Comments on: The Primary Visual - Physical Attractiveness and Persuasion http://www.presentationfacts.com/index.php/2005/09/09/the-primary-visual-physical-attractiveness-and-persuasion/ Sat, 04 Sep 2010 19:37:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Noel Sanderson http://www.presentationfacts.com/index.php/2005/09/09/the-primary-visual-physical-attractiveness-and-persuasion/#comment-9729 Noel Sanderson Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:51:47 +0000 http://www.presentationfacts.com/index.php/2005/09/09/the-primary-visual-physical-attractiveness-and-persuasion/#comment-9729 Interesting article. Were did you arrive at all the data from... :) Interesting article. Were did you arrive at all the data from… :)

]]> By: rbefus http://www.presentationfacts.com/index.php/2005/09/09/the-primary-visual-physical-attractiveness-and-persuasion/#comment-18 rbefus Sun, 06 Apr 2008 14:35:08 +0000 http://www.presentationfacts.com/index.php/2005/09/09/the-primary-visual-physical-attractiveness-and-persuasion/#comment-18 Michael - While I agree with Richard's comments about study design here, I am not sure it is helpful to totally throw out these results. At the time I wrote this post I was reading Cialdini's book "Influence" and had come across a number of different studies that looked at attractiveness as a factor in persuasion. Certainly it is not the only factor and most likely it is not the most important factor in persuasion, but I think it is unwise to disregard it out of hand. While I have talked to many who also believe we should "think less of numbers..." when it comes to presentation and persuasion, I could not disagree more. Why is it that so many are willing to accept anecdotes and subjective notions in this area as a substitute for scientific inquiry? Michael - While I agree with Richard’s comments about study design here, I am not sure it is helpful to totally throw out these results. At the time I wrote this post I was reading Cialdini’s book “Influence” and had come across a number of different studies that looked at attractiveness as a factor in persuasion. Certainly it is not the only factor and most likely it is not the most important factor in persuasion, but I think it is unwise to disregard it out of hand.

While I have talked to many who also believe we should “think less of numbers…” when it comes to presentation and persuasion, I could not disagree more. Why is it that so many are willing to accept anecdotes and subjective notions in this area as a substitute for scientific inquiry?

]]> By: Michael Vivion http://www.presentationfacts.com/index.php/2005/09/09/the-primary-visual-physical-attractiveness-and-persuasion/#comment-17 Michael Vivion Sat, 05 Apr 2008 23:59:16 +0000 http://www.presentationfacts.com/index.php/2005/09/09/the-primary-visual-physical-attractiveness-and-persuasion/#comment-17 Richard isolates the problem with these studies. There are simply too many variables to get too scientific about something as complicated as persuasion. In a way this issue also contains echoes of the incomplete discussion on Morabian. Describe the rhetorical situation in which physical impression makes such a difference that Joan Curtis can write "When we get too wrapped up in trying to give numbers and reliable data to what we know is true, we stop teaching and get caught up in semantics. That would be tragic. I really don’t care what the exact numbers are; but I do know that nonverbal communication plays a much greater role in the power of a message than verbal communication. That is what I try to teach." Would these statements about the primacy of visual appearance hold up to an argument before the Supreme Court? To a scientific presentation in front of one's peers at a congress? To a clinical presentation in front of an FDA Advisory Committee? In a speech about a political candidate? But that's only the rhetorical context. What about the audience? Would an audience of computer geeks care about the looks of the speaker? Would Bob Gates be persuasive? We still haven't considered the ethos of the speaker. How should we respond to Richard Saul Wurman of Ted fame? Or Stephen Hawking? Do looks matters so much when these physically unimposing men speak? Perhaps we would be better off to think less of numbers than to dust off our rhetoric texts to do a little research that just might show us that the nature of persuasion is a subject of centuries of debate and discussion--little of it boiled down to statistics of persuasion. I love the discussion but would assert that those of us who are rhetoricians don't need numbers to help our clients become better speakers. Instead we need to be sensitive to the rhetorical contexts of each speaking act and to do our bests to show our clients the possiblilites of approaching each. Richard isolates the problem with these studies. There are simply too many variables to get too scientific about something as complicated as persuasion. In a way this issue also contains echoes of the incomplete discussion on Morabian.

Describe the rhetorical situation in which physical impression makes such a difference that Joan Curtis can write
“When we get too wrapped up in trying to give numbers and reliable data to what we know is true, we stop teaching and get caught up in semantics. That would be tragic. I really don’t care what the exact numbers are; but I do know that nonverbal communication plays a much greater role in the power of a message than verbal communication. That is what I try to teach.”

Would these statements about the primacy of visual appearance hold up to an argument before the Supreme Court? To a scientific presentation in front of one’s peers at a congress? To a clinical presentation in front of an FDA Advisory Committee? In a speech about a political candidate?

But that’s only the rhetorical context. What about the audience? Would an audience of computer geeks care about the looks of the speaker? Would Bob Gates be persuasive?

We still haven’t considered the ethos of the speaker. How should we respond to Richard Saul Wurman of Ted fame? Or Stephen Hawking? Do looks matters so much when these physically unimposing men speak?

Perhaps we would be better off to think less of numbers than to dust off our rhetoric texts to do a little research that just might show us that the nature of persuasion is a subject of centuries of debate and discussion–little of it boiled down to statistics of persuasion.

I love the discussion but would assert that those of us who are rhetoricians don’t need numbers to help our clients become better speakers. Instead we need to be sensitive to the rhetorical contexts of each speaking act and to do our bests to show our clients the possiblilites of approaching each.

]]> By: Richard http://www.presentationfacts.com/index.php/2005/09/09/the-primary-visual-physical-attractiveness-and-persuasion/#comment-5 Richard Fri, 01 Feb 2008 20:14:55 +0000 http://www.presentationfacts.com/index.php/2005/09/09/the-primary-visual-physical-attractiveness-and-persuasion/#comment-5 You could hire an attractive model / actor to be the spokesperson and deliver the presentation... or create the presentation online and add "virtual" presenters that are visually appealing, or add pictures of appealing people in the presentation... But this live presentation by Bill Strickland may disprove the research... http://www.ted.com/speakers/view/id/184 Bill is not particularly attractive by our modern definitions (neither is he repulsive to look at), but his message is certainly enthralling and inspirational. Also, from a scientific standpoint, I question the validity of the research because of the lack of isolation of the dependent and independent variables. There are too many variables that come into play in this research because it was held at random campus locations. It should have been held in the same location. You could hire an attractive model / actor to be the spokesperson and deliver the presentation… or create the presentation online and add “virtual” presenters that are visually appealing, or add pictures of appealing people in the presentation…

But this live presentation by Bill Strickland may disprove the research… http://www.ted.com/speakers/view/id/184 Bill is not particularly attractive by our modern definitions (neither is he repulsive to look at), but his message is certainly enthralling and inspirational.

Also, from a scientific standpoint, I question the validity of the research because of the lack of isolation of the dependent and independent variables. There are too many variables that come into play in this research because it was held at random campus locations. It should have been held in the same location.

]]>