The Art and Science of Persuasion
Description
Using the fundamental principle of reciprocity in the art and science of persuasion provide three advertisements, commercials, or personal experiences/observations that illustrate this principle. Submit 3 examples (paste ads into the document, include URL links, and/or provide a synopsis), along with a one paragraph description of each clearly indicating how the advertisement, commercial, or personal experience/observation illustrates the principle of reciprocity. Examine in depth how social psychological principles of persuasion are relevant, citing scholarly research (which may include course resources) on the principle of reciprocity in this analysis.
Identify characteristics of the communicator, the message, and the target audience, considering key situational and contextual factors.
Produce a plan to intentionally enhance persuasiveness.
What are various alternative principles and/or techniques one might employ effectively?
Discuss ethical issues relevant to the collected examples, as well as your own persuasive plan.
Apply this insight to personal or professional life. Specifically, how might this insight be utilize moving forward?
Text Feenstra, J. (2013). Social psychology. • Chapter 7: Persuasion • Chapter 8: Conformity and Obedience • Chapter 9: Groups Articles Cialdini, R. B. (2014). Harnessing the science of persuasion. ASCA Newsletter, Edition 6, 26– 35. Retrieved from https://www.ebsco.com/ • The full-text version of this article can be retrieved from the EBSCOhost database through the Ashford University Library. This article identifies fundamental principles of persuasion. This resource will assist you in your the Art and Science of Persuasion assignment this week. Crano, W. D. (2000). Milestones in the psychological analysis of social influence. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/10892699.4.1.68 • The full-text version of this article can be retrieved from the EBSCOhost database through the Ashford University Library. This article discusses social influence. This resource will assist you in your Social Influence discussion forum this week. Forsyth, D. R. (2000). One hundred years of groups research: Introduction to the special issue. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 4(1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.4.1.3 • The full-text version of this article can be retrieved from the EBSCOhost database through the Ashford University Library. This article surveys major developments in group research over the past century. This resource will assist you in your Social Influence discussion forum this week. Multimedia Prudential. (2013, May 13). Prudential: Everybody’s doing it (Links to an external site.) [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/BgRoiTWkBHU • This humorous video clip illustrates the power of the situation to shape behavior. This resource will assist you in your Social Influence discussion forum this week. This video has closed captioning and a transcript. Accessibility Statement
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Main Posting | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
| Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3. |
|
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||