Persuasive strategies and closing arguments in a trial setting : a pilot study

Date
2004
Authors
Geiger, Gloria J.
Contributor
Advisor
Department
Instructor
Depositor
Speaker
Researcher
Consultant
Interviewer
Annotator
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Volume
Number/Issue
Starting Page
Ending Page
Alternative Title
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
Keywords
Persuasion (Rhetoric), Forensic oratory, Summation (Law)
Citation
Extent
Format
Geographic Location
Time Period
Related To
Theses for the degree of Master of Arts (University of Hawaii at Manoa). Communication; no. 3165
Table of Contents
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.
Rights Holder
Local Contexts
Email libraryada-l@lists.hawaii.edu if you need this content in ADA-compliant format.