A Holistic View of Persuasion

1
A Holistic View of Persuasion
ELEMENTS OF PERSUASION A HOLISTIC APPROACH
Subjective, contextual reasoning
Utterance Comprehension
A natural element of persuasion (Madsen, 2012) is
utterances since these are used to convey ideas
and will often feature as a prominent element of
persuasive attempts. Note, however, that
utterances are not limited to spoken language.
Ideally, it should encapsulate other types of
attempts to manipulate belief structures as well
such as body language, facial expressions and so
on. The conception of utterances in this
framework is broadened to not only the linguistic
content, but also extra-linguistic enrichment
(Sperber Wilson, 1995 Carston, 2002), bodily
dynamics as foundation for language (Cowley,
2011), and action (Austin, 1963). Main
Points Utterances may be enriched by
context. Utterances should not be reduced to
linguistic content. Utterances may be understood
as bodily and phenomenological.
Compared with traditional accounts of reasoning,
which rely on premises of truth-conditionally
dichotomous logic (e.g. Eemeren Grotendorst,
2004 Priest, 2008), a subjective approach to
reasoning may be considered as an alternative and
consequently as a fundamental aspect of
persuasion. There are a variety of contextual,
probabilistic models (e.g. Schum, 1981 Jones
Love, 2011). However, here I propose the Bayesian
approach (Hahn Oaksford, 2007a, 2007b Harris
et al., 2012) as one alternative to logical
accounts. Main Points Reasoning faculties
may not conform with normative logic. Priors
concerning probabilistic content may be
subjective. Context may influence how these
priors are elicited.
Phenomenological position
Human beings exist in a context, which may
constantly shape and influence them. The
philosophical traditional of phenomenological
investigations (Cassirer, 1929 Merleau-Ponty,
1968 take the subject as the point of departure
and attempts to describe how context may
influence her. For the present framework, this is
particularly interesting given the contextual
nature of the main elements described in this
theory of persuasion. Also, recent
phenomenological research indicates the potential
connection between cognitive sciences and
phenomenology (Zahavi, 2002 Gallagher Zahavi,
2008) Main Points Phenomenology may expand upon
concepts used. The tradition may provide insight
into contextual factors.
Imagining the speaker
Joint action/The context
An utterance can never stand alone since it will
always be conveyed by some speaker. This speaker
may influence our perception of the utterance and
thus significantly influence our perception of
the persuasive attempt. For example, if I am
given advice on a house, it matters whether the
speaker is my brother or the salesman trying to
get a commission. Mentalizing (Frith, 1992
Amadio Frith, 2006 Hooker et al., 2008) is a
theory concerning how humans ascribe intentions
and other knowledge to other human beings. In the
framework being developed here, this is
particularly important when assessing persuasive
attempts since it will influence estimations of
probabilistic strength. Main Points Utterances
cannot stand alone There is always a speaker who
influences the perception
The final element is concerned with how human
beings make use of their immediate surroundings
to guide action and perceive physical situations
(Sebanz et al., 2006 Vesper et al., 2010
Pezzulo, forthcoming). The theory of joint
actions stipulates that humans make use of subtle
cues to direct their attention and understanding
of the situation in order to make use of this as
beneficially as possible. For this framework,
this entails theoretical and empirical notions
pertaining to how human beings make use of
context to drive their probabilistic estimations
and make sense of the surrounding situation.
Given the contextual nature of the theory being
developed here, this is a central element of
processing persuasive attempts. Main
Points Contextual cues may influence estimations
of prior probabilities Interactivity is central
to communication and persuasion
Jens Koed Madsen, Cognitive, Perceptual Brain
Sciences, UCL Supervisors Nick
Chater, David Lagnado, and Adam Harris