Thesis (D. Min.)--Western Seminary, Portland, Or., 2000. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 264-269).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Ohio State University, 2003. / Title from first page of PDF file. Document formatted into pages; contains xii, 139 p.; also includes graphics (some col.). Includes abstract and vita. Advisor: Richard E. Petty, Dept. of Psychology. Includes bibliographical references (p. 101-110).

Not available / text

No description available.

Proper speaking rate is a key attribute of effective communication. Emerging persuasive technologies use computers as a tool to induce human behavioural and attitude changes. This thesis established a computational framework which can persuade people to slow down their speech and communicate more effectively. We defined a conceptual model and implemented a computer software system, both serving as the cornerstones of our persuasion framework. The computer system is designed to persuade people to be aware of their speaking rate and to slow down their speech. The combination of computer technology and persuasive technologies and theories are embedded in the system. In order to conduct effective persuasion, a number of computer-based survey questions were asked and a short tailored letter was generated for each participant. A virtual coach system monitored and reminded the participant to slow down. A few adaptive cues were used to enhance the effects of the persuasion. We evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of the overall system. At the same time, we evaluated the feasibility of individual elements. A total of 22 participants was selected to make up the sample. The experiments were conducted under controlled conditions. The results indicated that our system is effective in persuading people to speak more slowly. The feedback from users indicated that our system raised their awareness about speaking rate.

The purpose of the study was to determine whether or not high school students can detect the presence of motivational techniques used in cosmetic advertising. The study administered a test to eighteen senior high school students from an advanced speech class and to eighteen senior high school. students from an advanced English class. The speech class constituted the experimental group and the English class constituted the control group.The experimental group were given special. training In the six motivational techniques: emotional appeals, logical appeals, social approval appeals, social disapproval appeals, language appeals, and color appeals. The course procedure consisted of lectures, textbook readings, and exercises done by the students. Students applied their knowledge of motivational techniques to the writing of persuasive speech composition and delivery of the persuasive speeches.After the training course for the experimental group, test results showed a significant difference between the pretest and post test at the .01 level of confidence. On the other hand, the control group who had received no training showed no significant difference on test scores from pretest to post test.The investigation concerning high school students’ detection of motivational techniques indicated the following: First, there the complete experimental test showing was a positive correlation of scores between pretest and the complete post test for the group. Second, special training for the group resulted in scores from pretest to post a difference which was significant at the .01 level of confidence. Third, using the parametric t test shows no significant difference from the pretest to post test scores of the control group. Fourth, at times, the motive appeals appear to be somewhat ambiguous. Fifth, cosmetic products are emotionally oriented and, hence, many cosmetic advertisements will have emotional appeal. Sixth, social approval and social disapproval appeals are not always mutually exclusive. Seventh, it is feasible to train students to detect the presence of motivational techniques, and it is obvious that students who are untrained seem less able to detect the techniques.

Historically, dialectics is the general method of (early) philosophy. The philosophy rhetoric controversy of modern dialectics (or argumentation theory) is reducible to a persuasion-knowledge gap. It's addressed in five parts. First, disputes in discourse (dialectics). Critical discussion or debate involves disagreement and contention. An agent's position on an issue includes an opinion (or claim) and ground. A ground is strategically developed in a contest of strengths using psycho-social influence and persuasion. This depends on the conveyance of meaning. Dispute resolution occurs where there is preponderance and a dominant position. The remaining parts selectively elaborate this framework. Second, persuasion (rhetoric). Persuasion involves the use of appeals e.g. rhetorical devices, arguments etc. to influence the propositional attitudes of agents. A hormic-hedonic infrastructure of mind suggests that psycho-social influence occurs through interest-satisfaction and results in an attitude (acceptance-withholding or rejection) toward a proposition. An agents internally operate according to an opinion-persuasion relation with thresholds, which most likely belong to the class of sigmoid functions. Benchmarks (thresholds) are set by a standard of establishment or proof. Satisfying a good standard is a preferred condition for action. Third, reason (dianoetics). Reason is impassioned rationally-principled semi -- autonomous intellect. The hormic-hedonic infrastructure of mind suggests it's a source (ideas) and an influence (pro-rational passions). Rationality rests on concepts and principles that regulate conduct (thought, feeling and action). Rational discourse isn't fully understood game-theoretically. A jurisprudential metaphor offers proof-based decision-making as an approach. Fourth, conduct (strategics). The aim of dispute involves both persuasion and dominance in a contest of strength. Arguments are an important class of appeals; they have cogency as their strength attribute. Strategically, conduct involves argumentative strategic criticism. A universal argumentation scheme describes conduct generally and is the basis for strength aggregates. Ideally, dispute resolution occurs when one position satisfies the standard of establishment or proof. Game-theoretically, establishment- or proof-based decision-making involves scores, voting and Arrow's theorem. Fifth, the dialectics of alethic inquiry (epistemics). This is the application of dialectics to claims. Internally, they are beliefs or knowledge. Difficulties (e.g. the Gettier challenge) with the standard justified true belief (JTB) model leads to alternatives like cognitivism, gradualism and thresholdism. What is proposed is an open contested certified true belief model that makes use of a claim-persuasion relation with thresholds. It is underwritten by a progressive rational regimentation of influences that is naturally based on a common ground of pragmatic reliabilism. This requires a preference for persuasive over non-persuasive influences. Thus, knowledge is belief with proof where proof-based decision-making rests on the cogency of arguments and case. Finally, by bridging the persuasion-knowledge gap, the philosophy-rhetoric controversy is settled and a reconciliation of philosophy (representing dialectics) and rhetoric is achieved. Rhetoric is a sub-discipline of dialectics. An implication is a denial of the incommensurability of theories associated with critical discussion and debate in discourse.

Thesis (B.A.)--Haverford College, Dept. of Political Science, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (doctoral)--Albert-Ludwigs-Universität zu Freiburg im Breisgau, 1982. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 261-271).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1993. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 239-243).