Question

In your posts, you should identify the specific techniques of persuasion or social influence that can be applied to a criminal trial. For example, who would make the most persuasive attorney, defendant, witness, etc? Given what we know about the order of presentation, does the defense or prosecution have the advantage when presenting their evidence? What should lawyers, defendants, and others include in their statements or behavior in an effort to increase how influential they are?

Answer 1

When we interact with others, our ultimate goal is to change their mind and eventually their behaviour. This change is called persuasion. The judicial process is itself a display of social interaction with the ultimate goal of persuasion, from the authoritative figure of the judge to the prosecution and defense counsel’s attempts to convince the jury to adopt their version of events. In light of this discussion it can be said that persuasion can be utilized in the courtroom as potential tools.

Researches on Persuasion concludes that the presentation of strong argument and/or a perceived credible source(like an expert) tends to be the most effective approach for a review in relation to courtroom. It is also observed that the more arguments we can produce from a reputable source, the more persuasive we should be. However, recent research suggests that what we are saying is not the only factor that can make a difference. How and when we present our arguments can make or break our persuasive attempts.

We can categorize Persuasion techniques into two types: How to say it and when to say it.

  

How to Say It

Ask them to think about it- When the audience can generate more arguments in favour of our position, the more persuasive we will be. However, like so many things about human nature, it is not that simple. Researchers have shown that how easily something comes to mind can also influence the way a person thinks. People rely on this shortcut to determine if something is right or wrong. If an individual can easily generate arguments for a position, they are more likely to perceive the position as correct. If it is difficult to generate these arguments, they will likely judge the position as incorrect.

It’s about style. Even if people do have cogent arguments for their position, it still needs to be delivered by a credible source. Recent research shows that credibility can be communicated to an audience through the type of language used. A study of courtroom transcripts found that when lawyers used hesitant phrases, such as “umm,” “I mean,” and “you know”, they were viewed as less credible (O’Barr, 1982).

Be a chameleon. In some cases, subtlety can be just as effective as delivering a blatantly strong argument. In everyday interactions, many of our behaviours are in response to how others have behaved. When others smile we automatically smile back. Researchers have investigated the purpose of such mimicry and have shown that when others mimic our gestures (e.g., touching face, crossing legs) we actually like them better (Chartrand & Bargh, 1999). Furthermore, because we are more persuaded by people that we like, such mimicry can also increase persuasive appeal.

  

When to Say It

Wear them down. In several studies, Burkley (2008) investigated how people’s energy levels influence their ability to resist persuasive messages. One study found that participants who resisted persuasion became more fatigued. Then, in another study, Burkley (2008) found that fatigue made participants more vulnerable to persuasion. There are several ways that a lawyer can capitalize on this fatigue effect in the courtroom. First, because of this cyclical relationship, a lawyer can be very effective if he just keep pushing his strong arguments over and over with no chance for his target to rest. Eventually his persistence should wear down his target’s resistance.

Second, take advantage of the fact that energy levels fluctuate throughout the day. People are particular fatigued before lunch time and at the end of the day, so this research suggests that these are peak persuasive time periods. If possible, it is wise on the part of a lawyer to save strongest arguments for these situations, when his audience will be more open to influence.

Forewarned is forearmed. There are times when we may want to decrease our opponent’s persuasive power. Research on forewarning offers a way that we can build up resistance to an opponent’s appeals.

People do not like to know that they are being persuaded. When people feel their freedom is being attacked, they often respond by standing firm in their original position (Petty & Cacioppo, 1979; Quinn & Wood, 2004). Fortunately, this tactic can work to our advantage. We can simply and effectively point out to the jury that the opponent is going to use a variety of persuasive tricks to try and change their mind.

Inoculation is preventative. In addition to forewarning, there is a possibility to increase resistance to opponent’s message through inoculation.