures its essence, examining various perspectives helps us build a comprehensive understanding.

A concise starting point comes from the Merriam-Webster dictionary, which defines persuasion as: "to move by argument, entreaty, or expostulation to a belief, position, or course of action" ("Persuade," def. 1). Expanding on this, Dr. Stephen Lucas, a respected communication scholar, defined persuasion as "the process of creating, reinforcing, or changing people’s beliefs or actions" (p. 306). Lucas introduced a "scaled" way of thinking about persuasion as a continuum: imagine a line where -3 signifies strong disagreement and +3 signifies strong agreement with your central idea or proposition. Persuasion, in this view, means moving your audience members somewhere to the right, closer to +3. This perspective offers three key insights:

• You can visualize where your audience "sits" on an issue.
• Any movement toward your desired position is a win.
• Attempting to shift an audience from extreme disagreement to strong agreement in a single message is nearly impossible.

Other communication scholars offer broader definitions that highlight key elements. For example, Gass and Seiter state that persuasion "involves one or more persons who are engaged in the activity of creating, reinforcing, modifying, or extinguishing beliefs, attitudes, intentions, motivations, and/or behaviors within the constraints of a given communication context" (p. 40). Similarly, Richard Perloff defines it as "a symbolic process in which communicators try to convince other people to change their attitudes or behavior regarding an issue through the transmission of a message, in an atmosphere of free choice" (p. 8).

Despite their varied wording, common definitions of persuasion often overlap in key areas, including: intention (the persuader aims to influence), a positive result (implying success), the audience's free choice, and the absence of threat or harm (Powers, p. 126). These commonalities underscore that ethical considerations are central to the very definition of persuasion. Indeed, Powers offers a robust definition of ethical persuasion: "when a sender presents a true, honest, logical and complete argument that includes presentation of other real choices, has no personal benefit in the result, and when the receiver understands the arguments and has unrestrained freedom of choice and ability to choose, and all of this happens within a context of unhurried respect and equality, then this situation could be said to be persuasive and ethically justified" (p. 129). This emphasis on truth, honesty, respect, and freedom of choice highlights that true persuasion aims for a change born from understanding and autonomy, not coercion or manipulation.

Understanding Persuasion Through Paradigm Cases

When we try to define something, we usually aim for clear rules about what's "in" and what's "out." But sometimes, definitions cause more headaches than help! The problem is that there are always "gray areas" where it's hard to tell if something truly fits the definition.

Think about ketchup:

• Everyone agrees that ketchup is a condiment. (Clear case!)
• Everyone agrees that a burger bun is not a condiment. (Also clear!)
• But is hummus a condiment or a dip? Now that's where people might disagree! It's a "gray area."

This same problem applies to defining persuasion.

Instead of getting stuck on rigid definitions, communication scholar O'Keefe (2016) suggests a smarter way: let's look at "paradigm cases." These are the super clear, no-doubt-about-it examples that almost everyone would agree are instances of persuasion. By figuring out what these "perfect examples" have in common, we can better understand how persuasion usually works, without needing a rigid, arguable definition.

what are the common features when we say someone has "persuaded" another person? O'Keefe (2016) points out five key things:

O'Keefe's Paradigm Case to Understand Persuasion \(\PageIndex{1}\)

What are the common features when we say someone has "persuaded" another person? O'Keefe (2016) points out five key things:

1. It usually involves a successful attempt to influence. If you say, "I persuaded her," it automatically means you succeeded. You wouldn't say, "I persuaded her, but I failed!" That just doesn't make sense. You can say, "I tried to persuade her, but I failed." So, "persuaded" implies success.
2. The persuader usually intends to influence the other person. When you say, "I persuaded Casey to take Intercultural Communication," we naturally assume you meant to do that. If you say, "I accidentally persuaded Casey," you have to add "accidentally" because the usual meaning of "persuade" assumes you meant it.
3. The person being persuaded usually has some freedom of choice. Imagine if you stole your roommate's textbook. You wouldn't say you "persuaded" them to lend it to you – there was no choice involved! But if you convinced them that lending it was essential for your exam, that's definitely persuasion because they freely chose to help. If someone is forced or threatened, it's a "borderline" case because their freedom is unclear.
4. The influence is achieved through some form of communication. If you pushed your roommate down the stairs to get them to clean, that's not persuasion. That's force! But if you talked to them and convinced them to clean up the mess, that's persuasion because you used communication to get the outcome.
5. The person being persuaded has a change in mental state (which might lead to a change in behavior). When you persuade someone, you first change what they think or feel. For example, "I persuaded Alex that adding a Communication Minor was good for his career." This means Alex's thoughts changed. If you say, "I persuaded Alex to add a Communication Minor" (a behavior change), it's understood that his thoughts about it changed first. Persuasion primarily targets someone's thinking, not just their actions. In research, this "mental state" is often about changing someone's attitude.

Bringing all these common features together, O'Keefe (2016) offers a good working idea of persuasion: it's "a successful intentional effort at influencing another’s mental state through communication in a circumstance in which the [person being persuaded] has some measure of freedom" (p. 4). While this still leaves a few questions open (like "how much success?" or "how much intent?"), focusing on these shared characteristics helps us understand what we're really talking about when we study persuasion.

Exercises

1. Create a Persuasion Log: For three days, keep a log of every time you are exposed to an intentional persuasive message (e.g., an advertisement, a parent's request, a sales pitch, a news report). For each instance, note the channel (e.g., TV, in-person, social media) and the persuasive goal. At the end of the three days, reflect on which channels were most frequent and which were most effective for you.
2. Recall a time when you used language to influence someone. Was your primary focus on the "rhetoric" (the words, style, and delivery you used) or the "persuasion" (the outcome you wanted)? How did focusing on one over the other affect the interaction?

References

Gass, R. H., & Seiter, J. S. (2011). Persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining (4 ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Lucas, S. E. (2019). The Art of Public Speaking (13th edition) Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

O’Keefe, D. J. (2016). Persuasion: Theory and Research (Third Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Perloff, R. M. (2003). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st Century (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 5–6.

Powers, P. (2007). Persuasion and coercion: A critical review of philosophical and empirical approaches. HEC Forum, 19(2), 125–143.

Image Attributions

Goalkeeper defending a goal. Image by Phillip Kofler (opens in new window) from Pixabay (opens in new window)

Salt, Pepper, Ketchup, and Mayo. Image by Lena Petersson (opens in new window) from Pixabay (opens in new window).

Adapted from:

Cardwell, P., Prelip, A., & Graber‑Peters, J. (n.d.). 1: An introduction to persuasion (Module on Persuasion, Critical Thinking, and Writing). Folsom Lake College via LibreTexts.

Worthington, J. (n.d.). What is persuasion? (Chapter 1.01). In Persuasion Theory in Action. LibreTexts Social Sciences.