COMM 305 1st EditionLecture 24Outline of Last Lecture 1. Toulmin’s Model of Arguments 2. Theory of Reasoned Action and Theory of Planned Behavior 3. Elaboration Likelihood Model a. Processing messages - Two Routes i. Central vs. Peripheral ii. Examples of peripheral cues(e.g., credibility, liking, consensus) b. Which route to take? c. Attitude Change d. Criticisms of ELM i. Parallel processing and the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) ii. What about the message? 4. Aristotle’s Logos, Ethos, and PathosOutline of Current Lecture 3. Elaboration Likelihood Model a. Processing messages - Two Routes i. Central vs. Peripheral ii. Examples of peripheral cues(e.g., credibility, liking, consensus) b. Which route to take? c. Attitude Change d. Criticisms of ELM i. Parallel processing and the Heuristic-Systematic Model (HSM) ii. What about the message? 4. Aristotle’s Logos, Ethos, and Pathos Current LectureWe process centrally or peripherally but sometimes we use both at once. What looks like central and peripheral processing at the same time - parallel processing. Using both in concert. Parallel processing doesn’t exist in elaboration likelihood model. You are either processing a message peripherally or centrally. According to ELM, these two modes of thinking are so different there is not parallel processing. You are either processing peripherally or centrally. ELM says, you don’t look at the peripheral cues and think critically your way of thinking changes. You may like the message but you aren’t conscious of it. In HSM it is similar to peripheral processing. It doesn’t evolve a lot of thinking about the message. Systematic processing is like the central route. You are more systematic in your thinking. You engage the arguments being made more.You use peripheral when the message seems important to you or when you are missing information. Makes information about the necessity to engage systematically. HSM proposes that heuristic and systematic processes occur at the same time. HSM does make predictions about how he two work together.HSM - Parallel processing 1. What if message quality (central route/systematics processing) is consistent with heuristic cues (peripheral route/heuristic processing)? 2. When the routes disagree, which route wins out? 3. If the message is ambiguous, what happens? You are either processing centrally or peripherally. The effects will be stronger than were possible by systematic processing alone. There are heuristic cues in the add. There is an attractive person, he has a nice life. There are words saying venza is a masterful blend. The argument is stronger because they engaged in both types. If they just engaged in one type it would not be as strong of an argument. People that process both ways are more likely to buy.The effects are multiplicative.If the routes agree If we think the person is attractive but there arguments are good when the routes disagree according to HSM systematic processing will win out. That depends on your being able and motivated to process systematically. What if the systematic processing is ambiguous. Use heuristic cues to sort out ambiguity. To sort out certain arguments are more or less important. Heuristic processing to sort out the ambiguity of the message. You like the speaker so you give them the benefit of the doubt on certain arguments. Elaboration Likelihood Model think about the messages of influence and message. The theory doesn’t tell us why we are likely to change a message or get a new one. It is not a theory of message. What in my beliefs will hold intention that may or may not change into actual behavior. 4. Aristotle’s Logos Ethos, and PathosCOMM 305 1st Edition a. Making Persuasion Possible b. Speech Situations c. Forms of Rhetorical Proof i. Logos ii. Ethos iii. Pathos 4a. Making Persuasion Possible Aristotle saw the function of persuasive message - rhetoric. It was the identification of available means of persuasion. Aristotle is doing this at a time when coercion - you’ll do what I say because I can be violent, Ihave a bigger army, ect. was going on. Aristotle wanted to find something different to coercion. That was important to him. It was a way to govern or live without hurting each other. What is going to work in those moments in those speech situations. What is going to be included in our messages that will be persuasive. He asked what is the audience called to do in different speaking situations? How does Aristotle give us a message that speaks to audience and message? In forensic speaking Speaking Situations Forensic - like a court room context an audience must judge a matter of law. Deliberative - what do we as an audience want to hold as right or wrong? A political debate is akind of deliberate speaking. What should we do. The audience can be voters or legislatures that have to decide policy. Epideictic - ceremonially situations: graduation, wedding, funeral, ect. The audience must assign praise or blame. Aristotle’s rhetoric: logos, ethos, and pathos - Aristotle is giving us a theory of audience and message. Aristotle is talking about how do your construct the message. It is also still about the