Skip to main content
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Home
- Subscribe/renew
- Institutions
- Individual subscriptions
- Individual renewals
- Librarians
- Rates, orders, and payments
- Complete Chicago Package
- Full run and content coverage
- KBART files and RSS feeds
- Permissions and reprints
- Chicago Emerging Nations Initiative
- Dispatch dates and claims
- Librarian FAQ
- Agents
- Rates, orders, and payments
- Complete Chicago Package
- Full run and content coverage
- Dispatch dates and claims
- Agent FAQ
- About us
- About Chicago Journals
- Open access at Chicago
- Publish with us
- Newly acquired journals
- Publishing partners
- Updates from the Press
- Sign up for eTOC alerts
- Press releases
- Media
the name used by Aristotle for what modern students of communication refer to as credibility
the audience's perception of whether a speaker is qualified to speak on a given topic. the two major factors influencing a speaker's credibility are competence and character.
the credibility of a speaker produced by everything she or he says and does during the speech
the credibility of a speaker at the end of the speech
a technique in which a speaker connects himself or herself with the values, attitudes, or experiences of the audience
supporting materials used to prove or disprove something
the name used by Aristotle for the logical appeal of a speaker. the two major elements of logos are evidence and reasoning
the proces of drawing a conclusion on the basis of evidence
reasoning from specific instances
reasoning the moves from particular facts to a general conclusion
reasoning that moves from a general principle to a specific conclusion
reasoning that seeks to establish the relationship between causes and effects
reasoning in which a speaker compares two similar cases and infers that what is true for the first case is also true for the second
a fallacy in which a speaker jumps to a general conclusion on the basis of insufficient evidence
a fallacy in which a speaker mistakenly assumes that because one event follows another, the first event is the cause of the second
an analogy in which the two cases being compared are not essentially alike
a fallacy which assumes that because something is popular, it is therefore good, correct, or desirable
a fallacy that introduces an irrelevant issue to divert attention from the subject under discussion
a fallacy that attacks the person rather than dealing with the real issue in dispute
a fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist
a fallacy which assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented
a fallacy which assumes that something old is automatically better than something new
a fallacy which assumes that something new is automatically better than something old
the name used by Aristotle for what modern students of communication refer to as emotional appeal
what two factors exert the most influence on an audience's perception of a speaker's credibility?
1. competence-how an audience regards a speaker's intelligence, expertise, and knowledge of the subject. 2. character-how an audience regards a speaker's sincerity, trustworthiness, and concern for the well-being of the audience
three ways you can enhance your credibility
1. explain your competence 2. establish common ground with your audience 3. deliver your speeches fluently, expressively, and with conviction
why is evidence important
it can enhance credibility, increase both the immediate and long-term persuasiveness of the message, and help "inoculate" listeners against counterpersuasions
four tips for using evidence
1. use specific evidence 2. use novel evidence 3. use evidence from credible sources 4. make clear the point of your evidence
why is it important to supplement reasoning from specific instances with testimony or statistics?
because you can never give enough specific instances in a speech to make your conclusion irrefutable, you should supplement them with testimony or statistics demonstrating that the instances are representative
why is the relationship between causes and effects not always clear?
just because one event happens after another does not mean the first caused the second
Why is analogical reasoning frequently used in persuasive speeches on questions of policy?
the speaker may be able to claim that the policy worked else where and it should therefore be implemented here
1. hasty generalization 2. false cause 3. invalid analogy 4. bandwagon 5. red herring 6. ad hominem 7. either-or 8. slippery slope 9. appeal to tradition 10. appeal to novelty
three methods you can use to generate emotional appeal
1. use emotional language 2. develop vivid examples 3. speak with sincerity and convictinon
why is analogical reasoning frequently used in questions of policy
because if the policy has already been implemented somewhere then your argument for using it in another situation is stronger (if it worked there it'll work here)