This site is 100% ad supported. Please add an exception to adblock for this site.

Exam III: Public Speaking


undefined, object
copy deck
three objectives of a speech to persuade
1) try to change audience members attitude, beliefs, and values

2) identifying the target audience

3) meeting the burden of proof
What are the three factors of credibility?
1) competence (perception of intelligence, expertise, knowledge)

2) character (sincerity, trustworthyness, concern for audience wellness)

3) dynamism (how bold, frank, active, enthusiastic you are)
What are the seven methods of strengthening credibility?
1) explain your competence or experience
2) site many credible sources
3) site sources respected by the audience
4) establish common ground with audience
5) use sound reasoning
6) deliver the speech with conviction
7) deliver the speech with enthusiasm
What are the four methods of generating emotions?
1) use language intensity (neg or pos)
2) use vivid extended examples with imagery
3) use appropriate delivery (sincerity & conviction)
4) use emotionally loaded visual aids
What are the nine methods for generating motivations?
fascinating canines and animals can please silly little irene

1) fear
2) compassion
3) acquisition
4) anger
5) companionship
6) pride
7) shame
8) loyalty
9) independence
one-sided vs. two-sided appeal
one-sided: present only your argument

two-sided: state your position, state the objection & refute objections
innoculation theory
When to use a two-sided appeal
1) if audience disagrees with your position

2) if audience is highly intelligent

3) if audience will be exposed to counter arguments
method of presenting a two-sided appeal
1) present your arguments first
2) clearly state the objection
3) refute the objection with reasoning and evidence
What are the five types of reasoning?
1) Reasoning from Specific Instances (Inductive Reasoning)

2) Reasoning from Principle (Deductive Reasoning)

3) Causal Reasoning

4) Analogical Reasoning

5) Sign Reasoning
logical appeal of speaker
(evidence & reasoning)
emotional appeal
question of fact
a question about the truth or falsity of an assertion

Many questions of fact cannot be answered absolutely. There is a true answer, but we don't have enough information to know what it is.
ex: Who will win the Super Bowl this season? Will another major earthquake strike California before the year 2010?

Other questions deal with issues on which the facts are murky or inconclusive.
ex: What will happen next in the Middle East? Is sexual orientation genetically determined?
question of value
a question about the worth, rightness, morality, and so forth of an idea or action

ex: what is the best movie of all time? Is the cloning of human beings morally justifiable? What are the ethical responsibilities of journalists? Such questions not only involve matters of fact, but they also demand value judgments
Organizational pattern for question of value
Persuasive speeches on questions of value are almost always organized topically. The most common approach is to devote your first main point to establishing the standards for your value judgment and your second main point to applying those standards to the subject of your speech. You must make sure to justify your jdgment against some identifiable standards.

*speeches on questions of value do not argue directly for or against particular courses of action. THey do not urge listeners to do anything.
question of policy
a question about whether a specific course of action should or should not be taken

ex: What measures should be taken to protect the United States against terrorist attacks? Should same-sex marriages be legalized? What steps should be taken to ensure that all people in the United States receive adequate health care?
Speech to gain passive agreement
A persuasive speech in which the speaker's goal is to convince the audience that a given policy is desirable without encouraging the audience to take action in support of the policy.

ex: to persuade my audience that there should be stricter safety standards on amusement-park rides. To persuade my audience that the SAT should no longer be used in determing college admission.
Speech to gain immediate action
A persuasive speech in which the speaker's goal is to convince the audience to take action in support of a given policy.

ex: To persuade my audience to give blood through the REd Cross. To persuade my audience to vote in the next presidential election.
the first basic issue in analyzing a question of policy: Is there a serious problem or need that requires a change from current policy?
burden of proof
the obligation facing a persuasive speaker to prove that a change from current policy is necessary
the second basic issue in analyzing a question of policy: If there is a problem with current policy, does the speaker have a plan to solve the problem?
The third basic issue in analyzing a question of policy: Will the speaker's plan solve the problem? Will it create new and more serious problems?
Problem-solution order
a method of organizing persuasive speeches in which the first main point deals with the existence of a problem and the second main point presents a solution to the problem
problem-cause-solution order
A method of organizing persuasive speeches in which the first main point identifies a problem, the second main point analyzes the causes of the problem, and the third main point presents a solution to the problem.
comparative advantages order
a method of organizing persuasive speeches in which each main point explains why a speaker's solution to a problem is preferable to other proposed solutions
Five steps of Monroe's Motivated Sequence
1) Attention
2) Need
3) Satisfaction
4) Visualization
5) Action
initial credibility
the credibility of a speaker before she or he starts to speak
derived credibility
the credibility of a speaker produced by everything she or he says and does during the speech
terminal credibility
the credibility of a speaker at the end of the speech
Four tips for using evidence
Use Specific Evidence
Use Novel Evidence
Use Evidence from Credible Sources
Make Clear the Point of Your Evidence
false cause
an error in causal reasoning in which a speaker mistakenly assumes that because one event follows another, the first event is the cause of the second. This error is often known by its Latin name, post hoc, ergo propter hoc, meaning "after this, therefore because of this."
red herring
a fallacy that introduces an irrelevant issue to divert attention from the subject under discussion

ex: How dare my opponents accuse me of political corruption at a time when we are working to improve the quality of life for all people in the Unites States.

Why should we worry about the amount of violence on television when thousands of people are killed in automobile accidents each year?
Ad hominem
a fallacy that attacks the person rather than dealing with the real issue in dispute

Ex: The governor has a number of interesting economic proposals, but let's not forget that she comes from a very wealthy family.

THere is no doubt that American businesses have been hurt by all the environmental regulations passed in recent years. Most of the regulations were dreamed up by ivory-tower intellectuals, nature freaks, and tin-headed government bureucrats. We can't afford those kinds of regulations.

*Sometimes of course, a person's character or integrity can be a legitimate issue- as in the case of a police chief who violates the law, a scientist who falsifies data, or a corporate president who swindles stockholders. In such cases, a speaker might well raise questions about the person without being guilty of the ad hominem fallacy
A fallacy that forces listeners to choose between two alternatives when more than two alternatives exist

ex: either we build a new high school or children in this community will never get into college.

The government must either raise taxes or reduce services for the poor.
a fallacy that assumes that because something is popular, it is therefore good, correct, or desirable.

ex: THe fact that more people use Tylenol than Advil does not prove that Tylenol is a better pain reliever.

THe president must be correct in his approach to domestic policy; after all, the polls show that 60 percent of the people support him
slippery slope
a fallacy that assumes that taking a first step will lead to subsequent steps that cannot be prevented

Ex: If we allow the government to restrict the sale of semiautomatic weapons, before we know it, there will be a ban on the ownership of handguns and even hunting rifles. And once our constitutional right to bear arms has been compromised, the right of free speech will be the next to go.

*If a speaker calims that taking a first step will lead inevitably to a series of disastrous later steps, he or she needs to provide evidence or reasoning to support the claim. To assume that all the later steps will occur without proving that they will is to commit the slippery slope fallacy.

Deck Info