Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

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

File Description Size Format  
uhm_ma_3165_uh.pdf Version for UH users 2.7 MB Adobe PDF View/Open
uhm_ma_3165_r.pdf Version for non-UH users. Copying/Printing is not permitted 2.7 MB Adobe PDF View/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)
Date Issued: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
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

Please email if you need this content in ADA-compliant format.

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