Potential conflicts between normatively-responsible advocacy and successful social influence: Evidence from persuasion effects research

Daniel James O'Keefe*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

10 Scopus citations

Abstract

This article approaches the relationship of normative argumentation studies and descriptive persuasion effects research by pointing to several empirical findings that raise questions or puzzles about normatively-proper argumentative conduct. These findings indicate some complications in the analysis of normatively desirable argumentative conduct - including some ways in which practical persuasive success may not be entirely compatible with normatively-desirable advocacy practices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)151-163
Number of pages13
JournalArgumentation
Volume21
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2007

Keywords

  • Decision framing
  • Message framing
  • Pragma-dialectics
  • Risk communication
  • Risk perception
  • Strategic maneuvering

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy
  • Linguistics and Language

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Potential conflicts between normatively-responsible advocacy and successful social influence: Evidence from persuasion effects research'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this