Model of Persuasive Strategies Used by Romantic Confessors

The models in our study are devised inductively. After the data was collected and transcribed, the utterances of the confessors and the confessees were observed, analyzed, coded, and categorized into classification schemes with concepts drawn from previous studies. Such an inductive method was also adopted by Falbo (1977), Clark (1979), and Schenck-Hamlin, Wiseman, and Georgacarakos (1982) in their studies of communication/persuasive strategies. By using this method, we are able to present the accurate description and capture the essence of strategy use in the context of romantic confessions. Furthermore, despite borrowing terms and concepts of strategy classifications from previous studies, all of the definitions for the strategies in our models are created based on our data and are thus more context-specific and representative of the romantic confession context.

In the present study, the model of persuasive strategies used by romantic confessors is developed after we observe our data and review models in previous persuasion researches (Dillard, Segrin, and Harden, 1989; Harper and Hirokawa, 1988;

Marwell and Schmitt, 1967; Newton and Burgoon, 1990; Schenck‐Hamlin Wiseman, and Georgacarakos, 1982). After identifying a strategy in our data, we analyze and code the entire database with concepts drawn from previous models and taxonomies to create our own model. The main taxonomy that we borrow the classications and terms from is

the Schenck-Hamlin, Wiseman, and Georgacarakos (1982) typology. Although many models and taxonomies have been proposed in the past, we choose to use their taxonomy and naming of the strategies as references because it is one of the most commonly cited models in previous persuasive studies (Baxter, 1984; Dillard, Segrin, and Harden, 1989; Harper and Hirokawa, 1988; Neuliep and Hazleton, 1985; Newton and Burgoon, 1990).

In their pioneering study, Schenck-Hamlin, Wiseman, and Georgacarakos (1982) developed a model of compliance-gaining strategies based on the compliance-gaining messages written by 221 university students. The participants in the study were asked to write down their responses to hypothetical situations in which they were told to verbally influence their roommates. In their model, they divided the strategies they identified into four categories based on the properties of inducement (i.e., the type of motivation entailed in the strategies devised) associated with the strategy (Schenck ‐ Hamlin

Wiseman, and Georgacarakos, 1982):

(a) Strategies based on sanction: ingratiation, promise, debt, esteem, allurement, aversive stimulation, threat, guilt, and warning.

(b) Strategies based on need: altruism.

(c) Strategies based on explanation: direct request, explanation, and hinting.

(d) Strategies based on circumvention: deceit.

Among the strategies based on sanction, the strategies can be further grouped into

reward appeal and punishment appeal strategies (Dillard, Segrin, and Harden, 1989;

Schenck‐Hamlin Wiseman, and Georgacarakos., 1982). For this reason, we adopt the concepts and the terms of reward-based and punishment-based strategies invented by Harper and Hirokawa (1988) in our model to further compare between strategies that are devised to reward and punish the person being persuaded.

It should be noted that our study, following the conversation analysis procedure (Seedhouse, 2004) as a guideline, aims to reveal the linguistic phenomena observed in the context of romantic confession. Although previous studies have already established models and taxonomies for persuasive strategies, their models were developed with data collected from situational contexts (business, campus, or family settings, etc.) that are quite different from the one in the current study (i.e., romantic confession). As a result, we adopt an inductive method to develop our model so that the uniqueness of our data can be better revealed. Based on the strategies used by the romantic confessors in our data, we redefine and improve the categories and types of persuasive strategies. In total, there are 4 categories and 15 types of persuasive strategies in the model (See Table 1 and Appendix B for more details on the definition of each type of persuasive strategy).

Table 1. Persuasive strategies used by romantic confessors

Types of Strategies Definition

Reward-Based Strategies that reward the confessee or make him/her feel good so that he/she would agree to do what is asked.

Ingratiation Provides goods, services, or compliments to make the confessee feel good before asking him/her to do what the confessor wants.

Promise Promises to do something for the confessee in the future if he/she agrees to do what is asked. that he/she would agree to do what is asked.

Aversive Stimulation Makes things unpleasant for the confessee until he/she complies.

Guilt

Strategies that persuade the confessee by considering his/her viewpoint or indicating that the confessor is in need for him/her to do what is asked. Usually, this requires one person to give in to some extent for the benefit of another person.

Counsel

Implies that the confessor is willing to consider the standpoint of the confessee and perhaps provides additional assistance in helping the confessee make the decision to comply.

Favor Asks the confessee to do something as a special favor because it is the wish of the confessor.

Altruism Suggests that the confessee should agree to do what is asked because the confessor needs help.

Rationale-Based Strategies that are devised based on the rationale behind the request.

Direct Request States the request directly and sets forth the confessor’s position in a straightforward manner.

Logic Provides logical reasoning or evidence to show that it is a good idea for the confessee to do as requested.

Commonalities

Refers to shared values or commonalities to suggest that the confessee should agree to do what is asked because the confessor shares common goals, interests, or beliefs with the confessee.

Self-Promotion

Highlights personal achievements or desirable characteristics of the confessor as further references that help the confessee make the decision to comply.

Hinting Presents the situational context in a way that the confessee is led to conclude the desired action or response to the request.

Determination

Suggests that the confessor is determined and will not give up easily; and thus implies that the confessee should be the one to give in and comply.

To be more specific in terms of the differences between our model and the Schenck-Hamlin, Wiseman, and Georgacarakos (1982) typology, we draw concepts from the taxonomy of Harper and Hirokawa (1988) and categorize the strategies into reward-based, punishment-based, altruism-based, and rationale-based strategies so that a better representation of the data and a more systematic discussion between the patterns of strategy use among romantic confessors can be achieved. Moreover, strategies such as esteem, allurement, threat, and deceit are not identified in the data so are removed from our model to better represent the strategy selection of romantic confessors. On the other hand, strategies such as counsel, favor, commonalities, self-promotion⁷, and

determination are added into our model to further illustrate the persuasive strategies that

7 The strategies of counsel and favor are concepts from Harper and Hirokawa’s Taxonomy of Influence Strategies (1988), whereas the concepts for the commonalities, and self-promotion came from Newton’s

are perhaps context-specific to romantic confession. As for the strategy of explanation, we rename and define it as the strategy of logic to avoid overlapping with other strategies. After the model has been refined based on our data and with concepts drawn from previous persuasion researches, our model is assumed to provide complete and accurate representations of all the persuasive strategies used by the romantic confessors in our study.

3.3.2 Model of Refusal Strategies and Model of Acceptance Strategies Used by