Persuasive Litigatortag:typepad.com,2003:weblog-18443892017-12-08T08:18:58-07:00TypePadWhen Preparing to Present, Talk, Don't Readtag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a01156e439be2970c01bb09dd6408970d2017-12-08T08:18:58-07:002017-12-07T11:14:55-07:00By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: In my line of work, I find myself on my feet giving presentations quite often: marketing talks, CLE seminars, strategy sessions. I prepare for those opportunities pretty extensively, but here is one thing I don't do as part of that preparation: I don't sit and review my notes. I do prepare notes, and I do make sure that I devote plenty of time to planning out what I'm going to say, for example, when a given slide is on the screen. That's especially true since I don't believe in text-heavy slides that, in effect, put the...Persuasion Strategies
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: </p>
<p><a class="asset-img-link" style="display: inline;" href="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01b7c93a47a3970b-pi"><img title="53135982_s" class="asset asset-image at-xid-6a01156e439be2970c01b7c93a47a3970b img-responsive" style="width: 300px; display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" alt="53135982_s" src="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01b7c93a47a3970b-300wi" /></a></p>
<p>In my line of work, I find myself on my feet giving presentations quite often: marketing talks, CLE seminars, strategy sessions. I prepare for those opportunities pretty extensively, but here is one thing I <em>don't </em>do as part of that preparation: I don't sit and review my notes. I do prepare notes, and I do make sure that I devote plenty of time to planning out what I'm going to say, for example, when a given slide is on the screen. That's especially true since I don't believe in <a href="http://www.litigationps.com/litigation_postscript_per/2009/12/for-opening-statement-or-any-other-presentation-keep-your-speaking-notes-off-the-screen-1.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">text-heavy slides</a> that, in effect, put the speaker's notes up on the screen. So, the content is always planned out. But once I'm done writing those notes, I don't passively <em>read </em>them. Instead, if I have time, I'll practice the presentation on my feet -- using notes when I need to, but purposefully weening myself off those notes. </p>
<p>And, if I don't have time to practice on my feet, I'll do the next best thing. I'll record my presentation using a digital recorder, or these days, my phone, and then I will listen to my own presentation several times as I'm doing other things, like shaving or driving to work. It is my belief that this form of review and practice is much better than silent study. It gets me more quickly to the point of being familiar with the content so I can deliver it <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2015/07/speak-extemporaneously-7-tips-for-losing-the-notes-without-going-off-the-cuff.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">extemporaneously</a>, and it builds confidence. That has been my experience, and now there is research to back it up. Two memory researchers from Canada (<a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09658211.2017.1383434" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Forrin & MacLeod, 2017</a>) conducted an experiment showing that there is a memory advantage when saying words aloud, as opposed to hearing them or reading them. And the next best thing to actually saying them out loud is to hear them, not just in anyone's voice, but in our own. In this post, I'll briefly look at why that is the case, and share some rehearsal tips. </p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>The Reason: Production and Self-Reference </strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The memory advantage we have when actually speaking out loud is called "the production effect," in the sense that <em>producing </em>rather than simply reviewing content is more active, more engaging, and more likely to stick. Based on research reviewed in the article, the effect is well demonstrated, showing that saying words aloud, or even mouthing, writing or typing them, leads to better recall than passively reading them. </p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The recent Canadian study, however, was the first to focus on that next-best alternative of hearing your own voice. They compared four preparation conditions: reading words aloud, hearing oneself speak aloud, hearing another speak aloud, and reading silently. Testing the recall two weeks later, they found that the different methods of review were more to less effective in that order. </p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><a class="asset-img-link" onclick="window.open( this.href, '_blank', 'width=640,height=480,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=0,top=0' ); return false" href="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01bb09de0b22970d-popup"><img title="This time it s personal the memory benefit of hearing oneself_Page_4" class="asset asset-image at-xid-6a01156e439be2970c01bb09de0b22970d img-responsive" style="width: 450px; display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" alt="This time it s personal the memory benefit of hearing oneself_Page_4" src="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01bb09de0b22970d-450wi" /></a></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The "read aloud" version is best because you're active in producing it in that moment. But the condition of hearing yourself is second best, due to a self-reference effect. The authors explain, "Recollecting that it was you who said a word benefit[s] memory above and beyond recollecting that you heard it or read it." It is a more memorable and convincing way to prepare because it is you. </p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The authors summarize: "Put simply, the present results suggest that production is memorable in part because it includes a distinctive self-referential component. This may well underlie why rehearsal is so valuable in learning and remembering: We do it ourselves, and we do it in our own voice. When it comes time to recover the information, we can use this distinctive component to help us to remember." </p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The research in this case just used a list of 160 nouns. It would be interesting to see the theory tested in more realistic speech preparation conditions, but there's good reason to believe that the effect could be even stronger. When you do a stand-up speech (an opening, closing, oral argument, or CLE), the fact of hearing yourself wouldn't just carry a memory advantage, it would also promote confidence. Hearing yourself do it is a form of self-persuasion, and that translates into greater credibility. </p>
<p><strong>The Best Practices: Talk or Listen</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The implication here is that, when it is important that you come across as clear, prepared, and confident, the gold standard is to practice on your feet. <em>Any </em>time that you spend reading over your notes, or constantly revising notes, is going to be time less well-spent than time on your feet in practice. </p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">You don't want to recite your speech, either from the page or from memory, but you also don't want to improvise off-the-cuff. The happy mid-point is to speak extemporaneously, knowing the structure and the content very well, but choosing the exact words in the moment. The best means of preparing yourself for that is to practice doing it on your feet. So find some staff or colleagues as a test audience, or even find an empty room and just speak. </p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">And when you cannot do that, or to get ready for doing that, find a recorder. Record yourself giving the presentation once, and then listen to it several times (my magic number is 10). I have found that this can be a pretty good substitute, and an excellent supplement, to live rehearsal. Hearing the content and hearing it delivered in your own voice just seems to help in pumping it into your brain. </p>
<p>I understand litigators are busy and, particularly in the crush of trial, practice can and often does take a backseat. But that is exactly why busy litigators should not waste time with a less effective preparation method like reading one's notes. Get to a good version, and then start rehearsing it, improving it as you go. </p>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">____________________</span></p>
<p><strong>Other Posts on Effective Public Speaking: </strong></p>
<ul>
<li class="entry-header"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2014/10/dont-uh-necessarily-worry-about-um.html">Don't, uh, Necessarily Worry About "Um"</a></li>
<li class="entry-header"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2011/04/talk-with-your-hands.html">Go Ahead and Talk with Your Hands, But Know What You're Saying</a></li>
<li class="entry-header"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2017/07/drop-pitch-for-greater-power.html">Drop Pitch for Greater Power</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">____________________</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">Forrin, N. D., & MacLeod, C. M. (2017). This time it’s personal: the memory benefit of hearing oneself. <em>Memory</em>, 1-6.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #a2a2a2; font-size: 8pt;">Image credit: 123rf.com, used under license, edited</span></p>
<span class='st_linkedin' ></span><span class='st_twitter' ></span><span class='st_facebook' ></span><span class='st_email' ></span>
</div>
Nod Your Headtag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a01156e439be2970c01b8d2c42762970c2017-12-04T09:54:52-07:002017-12-04T09:54:09-07:00By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Nodding your head up and down means "Yes." At least in our culture it does. And world travelers will know that this one thankfully translates to nearly all other countries and cultures as well. There are exceptions, like one country I visited a couple of times on consulting trips: Bulgaria. There, shaking your head up and down, our "Yes," actually means "No," and shaking your head from side to side, our "No," means "Yes." And if you ask me if that creates the potential for confusion, I'd nod my head...or shake my head "Yes." But sticking...Persuasion Strategies
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: </p>
<p><a class="asset-img-link" style="display: inline;" href="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01bb09dcec44970d-pi"><img title="Nodding-disease-up-down-gesture-yes" class="asset asset-image at-xid-6a01156e439be2970c01bb09dcec44970d img-responsive" style="width: 300px; display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" alt="Nodding-disease-up-down-gesture-yes" src="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01bb09dcec44970d-300wi" /><br /></a>Nodding your head up and down means "Yes." At least in our culture it does. And world travelers will know that this one thankfully translates to nearly all other countries and cultures as well. There are exceptions, like one country I visited a couple of times on consulting trips: Bulgaria. There, shaking your head up and down, our "Yes," actually means "No," and shaking your head from side to side, our "No," means "Yes." And if you ask me if that creates the potential for confusion, I'd nod my head...or shake my head "Yes."</p>
<p>But sticking with the dominant cultural tendencies, the affirmative head nod is a useful and positive form of nonverbal communication. And we now have proof from the researchers that it works. Social scientists in Japan (<a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/11/171127091602.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Osugi & Kawahara, 2017</a>) used animated clips of figures either nodding affirmatively, shaking their heads negatively, or remaining motionless. They found that the nodding head motion significantly increases ratings of subjective likability and approachability. And rather than just enhancing <em>appearance,</em> the positive head-nodding is perceived to indicate a better <em>personality</em> on the part of the target. That stands to reason: It is easy to think well of someone who is nodding in agreement. For that reason, and with some important caveats, the head nod is a good tool for communicators in the courtroom, including advocates, questioners, and witnesses.</p>
<p><strong>For the Advocate: Nod to Reinforce the Positive Parts of Your Message</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">When you are standing before your judge or jury, that audience is both watching and listening. For that reason, your physical delivery should complement the words you are saying. Good nonverbal communication should act like a highlighter in reinforcing some sections of your verbal pitch to make them more punchy and memorable. While it is never a good idea to continuously nod like a bobble-head doll (if it doesn't fit the content, it is confusing), an occasional nod can help reinforce the content. "And was there a reasonable explanation [<em>nodding 'yes'</em>] for what she did? The evidence will show that there was."</p>
<p><strong>For the Questioner: Nod to Break Down Barriers and Draw out a Witness or a Venire Member</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">As the research shows, the head nod is dynamic. Rather than being just an isolated communication behavior of the speaker, it is instead an interaction between speaker and listener. For that reason, if used with a fair amount of discretion, the head nod can be a tool for influencing the person responding to your questions. It can be a way to reduce the threat you seem to pose and a way to encourage the witness to relax. A nod during their answer suggests that they're doing okay and implies that they should keep going. Like the advocate's nodding, however, it needs some subtlety: If it is too obvious, it looks odd or manipulative. And with your own witnesses, in direct examination, for example, head-nodding is best avoided, because you don't want to be seen as nonverbally coaching the witness on the correct answer. But with the other side's witness, nodding can be a way to make yourself appear more friendly and open, and that might help them to drop their guard.</p>
<p><strong>For the Witness: Nod at Times, but Don't Confuse the Affirmative Nod With the 'Yeah, I Get It' Nod</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">For a witness, in either deposition or trial testimony, the best advice is to exercise far greater care with the head nods. For one thing, remember that the nod isn't recorded in the record, so by itself, it doesn't count as a "Yes." But the more common problem is that witnesses who are often highly focused on understanding the question as it is being asked, will often nod their heads to convey, "Yes, I follow," "I understand what you're asking," or "I do know the answer." I have seen witnesses in practice sessions who will nod affirmatively all the way through a question before finally saying, "No" as their response. In that instance, they're just indicating comprehension, or perhaps mirroring back the <em>questioner's</em> nods, but it can obviously create a mixed message.</p>
<p>So, like all other facets of nonverbal communications, it helps to keep the head nod in mind as one of your tools, as long as it remains a supplement and not a distraction. And, if you're testifying in Bulgaria, then it's completely different.</p>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">____________________</span></p>
<p><strong>Other Posts on Nonverbal Communication:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li class="entry-header font-entryheader"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2013/10/dont-worry-about-the-jurys-eye-contact-worry-about-your-own.html">Don't Worry About the Jury's Eye Contact (Worry About Your Own)</a></li>
<li class="entry-header font-entryheader"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2014/05/avoid-rising-intonation.html">Avoid Rising Intonation?</a></li>
<li class="entry-header font-entryheader"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2012/07/dont-put-too-much-fizz-in-pop-psychology.html">Don't Put Too Much Fizz in Pop Psychology</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">____________________</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">Osugi, T., & Kawahara, J. I. (2017). Effects of Head Nodding and Shaking Motions on Perceptions of Likeability and Approachability. <em>Perception</em>, 301006617733209.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 8pt; color: #8b8b8b;">Image credit: Wikihow</span></p>
<span class='st_linkedin' ></span><span class='st_twitter' ></span><span class='st_facebook' ></span><span class='st_email' ></span>
</div>
Complete the Confidence Checklisttag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a01156e439be2970c01b8d2c2d7cd970c2017-11-30T09:09:52-07:002017-11-30T09:09:42-07:00By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: When an audience decides whether someone is credible or not, what do they look for? To a large degree, they look for confidence. In some ways, confidence can be viewed as performed credibility. Someone who is telling the truth is confident. Someone who is winning is confident. Of course, we know that neither of those statements is necessarily true, at least not all the time. But what matters is how the message is received. And in human communications, confidence is one of the most important external markers. Whether a speaker's confidence is merited or not, viewers...Persuasion Strategies
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: </p>
<p><a class="asset-img-link" style="display: inline;" href="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01b8d2c2d82d970c-pi"><img title="41823468_s" class="asset asset-image at-xid-6a01156e439be2970c01b8d2c2d82d970c img-responsive" style="width: 300px; display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" alt="41823468_s" src="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01b8d2c2d82d970c-300wi" /></a><br />When an audience decides whether someone is credible or not, what do they look for? To a large degree, they look for confidence. In some ways, confidence can be viewed as <em>performed</em> credibility. Someone who is telling the truth is confident. Someone who is winning is confident. Of course, we know that neither of those statements is necessarily true, at least not all the time. But what matters is how the message is received. And in human communications, confidence is one of the most important external markers. Whether a speaker's confidence is merited or not, viewers interpret confidence as a sign that a source is certain, and as an indication that the content is worthwhile. </p>
<p>For those reasons, the display of confidence is a necessity for attorneys, witnesses, and even for others in the courtroom who assist or sit at counsel table. While we might think that confidence is a <em>feeling</em>, at the end of the day and in the way that matters most, it is a <em>behavior</em>. And whether in deposition or trial testimony, opening statements or closing arguments, oral arguments, negotiations, or meetings, that behavior needs to be on display. In this post, I'll share seven factors that serve as a kind of checklist for confident communication.</p>
<p></p>
<p>When you are confident, you are:</p>
<p><strong>1. Conversational</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">We come across as comfortable when we talk as we would in a more comfortable setting. In other words, the more a speaker is able to <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2017/01/drop-your-filtersin-a-few-safe-ways.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">drop the filters</a>, and the closer a speaker is able to use the style they use when in a familiar and relaxed setting, the better. For each person, there is a vocal tone (pitch, pause, emphasis, etc.) that is used when they're in comfortable surroundings, and for each person, that tone probably represents a "personal best" in confidence.</p>
<p><strong>2. Direct</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Being direct applies both to the words used (e.g., simple, straightforward, nonevasive phrasing), and to the nonverbal communication that accompanies it (e.g., <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2015/07/avoid-gaze-aversion-in-your-deposition-video.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">eye contact</a> aimed directly at your questioner and persuasive targets). The direct communicator conveys confidence because they're purposefully and eagerly engaging: They aren't hiding anything.</p>
<p><strong>3. Focused</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The confident speaker or witness is giving their full focus and attention to the task. They're not distracted by externalities or self-absorbed with their own performance. Instead, they're focused on the audience, and on what that audience perceives, understands, and believes. That focus shows itself as positive interest and attention, and not evaluation or <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2016/02/dont-smirk.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">smirks</a>.</p>
<p><strong>4. Authoritative</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Confidence is displayed and embodied in posture. More specifically, a confident person knows they're <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2011/08/if-youre-in-view-youre-on-stage.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">always in view</a> and uses their space. For a speaker, that means <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2011/04/talk-with-your-hands.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">gesturing</a> powerfully, with arms out and away from the body. For the witness, that means adopting the "power pose" of sitting forward with forearms on the table, and maintaining that posture without giving in to nervous movement.</p>
<p><strong>5. Relaxed</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The confident communicator shows she isn't stressed or worried and, for the most part, that display is physical. The body posture is alert and attentive, but not rigid. And <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2015/07/dont-wear-your-tension-on-your-face.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the face</a> in particular should be relaxed and pleasant, and shouldn't "wear" the tension that the speaker might nonetheless feel. </p>
<p><strong>6. Positive</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Confidence is conveyed when speakers are feeling good about the message and about their success in conveying it. That means, when it is appropriate to the content, <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2014/04/smile-for-credibility-and-affect.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">smile</a>. It not only displays confidence and credibility, but it also conveys a positive feedback cycle such that it makes the speaker <em>feel</em> better, which in turn makes the speaker <em>do </em>better.</p>
<p><strong>7. Prepared</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Ultimately, these aren't necessarily natural or automatic behaviors. So it all comes down to preparation. Rather than just hoping that you'll feel confident, witnesses and presenters need to <em><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2016/03/practice.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">practice</a> </em>the behaviors of confidence so that they will come across as second nature even when you're under pressure. The best way to think about the time spent on preparation and practice is to remember that it is self-persuasion: Every time you run through it, you are convincing yourself that you can do it. And that's confidence.</p>
<p>____________________</p>
<p><strong>Other Posts on Credibility: </strong></p>
<ul>
<li class="entry-header font-entryheader"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2017/11/make-your-denial-credible.html">Make Your Denial Credible</a></li>
<li class="entry-header font-entryheader"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2017/05/beware-the-blue-lie.html">Beware the Blue Lie</a></li>
<li class="entry-header"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2014/01/dont-overthink-your-credibility-assessments.html">Don't Overthink Your Credibility Assessments</a></li>
</ul>
<p>____________________</p>
<p><span style="color: #a2a2a2; font-size: 8pt;">Image credit: 123rf.com, used under license</span></p>
<span class='st_linkedin' ></span><span class='st_twitter' ></span><span class='st_facebook' ></span><span class='st_email' ></span>
</div>
Use "You" (Not "I" or "One" or "They")tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a01156e439be2970c01bb09da48b9970d2017-11-27T09:05:07-07:002017-12-01T09:31:36-07:00By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Persuasion is often a matter of overcoming barriers and, in the courtroom, those barriers can be very real. The wall of the jury box is a physical analogy for the differences in class, age, race, education, and many other factors that can separate the fact finders from the attorneys, the witnesses, and the parties. But beyond those demographic traits, distance can also be influenced by more subtle features of language. When the wording is dry, abstract, and depersonalized, it is more difficult to cross the bridge to jurors' understanding. It's better to be more direct. And...Persuasion Strategies
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: </p>
<p><a class="asset-img-link" style="display: inline;" href="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01b8d2c1852c970c-pi"><img title="You" class="asset asset-image at-xid-6a01156e439be2970c01b8d2c1852c970c img-responsive" style="width: 300px; display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" alt="You" src="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01b8d2c1852c970c-300wi" /></a></p>
<p>Persuasion is often a matter of overcoming barriers and, in the courtroom, those barriers can be very real. The wall of the jury box is a physical analogy for the differences in class, age, race, education, and many other factors that can separate the fact finders from the attorneys, the witnesses, and the parties. But beyond those demographic traits, distance can also be influenced by more subtle features of language. When the wording is dry, abstract, and depersonalized, it is more difficult to cross the bridge to jurors' understanding. It's better to be more direct. And in an audience context, nothing is more direct than "you." </p>
<p>It is a habit of language that might go unnoticed. Am I saying, "It is understandable," or am I saying, "<em>You</em> can understand it"? Am I asking what a "reasonable person" would expect, or am I asking what "<em>You</em>" would expect? Am I previewing "the jury's deliberations," or am I previewing "<em>Your</em> deliberations"? The word "you" is one of the most common words in the language. While it sometimes carries direct meaning, referring to the listener, at other times it is used to indicate to people in general. Referred to as the generic-you, it is captured in phrases like, "You win some, you lose some." It is used to express norms or expectations about how things should be. That universalizing function of the generic-you makes it an important rhetorical tool. Some recent research (<a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6331/1299" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Orvell, Kross & Gelman, 2017</a>) looked at its function and effect, and the results suggest that the generic-you should be one of the techniques trial lawyers use to break down the barriers for your jurors. </p>
<p><strong>The Research: Why You? </strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The article in <em>Science</em> magazine is fittingly titled, "How 'You' Makes Meaning." The authors, psychology researchers from the University of Michigan, Dearborn, conducted six experiments exploring the conditions and effects of the use of generic-you. Hypothesizing that the form of reference, distinct from the first-person "I," serves as "a way of expressing universal, shared experience," the team created various online writing tasks. They found that participants were more likely to use the generic-you when writing about negative personal experiences, and in those situations, their use of a generic-you was associated with a greater tendency to derive meaning from the experience.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The lead author, Ariana Orvell, noted in a release carried by <a href="http://www.spring.org.uk/2017/03/linguistic-trick-emotions.php" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><em>Psyblog</em></a>, “When people use 'you' to make meaning from negative experiences, it allows them to ‘normalize’ the experience and reflect on it from a distance." She continued, “We suspect that it’s the ability to move beyond your own perspective to express shared, universal experiences that allows individuals to derive broader meanings from personal events.” In the <a href="http://selfcontrol.psych.lsa.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Orvell_etal_GenericYou_Report_RR_FinalF-4.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">article</a>, the researchers conclude, "That generic-you is recruited at such high rates in this context suggests that this linguistic device may constitute a central way that people derive meaning from their emotional experiences in daily life." </p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The task of deriving meaning from experience, of course, doesn't just apply to our own life, it also applies to the lives we evaluate. In the courtroom, for example, a jury is searching for a way to give meaning to the negative events that gave rise to the case in the first place. In that situation, the use of "you" can help jurors relate.</p>
<p><strong>What About the 'Golden Rule'? </strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Objection-prone attorneys, at this point, might be thinking about the problem of the "golden rule" argument, defined as an improper personal appeal to the jury. Justice Heaney of the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals wrote in <a href="http://scholar.google.ca/scholar_case?case=15364722448782613963&q=201+f.+3d+1074&hl=en&as_sdt=2,5" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Lovett v Union Pacific</a>, the "Golden Rule argument asks the jury to place itself in the defendant's position." He continues, "Such an argument is universally condemned because it encourages the jury to depart from neutrality and to decide the case on the basis of personal interest and bias rather than on the evidence."</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">That objection, however, applies to a direct and explicit request to the jury to stand in a party's shoes. The linguistic use of "you" is more subtle and wouldn't create an automatic 'golden rule' objection. This is especially the case when "you" is used in the generic sense: It applies generally, but as the research shows, jurors are also likely to derive personal meaning from it. Ultimately, it should be relatively safe to use "you" as long as you are not explicitly inviting your jurors to take your client's perspective.</p>
<p><strong>So When Should You Use "You"? </strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">For the practical persuader, it helps if you make it a habit. But here are a few situations where "you" makes the most sense.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><strong>Whenever You Want to Make Your Language More Concrete</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;">If the content itself poses a challenge, the use of "you" is going to help at least a little in bringing it down to earth. In calculating an oil and gas royalty payment, for example, "First, you determine the point where the fuel is marketable -- the point where you could sell it to a willing buyer, then you deduct..."</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><strong>Whenever You Want the Jury to Identify</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;">When you want to imply a particular perspective, but without making a golden rule argument, the "you" helps. "So, let's say a consumer buys this product. You take it home, you look at the instructions, and the first question on your mind is, 'How do I use this?'"</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><strong>Whenever You Would Otherwise Say "One" </strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;">The grammarians would probably say that the correct way to make a generic reference is to say, "one," as in, "one wonders what the motive could be." But if there is a better way to sound stuffy and abstract, one doesn't know what that would be. If you're referring to people in general, you're better off just saying, "you."</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><strong>Whenever you would otherwise say, "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury." </strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;">Finally, "you" is an ideal replacement for that overused and distancing phrase, "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury." Replacing that with a simple "you" is more personal. Unlike the other examples, this is a direct reference rather than a generic one, but it serves the same function of pulling the language down from the clouds and making a connection to individual jurors.</p>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">____________________</span></p>
<p><strong>Other Posts on Language Use: </strong></p>
<ul>
<li class="entry-header font-entryheader"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2015/02/check-your-language-level.html">Check Your <span class="search-results-highlight">Language</span> Level</a></li>
<li class="entry-header font-entryheader"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2015/03/speak-positively.html">Speak Positively</a></li>
<li class="entry-header font-entryheader"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2013/03/use-metaphors-to-touch-your-fact-finders.html">Use Metaphors to Touch Your Fact Finders</a></li>
<li class="entry-header"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2016/07/witnesses-know-when-to-use-your-own-words.html"></a><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2017/08/focus-on-the-factors-that-actually-change-minds.html">Focus on the Factors that Actually Change Minds</a></li>
</ul>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">____________________</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">Orvell, A., Kross, E., & Gelman, S. A. (2017). How “you” makes meaning. <em>Science</em>, <em>355</em>(6331), 1299-1302.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #8b8b8b; font-size: 8pt;">Image credit: 123rf.com, used under license, edited</span></p>
<span class='st_linkedin' ></span><span class='st_twitter' ></span><span class='st_facebook' ></span><span class='st_email' ></span></div>
Experts, Tell a Visual Storytag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a01156e439be2970c01b8d2c0b71d970c2017-11-24T08:40:14-07:002017-12-01T09:21:33-07:00By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: When you think of science, do you think of dry research articles, charts and graphs that take a good deal of explanation in order to get to a point? Or do you think of Neil DeGrasse Tyson explaining the Cosmos with the help of clear but sophisticated video and graphics? If it is your goal to connect with an audience of non-scientists, like a jury for example, then your choice ought to be for something closer to the latter. A science-educator like Tyson, who uses all the tools available, is in a better position to make...Persuasion Strategies
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: </p>
<p><a class="asset-img-link" style="display: inline;" href="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01bb09d97cc4970d-pi"><img title="80435450_s" class="asset asset-image at-xid-6a01156e439be2970c01bb09d97cc4970d img-responsive" style="width: 300px; display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" alt="80435450_s" src="http://www.litigationps.com/.a/6a01156e439be2970c01bb09d97cc4970d-300wi" /></a></p>
<p>When you think of science, do you think of dry research articles, charts and graphs that take a good deal of explanation in order to get to a point? Or do you think of Neil DeGrasse Tyson explaining the Cosmos with the help of clear but sophisticated video and graphics? If it is your goal to connect with an audience of non-scientists, like a jury for example, then your choice ought to be for something closer to the latter. A science-educator like Tyson, who uses all the tools available, is in a better position to make the material not just informative, but engaging and emotional as well.</p>
<p>In a past post, I shared the example of a <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2017/04/account-for-a-lost-faith-in-science.html">four-minute video</a> from Tyson on the science of public understanding <em>of science</em>, specifically. That video nicely illustrates the thesis of a group of researchers from Griffith University in Queensland, Australia (<a href="https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/opis.2017.1.issue-1/opis-2017-0004/opis-2017-0004.xml" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Czaran, Wolski & Richardson, 2017</a>). Their paper, like this post, probably should have been a video, because it makes the case that researchers should stretch themselves to step outside the typical forms and outlets of the academy and should tell the story of their research, and use modern media to do so. That advice to distill the research outcome to "short, relatable, digestible, and engaging visual products" applies to expert witnesses as well. This post shares a few of their conclusions, based on their 12-month review of a new service designed to encourage researchers to use audio-visual media to tell their research story as they apply to the testifying expert.</p>
<p></p>
<p>In bringing science to a general audience, the key is to find a story, and as the writers put it, to "tell it instead of talking about it." That entails developing a <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2016/12/experts-tell-a-story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">narrative sequence</a>, and finding an emotional connection. The stuff of expert testimony can be dry, but it can still be connected to something that a jury can relate to: fairness, accuracy, or the answer to a mystery, for example.</p>
<p>Often, the most reliable way to bridge that gap will be visual. Noting researchers' need to "say less and show more," the authors have a few observations that are worth calling out for experts.</p>
<p><strong> We Are Primed Toward the Visual</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">"We live in a visually-rich world," the authors say, noting that YouTube is now the second most-visited website in the world. We are used to getting our information visually, and at increasing levels of sophistication. Based on what we know of a changing human <a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2015/08/account-for-a-vanishing-attention-span.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">attention span</a>, it stands to reason that these visuals are "expected to be short and sharp."</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">There is good reason to believe that these visual preferences apply just as much to science as to cat videos. Even among the scientists likely to read a publication called the <em>New Journal of Physics,</em> the authors cite research showing that articles that include video abstracts are significantly more likely to be viewed in comparison to the articles that rely on text alone.</p>
<p><strong>But Scientists Can Be Visually Challenged</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Academics are used to abstract analysis, and used to talking to other academics, or at least to students who aspire in the same direction. When physical or social scientists need to convey their ideas and their work beyond that circle, it can be a struggle. Naturally, these experts know that it is possible to use visual aids. But in a statement that could apply as much, or more, to in-court experts, they note, "It is surprising how many researchers consider visual materials as an afterthought."</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The visual components should be recognized at the outset, and that helps sensitize experts to the need to translate ideas and conclusions in visual terms, which helps to keep them simple and accessible. "Researchers need to get into the habit of considering possible visual outputs in the early stages of their research to enable them to start collecting relevant and engaging visual materials as their research progresses," the authors note. "Collecting materials on an ongoing basis, i.e., capturing them, saving, and storing them in the highest possible resolution, creates a wealth of irreplaceable visual content to use in future media products."</p>
<p><strong>So Scientists Need Help</strong></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The less it seems like an area of science has a natural visual component, the more important it is to find one. The role of graphic designers is to help locate that visual potential that can supplement any kind of expert testimony. For that reason, experts should schedule a session with counsel and a designer in order to brainstorm and to flesh out ideas.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The authors recommend a four-phase model for developing graphics and animation that will help researchers tell the story of their research. The four phases are:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;"><strong>Scoping</strong>: What is the story and how can it be broadly translated into visual terms?</p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;"><strong>Development</strong>: What is the specific visual and textual content?</p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;"><strong>Release</strong>: How will that content be displayed and manipulated for the audience?</p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;"><strong>Review</strong>: What works and what does not?</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">When you're working through that process, there is no substitute for having a fresh pair of eyes on the task, including help from a graphic designer, and perhaps a mock trial for testing the effectiveness. </p>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">___________________</span></p>
<p><strong>Other Posts on Expert Testimony: </strong></p>
<ul>
<li class="entry-header"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2016/11/hire-an-expert-who-doesnt-want-or-need-to-be-led.html">Hire an Expert Who Doesn't Want or Need to be Led</a></li>
<li class="entry-header"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2016/09/look-for-the-experts-mental-mistakes.html">Look for the Expert's Mental Mistakes</a></li>
<li class="entry-header"><a href="http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2015/08/experts-stay-in-the-box.html">Experts: Stay in the Box</a></li>
</ul>
<div class="entry-content"><span style="color: #0080ff;">____________________</span></div>
<p><span style="color: #0080ff;">Czaran, E., Wolski, M., & Richardson, J. (2017). Improving research impact through the use of media. <em>Open Information Science</em>, <em>1</em>(1), 41-55.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 8pt; color: #a2a2a2;">Image credit: 123rf.com, used under license</span></p>
<span class='st_linkedin' ></span><span class='st_twitter' ></span><span class='st_facebook' ></span><span class='st_email' ></span></div>