|
APRIL 1998
The Organization of Arguments
by Paul DiLillo
The findings in literature can be summarized briefly as follows:
- A two-sided presentation is more effective in the long run than a one-sided one when
- regardless of initial opinion, the audience is exposed to subsequent counterpropaganda, or
- when, regardless of subsequent exposure to counterpropaganda, the audience initially disagrees with the commentators position.
- A two-sided presentation is less effective than a one-sided if the audience initially agrees with the commentators position and is not
exposed to later counterpropaganda.
Implications
One rationale for the findings on counterpropaganda would run as follows: Regardless of initial position, a convincing one-sided communication presenting only positive arguments will tend to sway many members of the audience further in the direction advocated by the communicator. Subsequently, however, these persons hear the opposite point of view, also supported by cogent-sounding arguments. Their opinions now tend to be swayed back in the negative direction, especially if the new arguments appear to offset the previous positive arguments. However, if the initial communication is, instead, a two- sided one it will already have taken into account both the positive and negative arguments and still have reached the positive conclusion. When the listener is then subsequently exposed to the presentation of negative arguments in the counterpropaganda he is less likely to be influenced in the negative direction. He is already familiar with the opposing point of view and has been led to the positive conclusion in a context where the negative arguments were in evidence. In effect, he has thus been given an advance basis for ignoring or discounting the negative arguments, and thus inoculated will tend to retain the positive conclusion.
Back to Top
|
|
