Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10125/11513

Files

File Description SizeFormat 
uhm_ma_3165_uh.pdfFor UH users only2.7 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
uhm_ma_3165_r.pdfRestricted for viewing only2.7 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

Item Summary

Title: Persuasive strategies and closing arguments in a trial setting : a pilot study
Authors: Geiger, Gloria J.
Keywords: Persuasion (Rhetoric)
Forensic oratory
Summation (Law)
Issue Date: 2004
Abstract: Done through a rhetorical examination of the transcripts of closing arguments from high-profile, criminal jury trials, this was an exploratory study aimed at determining the correlation between persuasive strategy, opposing council, and verdict outcome. For the purposes of this study, persuasive strategy refers a pattern of speech organization used to maximize communication effectiveness.

The findings suggest that persuasive strategy is not a valid determinant of verdict outcome, and that there is no persuasive strategy more successful or persuasive than others. The findings also indicate that trial lawyers tend to use a combination of strategies rather than one single template.
Description: Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2004.
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 47-48).
v, 48 leaves, bound ill. 29 cm
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10125/11513
Rights: All UHM dissertations and theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission from the copyright owner.
Appears in Collections:M.A. - Communication



Items in ScholarSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.