The Art of Persuasion in Politics

The art of Persuasion in Politics
Name:
Course title:
Instructor:
Institution:
Date Due:
Introduction
Application of language in politics has been a hot topic in public debates. There are those who blame political figures on language misuse in that their language is deemed shallow or clumsy. On the other hand, other politicians are accused of being too clever on using the language to persuade listeners towards believing their antics. What these critics (such as the press) do not understand is that they may be all the same guilty in using the same methods or are culpable of similar transgressions.
Scholars have been for a long time concerned with the mechanisms that lead to failure or success of persuasion endeavours. Research on persuasion has been ancient and can be traced back in Greece. The Greek philosophers such as Aristotle and others wrote extensively on the power of persuasion and the characteristics of persuasive messages. Early research on persuasion developed into a kind of inquiry famously known as rhetoric or rhetorical studies. This majorly focused in determining the most applicable methods of persuasion in any given situation. Scholars interested in the art of communication initiated the study of persuasion in the social science perspective. The US military department was particularly interested in this art during World War 1 and 2 and participated in the financing of studies concerning message effects. Researchers in many areas are presently concerned in the study of communication aspects in areas such as; marketing, advertising, psychology, communication health and other areas (HYPERLINK "/communication/people/index.cfm?p=Jakob_Jensen" \t "_blank"Jensen, and HYPERLINK "/communication/people/index.cfm?p=Nick_Carcioppolo" \t "_blank"Carcioppolo, 2012). The Present studies however, are focused on theory building and application. This paper will explore the art of persuasion in politics as modeled by theorists and other researchers. We will employ the elaboration likelihood model (ELM) in the discussion concerning persuasion in politics. Additionally, we will review literature from a number of scholars with regard to the employment of language and the art of persuasion in politics. Lastly, we will provide a conclusion based on the evaluation of the study.
Petty and Cacioppo’s Elaboration Likelihood Model
Elaboration likelihood Model observes persuasion as a cognitive event, denoting that the target audience employs mental processes of motivation and intelligence or lack of it, in accepting or rejecting these messages. This theory postulated by Petty and Cacioppo (1986), states two methods of influence in the art of persuasion; that is peripherally routed information and centrally routed information. Each of these routes has a virtually different target audience. This theory puts much emphasis in understanding the targeted audience before disseminating the messages.
Slow but Steady: Basic Route to Persuasion
Elaboration Likelihood Model theory portrays persuasion as a development in which the level of influence depends on the way the audience interprets the information. The intricate of the two Elaboration Likelihood Model pathways is regarded as the central route, or in another word elaborated route. Messages that are centrally routed are the ones that provide plenty of information, rational arguments, and prove in supporting exacting conclusion. For instance, during every electioneering period, politicians may involve themselves in talks and discussions. Most of these talks are filled with rational messages concerning the politician’s views and opinions, Platform, agenda and background.
Central routed information is much more likely to influence change that is long term oriented than peripheral messages. However, not all recipients are in a position of interpreting the centrally routed information. The Elaboration Likelihood Model postulates that centrally routed information succeed in long term oriented change when the two factors are realized, these two factors are ; first, the targeted audience must be motivated in processing the information being disseminated and second, the audience must be in a position of processing the message cognitively.
For instance, if one is not motivated to watch a televised discussion taking two hours, then ELM posts that there is no motivation that is needed to process the elaborate message in this case. On the other hand, one may be motivated in watching the same debate, but the messages are found to be full of slang and complexity that may not be clear to the listener. In such a case, the Elaboration Likelihood Model postulates that the capability in understanding the highly precise and complex information being disseminated is not present. The ELM model further postulates that without the presence of motivation and capability, the disseminated message may not be deemed as important.
In accordance to the ELM theory, there are two types of arguments. Understanding the audience is a critical factor when structuring and elaborate argument (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Alternatively, it is not enough viewing your target as motivated and able when employing the central route of persuasion. The speaker ought to consider how his or her listeners will respond to messages. In this way, elaborate an elaborate argument can be evaluated as being strong or weak.
Arguments that are poised to be strong are those that generate a positive reaction in the minds of the audience while at the same time aligning the audience’s attitudes with those of the speaker (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Additionally, strong arguments immunize the receiver against opposing views and in most instances generate a lasting attitude alteration, which will lead to their behavior being predictable. Strong arguments incorporate repetition aspect and conversely, disruptions will weaken their efficiency. Presumably, neutral arguments create noncommittal cognitive reaction from the audience. Put differently, neutral arguments have no much impact on the part of the audience; instead, the audience will turn to peripheral cues, or shortcuts to persuasion. Lastly, arguments that are presumed to be weak generate negative cognitive reaction to persuasive message. This negative reaction in turn prevents the change of attitude, which may in essence reverse the rebound effect, hence, reinforcing the contrasting point of view.
Taking a Shortcut: The Peripheral Route to Persuasion
As we discussed earlier, elaborated messages are not influential when the audience targeted are not motivated or capable of interpreting the information (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Even if, the speaker may prefer an invoked target audience in the hope of generating the aspired change, it is unthinkable to expect that all of the audience targeted is motivated or capable in interpreting all the messages disseminated. Consequently, when the ability or motivation is lacking on the part of the receiver, the persuader in this case can use the peripheral route to cause persuasion. This is because peripheral messages depend on the audience’s emotional aspect and persuade via superficial ways. A good example may be given whereby a popular presidential hopeful may air an advertisement taking 30 seconds focusing on such images as “family values”, character, patriotism and likeability. Other politicians may employ celebrates to give them public support. Therefore, the Elaboration Likelihood Model posts that in the case of the audience being unmotivated or incapable of interpreting the messages; speakers should focus on the alternative ways of causing change to these receivers. One disadvantage of the peripheral route is that its effect is short-term if any.
Types of Peripheral Cues
Cialdini noted seven universal cues that indicate the application of peripheral message. They are as listed below - the commitment of the authority, liking, contrast, scarceness, reciprocity and social proof. When applying the authority as a peripheral signal, the speaker employs the attitude of the authority in convincing the receiver into accepting the sentiments presented. Peripheral messages, which depend on commitment stress on one’s devotion to a particular product, political inclination, and social cause and so on. For instance, there are people who pronounce their commitment publicly to a particular political affiliation or ideology; such people may attend rallies, wear uniforms or capes and other logos that signify the political party (Canary, Cody, & Manusov, 2003). Likewise, wearing a company shirt, which portrays the company’s logo, indicates that the wearer is dedicated to the company. Others may portray their dedication in a private manner, for instance, supporting political parties, or charitable organizations through their donations.
Cialdini again postulates that among the common procedure that underscores the principle of commitment is “the foot in the door tactic”. In this case, the speaker persuades the receiver in doing a small thing first then afterwards into a greater thing. Once one agrees to commit himself or herself to the aspect, it may become difficult to reject similar or other requests because there is a risk of appearing as not consistent with the commitment.
Persuasion through effects of contrasts requires that the speaker establish unequal points of association (Cialdini, 1994). Apparently, liking messages emphasize empathy towards an individual, object or place. In the other sense, if people like someone, they will also like his or her ideas. Most soft and sneaker firms for instance, depend on this principle to sell their products. For example, by using Michael Jordan to sell Nike shoes or Britney Spear to sell Pepsi, they are expecting that those who like these celebrities will also like their goods or services hence they will be mandated to buy them.
Reciprocation messages try to influence by advocating for a give and take association (Cialdini, 1994). For instance, it may be much easier for one to convince her sister in law in taking care of her child if she had done something similar for her. Scarcity on the other hand, is a peripheral message that relies on an individual’s worry of lacking something. Most networks that are home shopping in nature and similar organizations employ this tactic by imposing time limitation on certain items. Probably, this will create an assumption that users are not able to obtain certain products if the promotion time lapses.
Lastly, the peripheral signal of social proof depends on the widely acknowledged notion of peer pressure (Cialdini, 1994). Although it may be widely perceived that the youth are the ones who are mostly affected by peer pressure, adults my also get influenced by social proof messages. These seven universal cues discussed in this paper are present in the daily life aspect and, they magically stress on the passing emotional reactions that may not create long-term change.
In the concluding remarks, peripheral messages can be assessed as positive, negative or neutral (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Peripheral messages that are considered positive are those that are received favorably by the audience and generate a positive influence. Apparently, positive peripheral messages have a prospect of achieving frail positive alterations in an individual’s attitudes. For instance, if one is an ardent supporter of particular politician and an individual or group endorses that politician, he or she may feel more positive about that politician. It should be noted however, that a change of ones attitudes does not necessarily mean a change of his or her behavior.
On the other hand, neutral peripheral messages leave the audience feeling emotionally unsure; they in particular are not aware or in the other sense ignorant care about the methodology employed in obtaining their attention (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). If one is not aware for instance, who Martin Sheen could be nor his political ambivalence, then the person in this case may not care either on whom he endorses as his favorite candidate. Lastly, peripheral messages, which are regarded as negative, generate critical emotional reactions from the audience.
Figure 1.1 summarizes these aspects of the Elaboration Likelihood Model
Figure 1.1 Elaboration Likelihood Model


SOURCE: Communication and Persuasion (p. 4) by Petty and J. T. Cacioppo, (1986).
New York: Springer-Verlag.
This Elaboration Likelihood Model postulates that if the audience are motivated and are capable of interpreting the elaborate message, speakers should employ strong arguments. Arguments that are poorly or weakly constructed will cause negative effects. On the other hand, persuaders should rely on peripheral messages if the audience does not receive elaborate messages. Finally, it is important for speakers to note that employing a peripheral route in disseminating messages does not guarantee lasting effect.
Literature Review on the art of persuasion in Politics
Studies on psychology and public views have established a number of factors that make people construct their attitudes and characters in social and political perspective. Firstly, individual beliefs and attitudes are modifiable and hence can be easily influenced, especially in places where people do not have personal commitments. Secondly, social factors form define the deliberations in which human beings make; human beings are in most cases influenced by the people they interrelate with such as frie...