Persuasion

For other uses, see Persuasion (disambiguation).

appeals to habit or emotion.[4]
Persuasion is an umbrella term of inuence. Persua-

1 Brief history
Persuasion began with the Greeks, who emphasized
rhetoric and elocution as the highest standard for a successful politician. All trials were held in front of the Assembly, and both the prosecution and the defense rested,
as they often do today, on the persuasiveness of the
speaker.[5] Rhetoric was the ability to nd the available
means of persuasion in any instance. The Greek philosopher Aristotle listed four reasons why one should learn
the art of persuasion:
1. truth and justice are perfect; thus if a case loses, it
is the fault of the speaker
2. it is an excellent tool for teaching
3. a good rhetorician needs to know how to argue both
sides to understand the whole problem and all the
options, and
4. there is no better way to defend ones self.
Aristotles rhetorical proofs:
1. ethos (credibility)
2. logos (reason)
3. pathos (emotion)[6]

Persuasion, novel by Jane Austen. Illustrated by C. E. Brock

For Sir Walter Elliot, baronet, the hints of Mr Shepherd, his agent,
were quite unwelcome

2 Theories

sion can attempt to inuence a persons beliefs, attitudes,

intentions, motivations, or behaviors.[1] In business, persuasion is a process aimed at changing a persons (or a
groups) attitude or behavior toward some event, idea, object, or other person(s), by using written or spoken words
to convey information, feelings, or reasoning, or a combination thereof.[2] Persuasion is also an often used tool in
the pursuit of personal gain, such as election campaigning, giving a sales pitch,[3] or in trial advocacy. Persuasion
can also be interpreted as using ones personal or positional resources to change peoples behaviors or attitudes.
Systematic persuasion is the process through which attitudes or beliefs are leveraged by appeals to logic and reason. Heuristic persuasion on the other hand is the process through which attitudes or beliefs are leveraged by

2.1 Attribution theory

Main article: Attribution (psychology)
Humans attempt to explain the actions of others through
either dispositional attribution or situational attribution.
Dispositional attribution, also referred to as internal attribution, attempts to point to a persons traits, abilities,
motives, or dispositions as a cause or explanation for their
actions. A citizen criticizing a president by saying the nation is lacking economic progress and health because the
president is either lazy or lacking in economic intuition is
utilizing a dispositional attribution.
1

Situational attribution, also referred to as external attribution, attempts to point to the context around the person
and factors of his surroundings, particularly things that
are completely out of his control. A citizen claiming that
a lack of economic progress is not a fault of the president
but rather the fact that he inherited a poor economy from
the previous president is situational attribution.
Fundamental attribution error occurs when people
wrongly attribute either a shortcoming or accomplishment to internal factors, and disregarding any external
factors. In general, people tend to make dispositional attributions more often than situational attributions when
trying to explain or understand a persons behavior. This
happens when we are much more focused on the individual because we do not know much about their situation or
context. When trying to persuade others to like us or another person, we tend to explain positive behaviors and
accomplishments with dispositional attribution, but our
own negative behaviors and shortcomings with situational
attributions.[7]

THEORIES

2.3 Cognitive dissonance theory

Main article: Cognitive dissonance
Leon Festinger originally proposed the theory of cognitive dissonance in 1957. He theorized that human beings
constantly strive for mental consistency. Our cognition
(thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes) can be in agreement, unrelated, or in disagreement with each other. Our cognition
can also be in agreement or disagreement with our behaviors. When we detect conicting cognition, or dissonance, it gives us a sense of incompleteness and discomfort. For example, a person who is addicted to smoking
cigarettes but also suspects it could be detrimental to his
health suers from cognitive dissonance.
Festinger suggests that we are motivated to reduce this
dissonance until our cognition is in harmony with itself.
We strive for mental consistency. There are four main
ways we go about reducing or eliminating our dissonance:
1. changing our minds about one of the facets of cognition

2.2

Conditioning theories

Main article: Classical conditioning

2. reducing the importance of a cognition

3. increasing the overlap between the two, and
4. re-evaluating the cost/reward ratio.

Conditioning plays a huge part in the concept of persuasion. It is more often about leading someone into taking certain actions of their own, rather than giving direct commands. In advertisements for example, this is
done by attempting to connect a positive emotion to a
brand/product logo. This is often done by creating commercials that make people laugh, using a sexual undertone, inserting uplifting images and/or music etc. and
then ending the commercial with a brand/product logo.
Great examples of this are professional athletes. They are
paid to connect themselves to things that can be directly
related to their roles; sport shoes, tennis rackets, golf
balls, or completely irrelevant things like soft drinks, popcorn poppers and panty hose. The important thing for the
advertiser is to establish a connection to the consumer.[8]
This conditioning is thought to aect how people view
certain products, knowing that most purchases are made
on the basis of emotion. Just like you sometimes recall a
memory from a certain smell or sound, the objective of
some ads is solely to bring back certain emotions when
you see their logo in your local store. The hope is that
by repeating the message several times it will cause the
consumer to be more likely to purchase the product because he/she already connects it with a good emotion and
a positive experience. Stefano DellaVigna and Matthew
Gentzkow did a comprehensive study on the eects of
persuasion in dierent domains. They discovered that
persuasion has little or no eect on advertisement; however, there was a substantial eect of persuasion on voting
if there was face-to-face contact.[9]

Revisiting the example of the smoker, he can either quit

smoking, reduce the importance of his health, convince
himself he is not at risk, or evaluate the reward of his
smoking to be worth the cost of his health.
Cognitive dissonance is powerful when it relates to competition and self-concept. The most famous example
of how cognitive dissonance can be used for persuasion
comes from Festinger and Carlsmiths 1959 experiment
in which participants were asked to complete a very dull
task for an hour. Some were paid $20, while others were
paid $1, and afterwards they were instructed to tell the
next waiting participants that the experiment was fun and
exciting. Those who were paid $1 were much more likely
to convince the next participants that the experiment really was enjoyable than those who received $20. This is
because $20 is enough reason to participate in a dull task
for an hour, so there is no dissonance. Those who received $1 experienced great dissonance, so they had to
truly convince themselves that the task actually was enjoyable in order to avoid feeling like they were taken advantage of, and therefore reduce their dissonance.[10]

2.4 Elaboration likelihood model

Main article: Elaboration likelihood model
Persuasion has traditionally been associated with two
routes.[11]

2.7

Narrative transportation theory

Central route: Whereby an individual evaluates in- A vaccine introduces a weak form of a virus that can easformation presented to them based on the pros and ily be defeated to prepare the immune system should it
cons of it and how well it supports their values
need to ght o a stronger form of the same virus. In
much the same way, the theory of inoculation suggests
Peripheral route: Change is mediated by how attrac- a certain party can introduce a weak form of an argutive the source of communication is and by bypass- ment that can easily be thwarted in order to prepare the
ing the deliberation process.[11]
audience to disregard a stronger, full-edged form of the
argument from an opposing party.
The Elaboration likelihood model (ELM) forms a new This is often practiced in negative advertisements and
facet of the route theory. It holds that the probability of comparative advertisements, both for products and poeective persuasion depends on how successful the com- litical causes. An example would be a manufacturer of a
munication is at bringing to mind a relevant mental rep- product displaying an ad that refutes one particular claim
resentation, which is the elaboration likelihood. Thus if made about a rivals product, so that when the audience
the target of the communication is personally relevant, sees an ad for said rival product, they will refute all the
this increases the elaboration likelihood of the intended claims of the product without a second thought.[15]
outcome and would be more persuasive if it were through
the central route. Communication which does not require
careful thought would be better suited to the peripheral 2.7 Narrative transportation theory
route.[12]
Main article: Transportation theory (psychology)

2.5

Functional theories

Functional theorists attempt to understand the divergent

attitudes individuals have towards people, objects or issues in dierent situations.[13] There are four main functional attitudes:
1. Adjustment function: A main motivation for individuals is to increase positive external rewards and
minimize the costs. Attitudes serve to direct behavior towards the rewards and away from punishment.

Narrative transportation theory proposes that when people lose themselves in a story, their attitudes and intentions change to reect that story. The mental state of narrative transportation can explain the persuasive eect of
stories on people, who may experience narrative transportation when certain contextual and personal preconditions are met, as Green and Brock[16] postulate for the
transportation-imagery model. Narrative transportation
occurs whenever the story receiver experiences a feeling
of entering a world evoked by the narrative because of
empathy for the story characters and imagination of the
story plot.

2. Ego Defensive function: The process by which

an individual protects their ego from being threatened by their own negative impulses or threatening
2.8
thoughts.

Social judgment theory

3. Value-expressive: When an individual derives plea- Main article: Social judgment theory
sure from presenting an image of themselves which
is in line with their self-concept and the beliefs that
Social judgment theory suggests that when people are
they want to be associated with.
presented with an idea or any kind of persuasive proposal,
4. Knowledge function: The need to attain a sense of their natural reaction is to immediately seek a way to sort
understanding and control over ones life. An in- the information subconsciously and react to it. We evaldividuals attitudes therefore serve to help set stan- uate the information and compare it with the attitude we
dards and rules which govern their sense of being.[13] already have, which is called the initial attitude or anchor
point.
When communication is targeted at an underlying function its degree of persuasiveness will inuence whether
the individual will change their attitude, after determining that another attitude will be more eective in fullling
that function.[14]

2.6

Inoculation theory

Main article: Inoculation theory

When attempting to sort the incoming persuasive information, an audience will evaluate whether it lands in their
latitude of acceptance, latitude of non-commitment or
indierence, or the latitude of rejection. The size of
these latitudes will vary from topic to topic. Our egoinvolvement generally plays one of the largest roles in
determining the size of these latitudes. When a topic
is closely connected to how we dene and perceive ourselves, or deals with anything we care passionately about,
our latitudes of acceptance and non-commitment are
likely to be much smaller and our attitude of rejection

METHODS

much larger. A persons anchor point is considered to be 3.2 Weapons of inuence

the center of his latitude of acceptance, the position that
Robert Cialdini, in Inuence, his book on persuasion, deis most acceptable to him.
ned six inuence cues or weapons of inuence":[18] InAn audience is likely to distort incoming information to
uence is the process of changing.
t into their unique latitudes. If something falls within the
latitude of acceptance, the subject tends to assimilate the
information and consider it closer to his anchor point than 3.2.1 Reciprocity
it really is. Inversely, if something falls within the latitude
of rejection, the subject tends to contrast the information Main article: Norm of reciprocity
and convince himself the information is farther away from
his anchor point than it really is.
The principle of reciprocity states that when a person proWhen trying to persuade an individual target or an en- vides us with something, we attempt to repay him or her
tire audience, it is vital to rst learn the average latitudes in kind. Reciprocation produces a sense of obligation,
of acceptance, non-commitment, and rejection of your which can be a powerful tool in persuasion. The reciaudience. It is ideal to use persuasive information that procity rule is eective because it can be overpowering
lands near the boundary of the latitude of acceptance if and instill in us a sense of obligation. Generally, we have
the goal is to change the audiences anchor point. Re- a dislike for individuals who neglect to return a favor or
peatedly suggesting ideas on the fringe of the acceptance provide payment when oered a free service or gift. As a
latitude will cause people to gradually adjust their anchor result, reciprocation is a widely held principle. This socipoints, while suggesting ideas in the rejection latitude or etal standard makes reciprocity extremely powerful pereven the non-commitment latitude will not result in any suasive technique, as it can result in unequal exchanges
change to the audiences anchor point.[17]
and can even apply to an uninvited rst favor.

Methods

3.2.2 Commitment and consistency

Consistency is an important aspect of persuasion because
it:
1. is highly valued by society,
2. results in a benecial approach to daily life, and
3. provides a valuable shortcut through the complicated
nature of modern existence.

Consistency allows us to more eectively make decisions

and process information. The concept of consistency
states that if a person commits, either orally or in writing,
he or she is more likely to honor that particular commitment. This is especially true for written commitments,
as they appear psychologically more concrete and can be
The art of persuasion'--returning from a ball in India from The backed up with hard proof. Once a person commits to a
Graphic, 1890
stance, he or she has a tendency to behave according to
that commitment. Commitment is an eective persuaPersuasion methods are also sometimes referred to as per- sive technique because once you get someone to make
a commitment, they are more likely to engage in selfsuasion tactics or persuasion strategies.
persuasion, providing themselves and others with reasons
and justications to support his or her commitment in order to avoid dissonance.

3.1

Usage of force

There is the usage of force in persuasion, which does not

have any scientic theories, except for its use to make demands. The use of force is then a precedent to the failure
of less direct means of persuasion. Application of this
strategy can be interpreted as a threat since the persuader
does not give options to his or her request.

3.2.3 Social proof

We are inuenced by others around us; we want to be
doing what everyone else is doing. People often base their
actions and beliefs on what others around them are doing,
how others act or what others believe.

3.3

Machiavellianism

The power of the crowd is very eective. We all want

to know what others are doing around us. We are so obsessed with what others do and how others act, that we
then try to be just like other people. Cialdini gives an example that is somewhat like this: in a phoneathon, the
host will say something along the line of, Operators are
waiting, please call now. The only context that you have
from that statement is that the operators are waiting and
they are not busy. Rather the host may say: If operators
are busy, please call again. This is proving the technique
of social proof. Just by changing three words, it sounds
like the lines are busy and other people are calling; so it
must be a good, legitimate organization.

volts. The catch to this experiment was that the teacher

did not know that the learner was an actor faking the pain
sounds he heard and was not actually being harmed. The
experiment was being done to see how obedient we are to
authority. When an authority tells ordinary people it is
their job to deliver harm, how much suering will each
subject be willing to inict on an entirely innocent other
person if the instructions come 'from above'?". In this
study the results show that most teachers were willing to
give as much pain as was available to them. The conclusion was that people are willing to bring pain upon others
when they are directed to do so by some authority gure.

Social proof is most eective when people are uncertain

or when there are similarities in a situation. In uncertain
or ambiguous situations, when there are multiple possibilities or choices that need to be made, people are likely
to conform to what others do/are doing. We become
more inuenced by the people around us, in situations that
cause us to make a decision. The other eective situation
for social proong is when there are similarities. We are
more prone to change/conform around people who are
similar to us. If someone who is similar to you is being
controlling and a leader, you are more likely to listen and
follow what it is they are saying.

3.2.6 Scarcity

3.2.4

Likeness

Scarcity is a principle that people underestimate. When

something has limited availability, people assign it more
value. According to Cialdini, people want more of what
they cannot have. When scarcity is an issue, the context
matters. This means that within certain contexts, scarcity
works better. To get people to believe that something is
scarcer, you need to explain what about that certain product will give them what no other product will. You have
to work the audience in the correct way. Something else
that you can do to get people to believe that something is
scarce, is to tell them what they will lose, not what they
will gain. Saying things like you will lose $5, rather than
saying you could save $5. You are making something
sound more scarce.

This principle is simple and concise. People say yes to

people that they like. Two major factors contribute to There are two major reasons why the scarcity principle
overall likeness. The rst is physical attractiveness. Peo- works:
ple who are physically attractive seem to be more persuasive; they get what they want and they can easily change
1. when things are dicult to get, they are usually more
others attitudes. This attractiveness is proven to send favaluable so that can make it seem to have better qualvorable messages/impressions of other traits that a person
ity; and
may have, such as talent, kindness, and intelligence. The
2. when things become less available, we could lose the
second factor is similarity. We are more likely to be perchance to acquire them.
suaded by people we see as similar to ourselves.[19]
3.2.5

Authority

When this happens, we assign the scarce item or service

more value simply because it is harder to acquire.

We have the tendency to believe that if an expert says This principle is that we all want things that are out of our
something, then it must be true. People like to listen to reach. If we see something is easily available, we do not
those who are knowledgeable and trustworthy, so if you want it as much as something that is very rare.
can be those two things, then you are already on your way
to getting people to believe and listen to you.

3.3 Machiavellianism

In the Milgram study, a series of experiments begun in

1961, a teacher and a learner were placed in two different rooms. The learner was attached to an electric
harness that could administer shock. The teacher was
told by a supervisor, dressed in a white scientists coat, to
ask the learner questions and punish him when he got a
question wrong. The teacher was instructed by the study
supervisor to deliver an electric shock from a panel under
the teachers control. After delivery, the teacher had to up
the voltage to the next notch. The voltage went up to 450

Machiavellianism employs the tools of manipulation and

deceit to gain wealth and power.

3.4 Relationship-based persuasion of Shell

and Moussa
In their book The Art of Woo, G. Richard Shell and
Mario Moussa present a four-step approach to strategic

persuasion.[20] They explain that persuasion means to win

others over, not to defeat them. Thus it is important to be
able to see the topic from dierent angles in order to anticipate the reaction others have to a proposal.

IN CULTURE

Personality tests and conict style inventory help devise strategy based on an individuals preferred style
of interaction
Sales techniques

Step 1: Survey the situation This step includes an

analysis of the persuaders situation, goals, and Other techniques:
challenges that the persuader faces in his or her
organization.
Deception
Step 2: Confront the ve barriers Five obstacles pose
the greatest risks to a successful inuence encounter: relationships, credibility, communication
mismatches, belief systems, and interest and needs.

Hypnosis

Step 4: Secure commitments In order to safeguard the

longtime success of a persuasive decision, it is vital
to deal with politics at both the individual and organizational level.

Brainwashing

3.5

Mind control

Power (social and political)

Subliminal advertising
Step 3: Make the pitch People need a solid reason to
justify a decision, yet at the same time many decisions are made on the basis of intuition. This step Coercive techniques, some of which are highly controversial and/or not scientically proven to be eective:
also requires presentation skills.

List of methods

By appeal to reason:
Logic
Logical argument
Rhetoric
Scientic evidence (proof)
Scientic method
By appeal to emotion:
Advertising
Faith
Presentation and Imagination
Pity
Propaganda
Psychological manipulation

Coercive persuasion
Force

Torture

4 In culture
It is through a basic cultural personal denition of persuasion that everyday people understand how others are
attempting to inuence them and then how they inuence
others. The dialogue surrounding persuasion is constantly
evolving because of the necessity to use persuasion in everyday life. Persuasion tactics traded in society have inuences from researchers, which may sometimes be misinterpreted. To keep evolutionary advantage, in the sense
of wealth and survival, you must persuade and not be persuaded. In order to understand cultural persuasion, researchers will gather knowledge from domains such as
buying, selling, advertising, and shopping, as well as parenting and courting.[21]
Methods of persuasion vary by culture, both in prevalence
and eectiveness. For example, advertisements tend to
appeal to dierent values according to whether they are
used in collectivistic or individualistic cultures.[22]

Seduction
Tradition
Aids to persuasion:
Body language
Communication skill or Rhetoric

4.1 Persuasion Knowledge Model (PKM)

The Persuasion Knowledge Model (PKM) was created by
Friestad and Wright in 1994. This framework allows the
researchers to analyze the process of gaining and using
everyday persuasion knowledge. The researchers suggest
the necessity of including the relationship and interplay

7
between everyday folk knowledge and scientic knowledge on persuasion, advertising, selling, and marketing in
general.[21]
In order to educate the general population about research
ndings and new knowledge about persuasion, a teacher
must draw on their pre-existing beliefs from folk persuasion in order to make the research relevant and informative to lay people, which creates mingling of their scientic insights and commonsense beliefs.[21]
As a result of this constant mingling, the issue of persuasion expertise becomes messy. Expertise status can
be interpreted from a variety of sources like job titles,
celebrity, or published scholarship.
It is through this multimodal process that we create concepts like stay away from car salesmen, they will try to
trick you. The kind of persuasion techniques blatantly
employed by car salesmen creates an innate distrust of
them in popular culture. According to Psychology Today, they employ tactics ranging from making personal
life ties with the customer to altering reality by handing
the customer the new car keys before the purchase.[23]

6 See also
Advertising
Captatio benevolentiae
Communication
Compliance gaining
Crowd manipulation
Elaboration likelihood model
Extended transportation-imagery model
Inoculation theory
Judgeadvisor system
Regulatory Focus Theory
Social engineering (political science)
Social marketing
Soft power

Neurobiology

Attitudes and persuasion are among the central issues of

social behavior. One of the classic questions is when are
attitudes a predictor of behavior. Previous research suggested that selective activation of left prefrontal cortex
might increase the likelihood that an attitude would predict a relevant behavior. Using lateral attentional manipulation, this was supported.[24]
An earlier article showed that EEG measures of anterior prefrontal asymmetry might be a predictor of persuasion. Research participants were presented with arguments that favored and arguments that opposed the attitudes they already held. Those whose brain was more active in left prefrontal areas said that they paid the most attention to statements with which they agreed while those
with a more active right prefrontal area said that they
paid attention to statements that disagreed.[25] This is an
example of defensive repression, the avoidance or forgetting of unpleasant information. Research has shown
that the trait of defensive repression is related to relative
left prefrontal activation.[26] In addition, when pleasant
or unpleasant words, probably analogous to agreement or
disagreement, were seen incidental to the main task, an
fMRI scan showed preferential left prefrontal activation
to the pleasant words.[27]

7 References
[1] Seiter, Robert H. Gass, John S. (2010). Persuasion, social
inuence, and compliance gaining (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn
& Bacon. p. 33. ISBN 0-205-69818-2.
[2] Persuasion. Business Dictionary. Retrieved 9 May
2012.
[3] Fautsch, Leo (January 2007). Persuasion. The American Salesman. 52 (1): 1316. Retrieved 9 December
2012.
[4] Schacter, Daniel L., Daniel T. Gilbert, and Daniel M.
Wegner. The Accuracy Motive: right is better than
wrong-Persuasion. Psychology. ; Second Edition. New
York: Worth, Incorporated, 2011. 532. Print,
[5] Ancient greece
[6] Higgins, Colin; Walker, Robyn (September 2012).
Ethos, logos, pathos: Strategies of persuasion in social/environmental reports. Accounting Forum. 36: 194
208. doi:10.1016/j.accfor.2012.02.003. Retrieved 20
August 2015.
[7] Fundamental Attribution Error. changingminds.org.
[8] Cialdini, R.B. (2007). Inuence: The Psychology of Per-

suasion New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

One way therefore to increase persuasion would seem to
be to selectively activate the right prefrontal cortex. This
is easily done by monaural stimulation to the contralateral [9] DellaVigna, S.; Gentzko, M. (2010). Persuasion: Empirical evidence. Annual Review of Economics. 2: 64369.
ear. The eect apparently depends on selective attention
doi:10.1146/annurev.economics.102308.12430.
rather than merely the source of stimulation. This manipulation had the expected outcome: more persuasion [10] Cognitive Dissonance Theory. Simply Psychology. Retrieved 30 April 2014.
for messages coming from the left.[28]

EXTERNAL LINKS

[11] Petty; Cacioppo (1986). The elaboration likelihood

model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 19 (1): 123205. doi:10.1016/S00652601(08)60214-2.

[26] Tomarken, A. J.; Davidson, R. J. (1994). Frontal brain

activity in repressors and nonrepressors. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 103: 339349. doi:10.1037/0021843x.103.2.339.

[12] Petty; Cacioppo & Schumann (1983). Central and peripheral routes to advertising eectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer Research.
10 (2): 135146. doi:10.1086/208954. Cite uses deprecated parameter |coauthors= (help)

[27] Herrington, J. D., Mohanty, A., Koven, N. S., Fisher, J.

E., Stewart, J. L., Banich, M. T., et al. (2005). Emotionmodulated performance and activity in left dorsolateral
prefrontal cortex Emotion 5, 200-207. Free full-text.

[13] Katz, D. (1960). The functional approach to the study

of attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly. 24 (2): 163204.
doi:10.1086/266945.
[14] DeBono, K.G. (1987). Investigating the social-adjustive
and value-expressive functions of attitudes: Implications
for persuasion processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 52 (2): 279287. doi:10.1037/00223514.52.2.279.
[15] Jenah Schwartswalder (14 February 2001). Innoculation
Theory - Persuasion Context. Uky.edu. Retrieved 30
April 2014.
[16] Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2002). In the minds
eye: Transportation-imagery model of narrative persuasion. In M. C. Green, J. J. Strange & T. C. Brock (Eds.),
Narrative impact: Social and cognitive foundations. (pp.
315-341). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[17] Social Judgment Theory | Persuasion Blog. Healthyinuence.com. 22 April 2014. Retrieved 30 April 2014.
[18] Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Inuence: Science and practice (4th
ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
[19] Burger, Jerry M.; Messian, Nicole; Patel, Shebani; Prado,
Alicia del; Anderson, Carmen (1 January 2004). What
a Coincidence! The Eects of Incidental Similarity on
Compliance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
30 (1): 3543. doi:10.1177/0146167203258838. ISSN
0146-1672. PMID 15030641.
[20] The art of Woo by G. Richard Shell and Mario Moussa,
New York 2007, ISBN 978-1-59184-176-0
[21] Friestad, Marian; Wright, Peter. Everyday persuasion
knowledge. Psychology & Marketing16. 2 (Mar 1999)
[22] Han, S., & Shavitt, S. (1994). Persuasion and Culture:
Advertising Appeals in Individualistic and Collectivistic
Societies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
326-350.
[23] Lawson, Willow. Persuasion:Battle on the Car Lot, Psychology Today published on 1 September 2005 - last reviewed on 31 July 2009
[24] Drake, R. A.; Sobrero, A. P. (1987). Lateral orientation
eects upon trait behavior and attitude behavior consistency. Journal of Social Psychology. 127: 639651.
[25] Cacioppo, J. T.; Petty, R. E.; Quintanar, L. R. (1982). Individual dierences in relative hemispheric alpha abundance and cognitive responses to persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 43:
623636. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.43.3.623.

[28] Drake, R. A.; Bingham, B. R. (1985). Induced lateral

orientation and persuasibility. Brain and Cognition. 4:
156164. doi:10.1016/0278-2626(85)90067-3.

Higgins, C.; Walker, R. (2012). Ethos, logos, pathos: Strategies of persuasion in social/environmental reports. Accounting Forum. 36
(3): 194208. doi:10.1016/j.accfor.2012.02.003.

8 Further reading
Cialdini, Robert B. "Harnessing the Science of Persuasion" (Archive). Harvard Business Review. October 2001.
Herbert I. Abelson, Persuasion, How opinions and
attitudes are changed 1959
Richard E. Vatz, The Only Authentic Book of Persuasion Kendall Hunt, 2013

9 External links

10
10.1

Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

Text

Persuasion Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasion?oldid=739833516 Contributors: The Anome, Larry Sanger, Camembert,

Patrick, Sam Francis, Paul A, Ronz, Ciphergoth, Rossami, Emperorbma, WhisperToMe, Radiojon, SEWilco, Altenmann, Naddy, Kenny
sh, Marcika, Everyking, Khalid hassani, Andycjp, Salishsea, Ot, Tothebarricades.tk, Mike Rosoft, Zappaz, Bobo192, Icut4you, Johnkarp,
MaxHund, Johnteslade, John W. Kennedy, Bookandcoee, Firsfron, Mathmo, Hughcharlesparker, Stefanomione, Mandarax, Graham87,
BD2412, Rjwilmsi, Spblat, FlaBot, Wars, DVdm, Bgwhite, Dresdnhope, Wavelength, Peter S., Stephenb, Pseudomonas, Cleared as led,
Darkfred, ThirteenthGreg, SMcCandlish, Colin, GraemeL, Gating, SaveTheWhales, SmackBot, Ashenai, Andrew Ross-Parker, Jrockley,
Skizzik, Kevinalewis, Rmosler2100, Iain.dalton, MartinPoulter, Oli Filth, Darth Panda, Cybercobra, Decltype, -Ozone-, Lambiam, Kraybilr, 16@r, Bytwerk, SQGibbon, Zombiebaron, TastyPoutine, RichardF, Jcbutler, Quaeler, Courcelles, Woodshed, Van helsing, Neelix,
Penbat, Gregbard, Anonymi, Vanished User jdksfajlasd, Thijs!bot, Epbr123, RobotII, Headbomb, Dawnseeker2000, Decety, JAnDbot,
Sara161616, Elmschrat, Magioladitis, Bongwarrior, Jim Douglas, Twsx, Hifrommike65, Edward321, MartinBot, Alro, Joie de Vivre,
J.delanoy, Pharaoh of the Wizards, Terrek, Derekrogerson, Thebrainsalad, Indubitably, Trondarild, Oshwah, Jackfork, Madhero88, Lova
Falk, Spotcream, Logan, YonaBot, Kaypoh, Flyer22 Reborn, Reneeholle, ClueBot, The Thing That Should Not Be, ImperfectlyInformed,
Mild Bill Hiccup, CounterVandalismBot, Nuiloa, Henninb, Publictransport, Delicious carbuncle, Jytdog, WilliamDavidRogers, Nemhun,
Jan E. Schreiber, Dagoblin, Fluernutter, MrOllie, 5 albert square, TippTopp, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Anypodetos, AnomieBOT,
Kristen Eriksen, Jim1138, Kingpin13, Materialscientist, CWSault, LilHelpa, Xqbot, Cureden, Tophernator, Thosjleep, Vantage01, FrescoBot, Charlesatencio, Beatagreen, Comm&emotion, Pikiwyn, MastiBot, DixonDBot, C14ism, Lotje, Sumone10154, Callanecc, Tbhotch,
Nihola, Orphan Wiki, Aetius41, JohnGabriel1, Jim Michael, PramathMalik, Vjayant, AManWithNoPlan, IGeMiNix, Gray eyes, Ready,
NTox, U3964057, ClueBot NG, Satellizer, Oleyea, Exec second, BG19bot, Mikeg pkp, Marcocapelle, Pravincumar pek, Louie81, Lithiumgold, Nagrasat, SP612, ChrisGualtieri, Khazar2, Roman Korzh, Luckyshe, Jamesx12345, Mmm.designs, Requiredforclass, Epicgenius, Anum27, Singhh64, Infamous Castle, Extabulis, Bigbangvip, CalvinG1rl, Mhansonfbs, Sarahbmcd, BlaineReinsma, Eighmey, JimRenge, Soranoch, Kind Tennis Fan, Contribute1988, Oensiveb, JaconaFrere, Monkbot, Hedieh Taraghi, Sbernt13, Ihaveacatonmydesk,
Pochins3, MurderByDeadcopy, DPetruseski, Librarydenyse, SSTyer, Fotoklaasje, Hillaryrachelb, Baking Soda, Hawaan12, Ultraman87,
Nick214454, Stoicjoe and Anonymous: 243

10.2

Images

File:2pers-01.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/2pers-01.jpg License: Public domain Contributors:

http://solitary-elegance.com/pers-2.htm Original artist: C. E. Brock (died 1938)
File:Edit-clear.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f2/Edit-clear.svg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Question_book-new.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Question_book-new.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0
Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:The_art_of_persuasion'--returning_from_a_ball_in_India_(The_Graphic,_1890).jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/
wikipedia/commons/f/f7/The_art_of_persuasion%27--returning_from_a_ball_in_India_%28The_Graphic%2C_1890%29.jpg License:
Public domain Contributors: http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00routesdata/1800_1899/women/travel/travel.html Original
artist: the graphics
File:Wiktionary-logo-v2.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Wiktionary-logo-v2.svg License: CC BYSA 4.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Dan Polansky based on work currently attributed to Wikimedia Foundation but originally
created by Smurrayinchester

10.3

Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0