Perceptions of Rebuttal Analogy: Politeness and Implications for Persuasion

Argumentation and Advocacy

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 161-169

  Whaley, Bryan B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0002047739     PISSN: 10511431     EISSN: 25768476     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00028533.1997.11978015     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aristotle, The rhetoric of Aristotle (L. Cooper, Trans.). (1932). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
2. Aristotle, Poetics (R. Janko, Trans.). (1987). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.
3. Baaske, K., (1991). Analogic argument in public discourse: A reconsideration of the nature and function of analogy. In F. H., van Eemeren, R., Grootendorst, J. A., Blair, & C. A., Willard (Eds.), Proceedings of the second international conference on argument (pp. 411–415). Amsterdam: Sic Sat
4. Bennett, W. L., (1977). The ritualistic and pragmatic bases of political campaign discourse. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 63, 219–238.
5. Blair, J. A., (1990). Fallacies in everyday argument. In R., Trapp & J., Schuetz (Eds.), Perspectives on argumentation: Essays in honor of Wayne Brockriede (pp. 121–133). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
6. Bosman, J., (1987). Persuasive effects of political metaphors. Metaphors and Symbolic Activity, 2, 97–113.
7. Bowers, J. W., & Osborn, M. M., (1966). Attitudinal effects of selected types of concluding metaphors in persuasive speeches. Speech Monographs, 33, 147–155.
8. Chaiken, S., (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752–766.
9. Chaiken, S., & Eagly, A. H., (1983). Communicator modality as a determinant of persuasion: The role of communicator salience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 241–256.
10. Downs, V. C, Kaid, L. L., & Ragan, S., (1990). The impact of argumentativeness and verbal aggression on communicator image: The exchange between George Bush and Dan Rather. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 54, 99–112.
11. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S., (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
12. Fraser, B., & Nolan, W., (1981). The association of deference with linguistic form. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 27, 93–109.
13. Friedman, P., (1992). Inadmissible evidence. New York: Donald I. Fine.
14. Gentner, D., (1982). Are scientific analogies metaphors? In D. S., Miall (Ed.), Metaphor, problems and perspectives (pp. 106–132). Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.
15. Gentner, D., (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170.
16. Goodall, H. L., (1983). The nature of analogic discourse. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69, 171–179.
17. Graham, G. M., (1928). Analogy—A study in proof and persuasion values. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 74, 534–542.
18. Gross, A. G., (1983). Analogy and intersubjectivity: Political oratory, scholarly argument and scientific reports. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 69, 37–46.
19. Hecht, B., (1991, July). Out of joint: The case for medicinal marijauna. The New Republic, 205, 7–10.
20. Hockenberry, J., (1993, November 22). “By reason of insanity.” DAY ONE. Transcript #138, p. 4.
21. Hollihan, T., & Baaske, A., (1994). Arguments and arguing: The products of process and human decision making. New York: St. Martin's.
22. Jackson, S., (1992). Message effects research. Principles of design and analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.
23. Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H., (1989). The effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 290–314.
24. Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H., (1990). Involvement and persuasion: Types, traditions, and the evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 375–384.
25. Johnson, J. T, & Taylor, S. E., (1981). The effect of metaphor on political attitudes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 2, 305–316.
26. Kahane, H., (1984). Logic and contemporary rhetoric: The use of reason in everyday life (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
27. McCroskey J. C., & Combs, W. H., (1969). The effects of the use of analogy on attitude change and source credibility. Journal of Communication, 79, 333–339.
28. Perelman, Ch. (1979). The new rhetoric and the humanities: Essays on rhetoric and its applications. Boston: D. Reidel.
29. Perelman, Ch., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L., (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation (J. Wilkinson & P. Weaver, Trans.). Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
30. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T., (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
31. Petty, R. E, Ostrom, T. M., & Brock, T. C., (Eds.) (1981). Cognitive responses in persuasion. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32. Polanski, V. G., (1984). Do student-produced metaphors persuade? Educational Research Quarterly, 9, 36–43.
33. Read, S, Cesa, I., Jones, D., & Collins, N., (1990). When is the federal budget like a baby? Metaphor in political rhetoric. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 5, 125–149.
34. Reinsch, N. L., Jr. (1971). An investigation of the effects of the metaphor and simile in persuasive discourse. Speech Monographs, 38, 142–145.
35. Reinsch, N. L., Jr. (1974). Figurative language and source credibility: A preliminary investigation and reconcep- tualization. Human Communication Research, 7, 75–80.
36. Rieke, R. D., & Sillars, M. O., (1993). Argumentation and critical decision making (3rd ed.). New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
37. Roberts, P., (1992, November). Zero cut. Seattle Weekly, pp. 19–20.
38. Siltanen, S. A., (1981). The persuasiveness of metaphor: a replication and extension. Southern Speech Communication Journal, 47, 67–83.
39. Sternberg, R. J., (1977). Component processes in analogical reasoning. Psychological Review, 84, 353–378.
40. Sternberg, R. J., & Nigro, G., (1983). Interaction and analogy in the comprehension and appreciation of metaphors. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35, 17–38.
41. Sullivan, B., (1991, January). The North Coast Journal, 11, p. 17.
42. Thagard, P., (1992). Analogy, explanation, and education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 537–544.
43. Trapp, R., & Schuetz, J., (Eds.). (1990). Perspectives on argumentation: Essays in honor of Wayne Brockriede. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
44. Whaley, B., & Babrow, A., (1993). Analogy in persuasion: Translator's dictionary or art? Communication Studies, 44, 239–253.
45. Whaley, B., & Holloway, R., (in press). Rebuttal analogy as political argument: Affiliation and attack in sound bite. Political Communication.
46. Whaley, B., & Holloway, R., (1996). Rebuttal analogy: A theoretical note. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 77, 161–167.
47. Wilcox, J. R., & Ewbank, H. L., (1979). Analogy for rhetors. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 72, 1–20.
48. Zashin, E., & Chapman, P. C., (1974). The uses of metaphor and analogy: Toward a renewal of political language. Journal of Politics, 36, 290–326.