Search results

Scholars of persuasion have long made a distinction between appeals to logic, emotion and authority- logos, ethos and pathos- but ideas developed to account for live face-to-face conversation processes must also be tested in new media. We aimed to test the effectiveness of these three strategies in one-to-one chats through different communication media.

With a 3 × 3 × 2 between-subject factorial design, we tested these three strategies in one-to-one chats (female–female or male–male pairs) through three communication media: face-to-face, Skype video or Skype text. The persuasion scenario was adapted from prior studies in which students were presented with the idea of requiring a comprehensive exam as part of their degree. The participants were all undergraduate students of a major university in USA.

Our results showed trivial differences between female–female and male–male conditions. The logos appeal worked best overall in persuading the participants to change their reported attitudes. Additionally, the explanations provided by the participants for their own opinions were most like the persuasion scripts in the logos condition compared to the other two appeal conditions. Separately, participants indicated some disapproval of the pathos appeal in the text-based chat condition, although this did not seem to make a difference in terms of actual attitude change.

One major limitation of our study is that our subjects are college students and therefore are not representative of Internet users in general. Future research should test these three types of persuasion strategies on people of diverse backgrounds. For example, while logos seems to be most effective strategy in persuading college students (at least in our study), pathos or ethos may be more effective when one attempts to persuade people of different backgrounds.

Although it is enough for a statistical test, our sample size is still relatively small due to constraints on time, personnel and funding. We also recognize that it is challenging both conceptually and empirically to compare the effectiveness of three persuasion strategies separately.

Our findings suggest it is helpful to use fact-checking tools to combat disinformation in cases where users may not have sufficient domain knowledge or may not realize the need to identify or examine the given information. Additionally, it may require more effort to negate the impact of the disinformation spread than correcting the information, as some users may not only believe false information but also may start to reason in ways similar to those presented in the disinformation messages.

Past studies on online persuasion have limitedly examined whether and how communication media and persuasion strategies interact in one-to-one persuasion sessions. Our experiment makes an attempt to close this gap by examining the persuasion process and outcome in three different communication media and with three different persuasion strategies.

The authors unpack the critical role of rhetoric in developing and justifying the New Zealand (NZ) government's coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown strategy.

Using Green's (2004) theory of rhetorical diffusion, the authors analysed government documents and media releases before, during and after the lockdown to reconstruct the government's rationale.

The blending of kairos (sense of urgency and “right” time to act), ethos (emphasis on “saving lives”), pathos (fear of disruption and death) and selective use of health-based logos (shrinking infection rates), prompted fast initial adoption of the lockdown. However, support for the rhetoric wavered post-lockdown as absence of robust logos became apparent to the public.

The authors implicate the role of rhetoric in decision-makers’ ability to successfully elicit support for a new practice under urgency and the right moment to act using emotionalisation and moralisation. The assessment of the NZ government's response strategy provides insights decision-makers could glean in developing policies to tame the virus.

This study’s analysis demonstrates the unsustainability of rhetoric in the absence of reliable information.

The authors demonstrate the consequences of limited (intermittent) evidence and disregard for accounting/accountability data in public policy decisions under a rhetorical strategy.

Taking a communication perspective, the paper explores management's rhetoric in profit warnings, whose sole purpose is to disclose unexpected bad news.

Adopting a close-reading approach to text analysis, the authors analyse three profit warnings of the now-collapsed Carillion, contrasting the rhetoric with contemporaneous investor conference calls to discuss the profit warnings and board minutes recording boardroom discussions of the case company's precarious financial circumstances. The analysis applies an Aristotelian framework, focussing on logos (appealing to logic and reason), ethos (appealing to authority) and pathos (appealing to emotion) to examine how Carillion's board and management used language to persuade shareholders concerning the company's adverse circumstances.

As non-routine communications, the language in profit warnings displays and mimics characteristics of routine communications by appealing primarily to logos (logic and reason). The rhetorical profiles of investor conference calls and board meeting minutes differ from profit warnings, suggesting a different version of the story behind the scenes. The authors frame the three profit warnings as representing three stages of communication as follows: denial, defiance and desperation and, for our case company, ultimately, culminating in defeat.

The research is limited to the study of profit warnings in one case company.

The paper views profit warnings as a communication artefact and examines the rhetoric in these corporate documents to elucidate their key features. The paper provides novel insights into the role of profit warnings as a corporate communication vehicle/genre delivering bad news.

This research objective was to explore how Romanian IT family businesses' co-founders enable entrepreneuring through familiness practices. The authors explored what familiness practices emerge and how these are facilitated and supported by the rhetoric framework.

Drawing on Romanian IT entrepreneurs' practice from five case studies of IT family businesses and purposive revelatory cases, the authors considered the family co-founders' narratives and representations of familiness presented in 31 interviews.

The respondents' communication in entrepreneuring is a joint collaborative effort of the family co-founders to function well. Family entrepreneurs generate positive perceptions in favour of enterprising families using persuasive communication via rhetoric appeals to familiness ethos, familiness logos and familiness pathos, leading to constructive conflict management. The rhetoric of persuasion supports family entrepreneuring.

The authors conducted multiple case studies, profiling technological co-founders and family entrepreneurs in the challenging circumstances of an emerging economy.

The analysis of the use of rhetoric contributes to a better understanding of familiness practices in the family business. Through appeals to ethos, family business entrepreneurs enforce family values built on shared history, complementarity and moral exemplarity. The appeals to logos in entrepreneuring involve fulfilling complementary roles, alignment and continuous learning and coaching. The appeals to pathos are about emotions and how the family entrepreneurs' discourse enforces constructive handling of emotions.

The perceived familiness communicated through appeals to ethos, logos and pathos contributes to legitimating the family firm structures.

Theorising from family entrepreneurs' familiness practices, the authors suggest that entrepreneuring requires good communication of the representation of familiness for co-founders, employees and other stakeholders to also serve constructive conflict handling. The perceived familiness communicated through appeals to ethos, logos and pathos helps family businesses leverage their unique strengths and resources in the entrepreneuring process.

The major aim of this study is to specify the ways in which rhetorical strategies are employed in Q&A (question and answer) discussion, and how information sources are used to support such strategies.

The study is based on the analysis of 944 answers provided to the questions about global warming in Yahoo! Answers. The answers were analysed by means of descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.

Twelve rhetorical strategies serving the ends of classic rhetorical appeals, i.e. ethos, pathos and logos, were identified. The answerers drew most frequently on strategies related to logos (for example, appeal to reason) and ethos (for example, appeal to authority), while the strategies serving the ends of pathos (for example, argument ad hominem) were less popular. To support the rhetorical strategies, the answerers mainly used scientific sources such as websites of research organizations and persuasive material like Youtube videos.

The findings are based on the analysis of a Q&A site focusing on a controversial issue providing fertile ground for the use of rhetorical arguments.

The findings can be used in information literacy instruction. It would be easier for the users to evaluate the relevance and credibility of information if they become aware of the specific ways in which askers and answerers on Q&A sites make use of persuasive communication.

The study is unique in that it elaborates the ways in which rhetorical strategies are employed as ways of persuasive communication in Q&A discussion.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze media storytelling and rhetoric surrounding the credibility of the longstanding accounting practice of mark‐to‐market valuation.

The cascading storytelling model of progressive framing by the media of mark‐to‐market valuation was applied to story subsets of the three types of classic Aristotelian rhetorical appeals.

The authors found that the media blamed the accounting profession's mark‐to‐market valuation practices as substantive cause of recent corporate problems and declines in market values. In addition, the rhetorical framing of mark‐to‐market accounting practices in the media prompted the Financial Accounting Standards Board to a rush to judgment.

The paper is limited to the analysis of the storytelling included. Different results from other sources may provide another result.

The failure in the media to address the duality between the logos of accounting and the ethos of the media narratives exacerbated the cascading activation. Understanding this duality may provide a different lens in looking at information dissemination. This is not only relative to stakeholders in making more informed decisions but should also serve as a warning to the profession, to have more voice, to use a rhetorical strategy that can have more saliency in the public arena.

The paper examined storytelling as interplay of retrospective narrative, the presentness of living story, and the antenarratives shaping the future of not only the unfolding economic crisis, but the future of accounting itself. In terms of rhetoric, we extended the application of pathos, ethos, and logos by examining a cascading activation theory model. This is one of the few studies of antenarratives and how through cascade rhetoric the future is shaped.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the rhetorical strategies used by organizations when the legitimacy of their products is challenged by stakeholders’ sustainability concerns.

The approach involves rhetorical analysis of texts addressing the implications of genetically modified foods for sustainability. The rhetorical logic (pathos, logos, or ethos) and discursive intent (promotion of validity or propriety) invoked by leading seed producers to address stakeholders’ sustainability concerns was identified.

Ethos was found to be used to address validity judgments, pathos to address propriety judgments, and logos to address both validity and propriety judgments. The mechanisms through which rhetorical logic supports discursive intent are described.

This study contributes to a growing body of research at the intersection of discourse and legitimacy, and reveals the rhetorical strategies used to address stakeholders’ sustainability concerns. Future research can build on the study’s findings by examining the effectiveness of distinct rhetorical strategies in building legitimacy.

We lack a complete understanding of how legitimacy is discursively constructed when stakeholder concerns, such as those around sustainability, threaten an organization’s legitimacy. This paper’s examination of rhetorical logic and discursive intent advances this understanding.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the mapping of the social media discourse involving politicians and their followers during election campaigns, the authors examined Israeli politicians’ Aristotelian rhetoric on Facebook and its reception during the 2013 elections campaign.

The authors examined the Aristotelian rhetorical strategies used by Israeli politicians on their Facebook walls during the 2013 elections, and their popularity with social media users.

Ethos was the most prevalent rhetorical strategy used. On the reception front, pathos-based appeals attracted the most likes. Finally, the results point to some discrepancy between politicians’ campaign messages and the rhetoric that actually gains social media users’ attention.

The findings indicate that Israel’s multi-party political system encourages emphasis on candidates’ credibility (ethos) in contrast to the prevalence of emotion (pathos) in typical election campaigns in two-party systems like the USA. One possible explanation is the competitive nature of elections in a multi-party system where candidates need to emphasise their character and distinct leadership abilities.

Politicians and campaign managers are advised to attend to the potential discrepancy between politicians’ output and social media users’ preferences, and to the effectiveness of logos-based appeals.

The study highlights the possible effect of the party system on politicians’ online rhetoric in social media election campaigns.

The purpose of this paper is to call for a rhetorical turn in the study of school leadership and discusses how principals use language to enact school improvement. The key purpose is to explore how talk is action in leading and managing school reform.

This paper presents a rhetorical framework and methodology for interpreting principal practice through language. As a model, the language use of one urban school principal is examined through a rhetorical analysis of 650 instances of principal talk in 14 administrative meetings. The paper reports on the form and content of principal rhetoric, including analysis of logos, pathos, and ethos, and comparative analysis across meeting contexts.

The paper demonstrates the importance of rhetorical form and content and highlights the role of audience in principal talk. In the present example, each of three rhetorical forms was used to transform school practice. Logos was used most frequently; emotional and ethical arguments were also integral to principal talk. Comparative analysis showed that the principal's rhetoric varied by audience. The principal's use of language did not just explain practice, but also defined and shaped ongoing practices.

The author proposes future cross-case research to develop an understanding of how leadership language varies across individuals and contexts, as well as interaction analyses of the co-performance of discourse and rhetoric in schools.

The author argues that principal preparation would benefit from the incorporation of the linguistic concepts and forms of rhetoric, particularly in the context of school improvement.

While many have turned to principal practice as an area of research, few have focussed on the underlying linguistic structures. This paper emphasizes the importance of language in principal practice and offers a specific methodology with which to study it.

Companies documents such as annual reports incorporate narratives of repetitive rhetorical strategies as effective mechanisms adopted by companies' boardrooms to promote strategic change and strategic choices. These mechanisms can be viewed as persuasive appeals to facilitate boardrooms’ discourses. Despite the contribution of previous research through narrative analysis domains, conceptualization of narrative practices remains a relatively neglected area in the extant accounting literature.

The analytical framework is rooted in Aristotle's three pillars of rhetorical proofs: ethos (credibility/trustworthiness), pathos (emotion/identification through cultural domains) and logos (reason/rationale) in investigating narrative extracts regarding persuasive appeals adopted by Carillion's board through annual reports that facilitate discourse regarding Carillion’s strategic choices. Further, the authors emphasis on repetitive rhetorical slogan strategies embedded in the annual reports regarding Carillion's acquisitions strategy. We viewed acquisitions narratives as rhetorical communication artefacts and analyzed the repetitive rhetoric slogans in these corporate documents.

Findings of this study show how persuasive strategies and repetitive slogans trigger the discourses of Carillion's annual reports by drawing on perspectives from upper echelon theory, impression management and communication patterns. Findings reveal that Carillion’ board strategically use repetitive rhetoric slogans to shape optimistic corporate future performance which might be different from the feasible reality. Finally, the authors argue that corporate executives are striving to construct an alternative reality stem from their initial unrealistic aspiration to lead their sector of less controlled market share. Findings of this study have theoretical and managerial implications.

The key limitation of this study lies with the case study as the research methodology. Subjectivity remains inherent in interpreting the findings of this study. Future studies may adopt or adapt the authors’ analytical framework to examine other domains underpinning corporate reporting practices.

The findings of this study have practical implications for boardrooms and policymakers. Findings of this study have theoretical and managerial implications. The level of optimism has its impact on the mood of financial decision-makers, and when there is a high level of optimism, managers may consider making more investment decisions and therefore making many acquisitions. Managerial overconfidence has been widely documented in the literature. Overconfident managers systematically overestimate the probability of good outcomes (and correspondingly underestimate the probability of bad outcomes) resulting from their actions.

Managerial overconfidence refers to overestimation of managers' own abilities and outcomes relating to actions which are under their control. Executives believed that they have ultimate control over outcomes, which leads them to underestimate the probability of failure generally. According to self-attribution bias, many people tend to excessively credit their own skills for good results and overly credit external factors for bad outcomes.

The study explores the repetitive rhetorical slogan strategies embedded in the annual reports regarding Carillion's acquisitions strategy. Further, the study reveals how Carillion's board engaged through the early report with discourse and repetitive slogans to maintain their legitimacy. Findings reveal that Carillion’s board strategically uses repetitive rhetoric slogans to shape optimistic corporate future performance, which might be different from the feasible reality. Finally, the authors argue that corporate executives are striving to construct an alternative reality stem from their initial unrealistic aspiration to lead their sector of less controlled market share.