Attitude-behaviour discepancy and cognitive disonancetactics for enhancing compliance in persuasive discourse

  1. García Gómez, Antonio
Revista:
Odisea: Revista de estudios ingleses

ISSN: 1578-3820

Año de publicación: 2008

Número: 9

Páginas: 67-82

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.25115/ODISEA.V0I9.145 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Odisea: Revista de estudios ingleses

Resumen

Desde un enfoque pragmatico-discursivo, el presente estudio examina las estrategias persuasivas que facilitan la adhesion a un punto de vista concreto en talkshows. A partir del análisis de diferentes extractos extraídos del talk show británico Ki-lroy, se argumenta que los episodios de habla confl ictiva no deben ser entendidos como un acto expresivo producto de una pérdida momentanea de autocontrol sino como un acto premeditado e instrumental. El análisis revela que las estrategias persuasivas que los invitados usan se basan en la habilidad de hallar un equilibrio entre la expresión de las emociones propias de un enfrentamiento verbal y la obtención de información per-sonal por parte de sus oponentes. Es pues la manipulación de esta información frente a la audiencia la que permite a los invitados atraer a los demás a su punto de vista y hacer que la estrategia de persuasión sea efectiva

Referencias bibliográficas

  • ALTMAN, I. and D. A. TAYLOR, 1973. Social Penetration. New York: Holst, Rinehart, Winston.
  • ANTAKI, C. 1994. Explaining and Arguing: The Social Organisation of Accounts. Lon-don: Sage Publications.
  • AUGOUSTINOS, M. and I. WALKER. 1995. Social Cognition. An Integrated Introduction.London: Sage publications.
  • BRIGGS, C.L., ed. 1996. Disorderly Discourse. Narrative, Confl ict and Inequality.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • BROWN, P. and S. LEVINSON. 1987. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • COTTERILL, J. 2003. Language in Court: Power and Persuasion in the O. J. Simpson Trial. Palgrave: Basingstoke.
  • DICKERSON, P. 2001. “Disputing with care: analyzing interviewees’ treatment of inter-viewers’ prior turns in televised political interviews”. Discourse Studies 3: 203-222.
  • EDWARDS, D. and J. POTTER. 1992. Discursive Psychology. London: Sage Publications.
  • EDWARDS, D. 2000. “Extreme case formulations: softeners, investment, and doing non-literal”.Research on Language and Social Interaction 33, 4: 347-373.
  • EDWARDS, K. and E.E. SMITH. 1996. “A disconfi rmation bias in the evaluation of argu-ments”.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71: 5-24.
  • FAIRCLOUGH, N. 1989. Language and Power. London: Longman.
  • FISCHOFF, S. 1995. “Confessions of a TV talk show shrink”. Psychology Today 28, 5: 38-45.
  • FOUCAULT, M. 1972. The Archeology of Knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
  • GARCÍA GÓMEZ, A. 2000. “Discourse, politeness and gender roles: an exploratory in-vestigation into British and Spanish Talk show verbal confl ict”. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense 8: 97-125.
  • GARCÍA GÓMEZ, A. 2002. “A Cognitive Approach to Topic Management in Verbal Duels on American Talkshows”. SELL 4: 145-170.
  • GARCÍA GÓMEZ, A. 2005. “The Social and Psychological Approach to Emotional and Confl ict Expression”.Estudios de la Mujer: Discursos e identidades 5: 65-75.
  • GARCÍA GÓMEZ, A. 2007. Habla confl ictiva como acción social. Discurso y Cognición. Oviedo: Septem Ediciones.
  • GARCÍA GÓMEZ, A. 2008. Assertive Behaviour and Gender Roles in Interpersonal Communi-cation: A Contrastive Study. Madrid: Magister Editorial.
  • GREGORI-SIGNES, C. 2000. “The tabloid Talkshow a quasi-conversational type of facte-to-face interaction”. Pragmatics 10, 2: 195-213.
  • GREGORI-SIGNES, C. 2001 “Opening Phase in American Tabloid Talkshows”. La lingüística aplicada a fi nales del siglo XX. Ensayos y propuestas. Eds. I. de la CRUZ, C. SAN-TAMARIA, C. TEJEDOR y C. VALERO. Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Alcalá. 555-562.
  • GRIMSHAW, A. D., ed. 1990. Confl ict Talk: Sociolinguistic Investigations of Arguments in Conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • HOGG, M.A. and G.M. VAUGHAN, 2002. Social Psychology. London: Prentice Hall.
  • HOLTGRAVES, T. and B. LASKY, 1999. “Linguistic power and persuasion”. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 18: 196-205.
  • HUTCHBY, I. 1996 Confrontation Talk – Arguments, asymmetries, and Power on Talk Radio.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. HUTCHBY, I. 1996 “Power in discourse: the case of arguments on a British talk radio show”.Discourse and Society 7, 4: 481-497.
  • LORENZO-DUS, N. 2008. “Real disorder in the court: an investigation of confl ict talk in US television courtroom shows”. Media, Culture and Society 30: 81-107.
  • MYERS, G. 2001. “I’m Out of It; You Guys Argue ́: Making an Issue of It on The Jerry Springer Show”. Television Talk Shows. Discourse, Performance, Spectacle. Ed. A.TOLSON. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum. 173-192.
  • O’KEEFFE, A. 2006. Investigating Media Discourse. London: Routledge.
  • POTTER, J. and M. WETHERELL. 1987. Discourse and Social Psychology. London: Sage
  • PUTNAN, S. 2001. Confl ict in Language. London: Routledge
  • SHOTTER, J. 1993. Conversational Realities. Constructing Life Through Language.London: Sage Publications.
  • TERRIBAS, M. and C. PUIG. 2000. “The Theatricalisation of the Private Domain and the Hybridization of Television Genres. The Case of Big Brother“. http://www.iuo.upf.es/formats/formats3/ter_a.htm (10 January 2008)
  • THORNBORROW, J. 2001. “Authenticating talk: building public identities in audience participation broadcasting”. Discourse Studies 3, 4: 459-479.
  • THORNBORROW, J. 2001. “Authenticity, talk and mediated experience”. Discourse Studies 3, 4: 391-411.
  • THORNBORROW, J. 2007. “Narrative, opinion and situated argument in talk show discourse”. Journal of Pragmatics 39, 8: 1436-1457.
  • VUCHINICH, S. 2003. “Social Problem Solving Training with Families”. Social Problem Solving: Theory, Research and Training. Eds. E.C. CHANG, T.J. D’ZURILLA and L.J. SANNA. American Psychological Association: Washington, DC. 34-43.
  • VUCHINICH, S. 2003. “Family problem solving”. The International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family Relationships. Ed. J. PONZETTI. Macmillan Reference USA.: NY. 57-74.
  • VUCHINICH, S., R. OZRETICH, C. PRATT, and B. KNEEDLER. 2002. “Problem-Solving Communication in Foster Families and Birthfamilies”. Child Welfare 81: 571-595.
  • WOOD, H. 2001. “No, YOU Rioted! ́: The Pursuit of Confl ict in the Management of “Lay” and “Expert” Discourses on Kilroy”. Television Talk Shows. Discourse, Per-formance, Spectacle. Ed. A. TOLSON. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum. 65-88.
  • GARCÍA GÓMEZ, A. (in press). La conversacionalización del discurso mediático en la televisión británica. Ideología, poder y cambio social. Oviedo: Septem Ediciones.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet