Deep canvassing, street epistemology, and other tools of persuasion (with David McRaney)

Jun 28, 2023 Episode Page ↗
Overview

Spencer Greenberg and David McRaney discuss the psychology of persuasion, motivated reasoning, and introspection. They explore how minds change via self-persuasion, the Elaboration Likelihood Model, and practical techniques like Deep Canvassing, emphasizing rapport and uncovering hidden motivations.

At a Glance
18 Insights
1h 20m Duration
12 Topics
13 Concepts

Deep Dive Analysis

Defining Persuasion and its Distinction from Coercion

Categorizing Persuasion Targets: Behavior, Beliefs, Attitudes, Values

The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) of Persuasion

Factors Influencing Elaboration Likelihood

Assimilation and Accommodation: How Minds Update Reality

The 'Magnetic Concept Problem' and Prior Beliefs

Understanding Motivated Reasoning

The Role of Social vs. Physical Death in Motivation

Introspection, Confabulation, and Moral Dumbfounding

The Affective Tipping Point: When Evidence Becomes Overwhelming

Practical Persuasion Techniques: Deep Canvassing, Street Epistemology, and Motivational Interviewing

Ethical Considerations in Persuasion

Persuasion

Persuasion is leading another person in stages to help them better understand their own thinking and see how it could align with a message. Ultimately, it is self-persuasion, as people change their minds based on their own desires and internal counter-arguing.

Coercion

Coercion is any action that takes away another person's agency or attempts to force them into a certain way of thinking. It is explicitly distinguished from persuasion, which respects the other person's autonomy.

Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)

The ELM is a model that explains how people process persuasive messages, suggesting they either take a central route when elaboration likelihood is high (focusing on argument merits) or a peripheral route when elaboration likelihood is low (focusing on emotional or superficial cues).

Elaboration (psychological)

In psychology, elaboration refers to the process where a message enters someone's mind, and they add their own thoughts and interpretations on top of it. This internal processing significantly influences the message's effectiveness.

Central Route (ELM)

When elaboration likelihood is high, individuals take the central route, paying close attention to the merits, logic, and accuracy of an argument, often based on their existing expertise on the issue.

Peripheral Route (ELM)

When elaboration likelihood is low, individuals take the peripheral route, paying attention to more emotional or superficial cues such as the speaker's attractiveness, eloquence, prestigious degrees, or the sheer number of arguments presented, regardless of their quality.

Assimilation

Assimilation is the process of interpreting novel or ambiguous information by fitting it into one's existing model of reality or categorical understanding. It often involves interpreting new information as a confirmation of existing beliefs.

Accommodation

Accommodation is the process of acknowledging that one's existing model of reality is incomplete or incorrect and updating it to incorporate novel information. This involves expanding one's mind to make sense of anomalies, leading to a deeper change in understanding.

Motivated Reasoning

Motivated reasoning is the psychological process where individuals come up with reasons for what they think, feel, and believe, often to create a defensive argument for reputation management among their trusted peers rather than to objectively seek truth.

Confabulation

Confabulation occurs when a person produces rationalizations and justifications for their thoughts, feelings, or behaviors without actual access to their true underlying causes. These explanations are often generated quickly and effortlessly to appear reasonable to others.

Affective Tipping Point

The affective tipping point is the moment at which an individual can no longer justify ignoring an overwhelming amount of disconfirming evidence. At this point, they switch from resisting information to engaging in active learning and updating their understanding.

Reactance

Reactance is the feeling that one's agency or freedom is under threat, often leading to a defensive doubling down on existing decisions, plans, or behaviors to reassert control against the perceived threat.

Technique Rebuttal

Technique rebuttal is a persuasion approach that focuses on helping another person introspectively understand the underlying reasons, motivations, and level of confidence they hold for their position, rather than directly challenging the factual claims of their argument.

?
What is persuasion, and what is it not?

Persuasion is leading another person to better understand their own thinking, aligning it with a message, and ultimately encouraging self-persuasion; it is not coercion, intellectual defeat, or a debate where someone wins and someone loses.

?
How does persuasion differ from coercion?

Persuasion differs from coercion in that it maintains the other person's agency and encourages them to realize that change is possible, whereas coercion involves taking away their agency or forcing them to fall in line with a certain way of thinking.

?
What is the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) of persuasion?

The ELM is a model that explains how people process persuasive messages, stating that when elaboration likelihood is high, people take a central route focusing on argument merits, and when it's low, they take a peripheral route focusing on emotional or superficial cues.

?
What factors influence the likelihood of elaboration in persuasion?

Elaboration likelihood is increased by high motivation (e.g., personal relevance, expertise, social identity concerns) and ability (e.g., understanding the topic, low cognitive load), and decreased by factors like cognitive load, noise, hunger, or anger.

?
How do assimilation and accommodation relate to how minds change?

Assimilation involves fitting new information into existing mental models, while accommodation requires updating or expanding one's models to make sense of new, contradictory information. Accommodation represents a more profound change in how one understands the world.

?
What is motivated reasoning?

Motivated reasoning is the process of generating reasons for one's thoughts, feelings, and beliefs, often employed to create a defensive argument for reputation management among trusted peers rather than to objectively seek truth or accuracy.

?
Are people more motivated by physical death or social death?

According to social science, the fear of social death (e.g., shame, ostracism, losing group standing) is often a greater motivator than the fear of physical death in many scenarios, guiding behavior and decision-making.

?
What is the 'affective tipping point' in persuasion?

The affective tipping point is the moment when an individual can no longer justify ignoring an overwhelming amount of disconfirming evidence, causing them to switch from resisting information to engaging in active learning and updating their understanding.

?
What are some effective practical techniques for persuasion?

Effective techniques like Deep Canvassing, Street Epistemology, and Motivational Interviewing focus on establishing rapport, asking for consent to explore reasoning, using numerical confidence scales, and helping the person introspectively examine the sources of their beliefs and motivations.

?
When is persuasion morally acceptable?

Persuasion is morally acceptable when the other person retains complete agency, both parties are genuinely open to changing their own minds, and the shared objective is to collectively seek truth, reduce harm, or achieve a mutually agreed positive outcome.

1. Ethical Self-Reflection First

Before attempting persuasion, honestly evaluate your own motivations: ensure your goal is genuinely to seek truth, reduce harm, or find shared positive outcomes, and be open to changing your own mind. This ensures ethical engagement and respects the other person’s agency.

Always start by establishing rapport and seeking consent to explore someone’s reasoning. Frame the conversation as a shared exploration of disagreement (“shoulder-to-shoulder”) rather than a debate, to reduce defensiveness and threat to agency.

3. Focus on Self-Persuasion

When attempting persuasion, focus on helping the other person understand their own thinking and motivations, rather than trying to defeat them or coerce them. This encourages self-persuasion by examining their certainty and confidence.

4. Avoid “Fact Dumping”

Avoid simply “dumping facts” on someone you’re trying to persuade, as this often triggers motivated reasoning and cherry-picking of evidence. Instead, use metacognitive techniques to help them recognize their own reasoning process.

5. Employ Technique Rebuttal

In personal conversations, employ “technique rebuttal” by guiding the other person to introspect on why they hold their beliefs and their level of certainty, rather than using “topic rebuttal” which directly challenges their facts or arguments.

6. Prompt Self-Generated Counter-Arguments

To encourage self-persuasion, ask questions that prompt the person to generate their own counter-arguments or reasons for not holding an even stronger position (e.g., “Why isn’t your confidence 100%?”). This creates internal cognitive dissonance they are motivated to resolve.

7. Identify Persuasion Target

Before employing persuasion, identify the exact target: an attitude, a belief, a value, or a behavior. Different targets require different approaches (e.g., attitudes need focus on underlying feelings/identity, not just facts).

8. Understand Underlying Goals

Understand the underlying goal driving someone’s reasoning. If their goal is social (e.g., group belonging) rather than accuracy, address the social motivation rather than just presenting facts.

9. Uncover Hidden Motivations

Recognize that people may not genuinely know why they hold a certain strong feeling or belief. Instead of directly challenging their stated reasons, help them uncover and articulate hidden motivations and drives behind their position.

10. Tailor to Elaboration Likelihood

Tailor your persuasion approach based on the listener’s likelihood of elaboration. If high, use strong, logical arguments (central route). If low, use peripheral cues like speaker credibility or quantity of arguments.

11. Enhance Elaboration Likelihood

To increase the likelihood of central route processing (focus on merits), enhance the listener’s motivation and ability. This can be done by making the topic personally relevant, reducing cognitive load (e.g., quiet environment, clear message), or highlighting potential social implications.

12. Leverage Assimilation & Accommodation

When introducing new concepts, build upon existing understanding (assimilation) by using familiar examples or analogies. For deeper, more profound change (accommodation), help the person see that not updating their model is riskier than updating it.

13. Acknowledge Affective Tipping Point

While there’s an “affective tipping point” where evidence becomes overwhelming, be aware that people actively control their information intake to avoid reaching it. Direct evidence alone may not be sufficient if they can filter it out.

14. Confirm Claims & Definitions

For fact-based issues, clearly state and confirm the other person’s claim by repeating it back, and clarify their definitions, using their terminology, to ensure mutual understanding.

15. Rate Confidence Level

Ask the person to rate their confidence level (e.g., 0-100%) in their claim. This prompts metacognition and sets the stage for exploring the basis of their certainty.

16. Explore Reasons for Confidence

After establishing a confidence level, ask why they hold that specific level of confidence and what methods they used to arrive at their reasons. This encourages deeper introspection into their reasoning process.

17. Use “Why Does That Number Feel Right?”

For attitude-based issues, ask for a strength rating (1-10), then present a relevant story or ad. Afterward, re-ask the rating and, crucially, “Why does that number feel right to you?” to prompt emotional and value-based introspection.

18. Explore Origins of Beliefs

Encourage reflection on the origins of their beliefs or attitudes by asking questions like, “Was there a time in your life before you felt that way?” This helps uncover underlying motivations and historical context.

Persuasion is always going to be self-persuasion.

David McRaney

It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.

David McRaney

The fear of social death is greater than the fear of physical death.

David McRaney

I don't know why, it's just wrong.

David McRaney

You do not have access to the antecedents of your thoughts, feelings, or behaviors, but you will very easily, quickly, and almost effortlessly produce rationalizations and justifications for whatever you're currently thinking, feeling, or doing, which may or may not be true.

David McRaney

General Persuasion Technique (based on Deep Canvassing, Street Epistemology, and Motivational Interviewing)

David McRaney
  1. Establish rapport by assuring the other person you are not there to shame them and asking for consent to explore their reasoning.
  2. Frame the conversation as going 'shoulder to shoulder' to marvel at disagreement and explore why you disagree together, rather than a debate.
  3. Ask for the specific claim or fundamental belief the person holds on the issue.
  4. Confirm the claim by repeating it back to them and asking if you've accurately summarized their position.
  5. Clarify their definitions, ensuring you use their understanding of terms, not your own.
  6. Ask the person to rate their confidence or certainty level regarding their claim on a numerical scale (e.g., 0-10 or 0-100%).
  7. Ask 'What reasons do you have to hold that high level of confidence?' or 'Why does that number feel right to you?' to prompt their justifications.
  8. Explore the methods they've used to judge their reasons as good, focusing on their critical thinking process.
  9. Optionally, ask questions like 'What would it take to get you up to 100%?' or 'Why isn't your confidence lower?' to encourage them to generate counter-arguments against their own position.
  10. Encourage reflection on the origins of their beliefs, asking 'Was there a time in your life before you felt that way?' to uncover underlying motivations or sources of their attitude.
15%
Approximate percentage of incoming counter-evidence that causes doubt According to David Redlosk's research on the affective tipping point in controlled studies.
30%
Approximate percentage of incoming counter-evidence that triggers active learning According to David Redlosk's research on the affective tipping point, people start to update their understanding when 30% or more of information suggests their current understanding is incorrect.
17,000
Number of conversations in deep canvassing research The number of door-to-door conversations conducted by deep canvassing groups to A-B test and refine their persuasive techniques.