McDreamy. He isn’t really a doctor. He just plays one on TV. They still make TV ads using actors saying they aren’t doctors! And we listen to them. Go figure. It’s akin to when the West Wing was on television and news shows would ask Martin (“I’m not the President but I play one on TV”) Sheen to weigh in on political matters.

I know you’re wondering how this is ever going to get around to litigation advocacy. Just watch me. Sagarin & Cialdini (2004) point out that teaching people about invalid persuasion attempts (e.g., “I’m not a doctor but I play one on TV”) paradoxically makes them more vulnerable to persuasion by valid sources (e.g., “real” doctors). Basically, if I know how to identify a source as ‘not valid’, I am more likely to put more credibility in ‘valid’ sources of information. Therefore, indirect routes of persuasion are the most powerful because you don’t see yourself resisting a hard sell.

In truth, we don’t really believe in ‘persuasion’. It’s part of why we encourage litigators to “tell the story but don’t draw conclusions for the jury” and to “let the story draw the listener in and they will fill in the blanks”. It’s an indirect approach. You engage the jurors and they ‘see’ connections in the story that are left unstated. They figure out the puzzle. They fill in the blank. They understand character’s motivations. They ‘get it’.

Sagarin, B. and Cialdini, R. (2004). Creating Critical Consumers: Motivating Receptivity by Teaching Resistance. In E. Knowles & J. Linn (Eds.). Resistance and Persuasion (pp. 259-282): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: New Jersey.

Related posts:

1. Simple Jury Persuasion: You may want to disagree with this post
2. Simple Jury Persuasion: There is no such thing as “Persuasion”.
3. Simple Jury Persuasion: “You know you want to trust me!”
4. Simple Jury Persuasion: Alpha and Omega Persuasion Strategies
5. Simple Jury Persuasion: Make an emotional connection with your jury