The Key to Political Persuasion <http://www.citizenwarrior.com/>

[image: Description: Link to Citizen Warrior]
<http://www.citizenwarrior.com/>
------------------------------

Posted: 05 Dec 2015 10:00 AM PST

*[image: Description:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dXNqIeOMyhk/VlwcZ64mbHI/AAAAAAAAA7k/tNzqpFWzSVQ/s320/1-political%2Bpersuasion.jpg]*
<http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dXNqIeOMyhk/VlwcZ64mbHI/AAAAAAAAA7k/tNzqpFWzSVQ/s1600/1-political%2Bpersuasion.jpg>

*The following is an article by Robb Miller and Matthew Feinberg, published
in the New York Times here
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/opinion/sunday/the-key-to-political-persuasion.html>,
and well worth studying. We need just this kind of information if we are to
be successful with our goal of reaching people who do not share our
political views
<http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2015/07/whats-game-plan.html>. Here is the
article:*

In business, everyone knows that if you want to persuade people to make a
deal with you, you have to focus on what they value, not what you do. If
you’re trying to sell your car, you emphasize the features of the sale that
appeal to the buyer (the reliability and reasonable price of the vehicle),
not the ones that appeal to you (the influx of cash).

This rule of salesmanship, as we demonstrated in a series of experiments
detailed in a recent article in the journal Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, also applies in political debate — i.e., you should
frame your position in terms of the moral values of the person you’re
trying to convince. But when it comes to politics, this turns out to be
hard to do. We found that people struggled to set aside their reasons for
taking a political position and failed to consider how someone with
different values might come to support that same position.

In one study, we presented liberals and conservatives with one of two
messages in support of same-sex marriage. One message emphasized the need
for equal rights for same-sex couples. This is the sort of fairness-based
message that liberals typically advance for same-sex marriage. It is framed
in terms of a value — equality — that research has shown resonates more
strongly among liberals than conservatives. The other message was designed
to appeal to values of patriotism and group loyalty, which have been shown
to resonate more with conservatives. (It argued that “same-sex couples are
proud and patriotic Americans” who “contribute to the American economy and
society.”)

Liberals showed the same support for same-sex marriage regardless of which
message they encountered. But conservatives supported same-sex marriage
significantly more if they read the patriotism message rather than the
fairness one.

In a parallel experiment, we targeted liberals for persuasion. We presented
a group of liberals and conservatives with one of two messages in support
of increased military spending. One message argued that we should “take
pride in our military,” which “unifies us both at home and abroad.” The
other argued that military spending is necessary because, through the
military, the poor and disadvantaged “can achieve equal standing,” by
ensuring they have “a reliable salary and a future apart from the
challenges of poverty and inequality.”

For conservatives, it didn’t matter which message they read; their support
for military spending was the same. However, liberals expressed
significantly greater support for increasing military spending if they read
the fairness message rather than the patriotism one.

If you’re thinking that these reframed arguments don’t sound like ones that
conservatives and liberals would naturally be inclined to make, you’re
right. In an additional study, we asked liberals to write a persuasive
argument in favor of same-sex marriage aimed at convincing conservatives —
and we offered a cash prize to the participant who wrote the most
persuasive message. Despite the financial incentive, just 9 percent of
liberals made arguments that appealed to more conservative notions of
morality, while 69 percent made arguments based on more liberal values.

Conservatives were not much better. When asked to write an argument in
favor of making English the official language of the United States that
would be persuasive to liberals (with the same cash incentive), just 8
percent of conservatives appealed to liberal values, while 59 percent drew
upon conservative values.

Why do we find moral reframing so challenging? There are a number of
reasons. You might find it off-putting to endorse values that you don’t
hold yourself. You might not see a link between your political positions
and your audience’s values. And you might not even know that your audience
endorses different values from your own. But whatever the source of the
gulf, it can be bridged with effort and consideration.

Maybe reframing political arguments in terms of your audience’s morality
should be viewed less as an exercise in targeted, strategic persuasion, and
more as an exercise in real, substantive perspective taking. To do it, you
have to get into the heads of the people you’d like to persuade, think
about what they care about and make arguments that embrace their
principles. If you can do that, it will show that you view those with whom
you disagree not as enemies, but as people whose values are worth your
consideration.

Even if the arguments that you wind up making aren’t those that you would
find most appealing, you will have dignified the morality of your political
rivals with your attention, which, if you think about it, is the least that
we owe our fellow citizens.

Originally published in New York Times *here*
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/opinion/sunday/the-key-to-political-persuasion.html?_r=0>
.

*Robb Willer is a professor of sociology at Stanford. Matthew Feinberg is
an assistant professor at the Rotman School of Management at the University
of Toronto.*[image: Description:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CitizenWarrior/~4/KgBVEAbOLEg?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email]





Email delivery powered by Google






__._,_.___
------------------------------
Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected]>
------------------------------


Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmbjF0djc2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NDk1MzAyMzk->


[image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJldmdoOTluBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ0OTUzMDIzOQ-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>
• Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to