University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An Empirical Study Of The Behavioral Characteristics Of Sincere And Insincere Speakers

(USC Thesis Other)

An Empirical Study Of The Behavioral Characteristics Of Sincere And Insincere Speakers

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content T h is d is s e rta tio n h as been M ic 61— 1711 m ic ro film e d ex a c tly as re c e iv e d W ILLS, John W illiam . AN EM PIR IC A L STUDY O F TH E BEHAVIORAL CHARAC TERISTICS O F SINCERE AND INSINCERE SPEA K ERS. U n iv e rsity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia , P h .D ., 1961 Speech — T h e a te r University Microfilms, Inc., A nn Arbor, M ichigan AN EM PIRICA L STUDY OF THE BEHAVIORAL CHARACTERISTICS O F SINCERE AND INSINCERE SPEAKERS by Jo h n W illiam W ills A D is s e rta tio n P re s e n te d to the FACU LTY O F THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In P a r tia l F u lfillm e n t of the R e q u irem e n ts fo r the D eg ree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Speech) J a n u a ry 1961 UNIVERSITY O F S O U T H E R N C A LIFO RN IA GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY PARK LOS ANOELES 7 . CALIFORNIA This dissertation, written by ...... John. W illiam .W ills........................ under the direction of h.i&...Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Dean of the Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y .................................... 1 D«m Date. J a n u a r y . 1961 TA BLE OF CONTENTS C h a p te r P ag e I. ORIGIN AND STATEM ENT O F PR O B LEM , DEFINITIONS, AND REVIEW O F L IT E R A T U R E 1 O rig in of the P ro b le m S tatem en t of the P ro b le m D efinition of S in cerity R eview of L ite ra tu re II. SUBJECTS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES . . . . 2 8 R eview of R e se a rc h P ro c e d u re The P re p a ra tio n and S election of M a te ria ls T ech n iq u es of O b serv atio n D e sc rip tio n of O b serv atio n al C r ite r ia IU. PRESENTATION AND IN TERPRETA TIO N OF DATA . 92 P a r t I P a r t II IV. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IM PLICATIONS . . 151 S um m ary C onclusions Im p lic atio n s S uggestions fo r F u rth e r R e se a rc h B IB L IO G R A P H Y .............................................................................................. 160 A PPEN D IX ES A ppendix A: In stru c tio n s f o r F i r s t S p e e c h ............................ 168 A ppendix B: In stru c tio n s fo r Second Speech . . . . . . 171 A ppendix C: In stru c tio n s and B a llo ts fo r R ating S p e a k e r s ....................................... 173 A ppendix D: S um m ary of C o rre c t and In c o rre c t Id en tific atio n s of S in ce rity and In s in c e rity by A u d i e n c e s ............................................ 177 ii iiC P age A ppendix E: F i r s t A n aly sis S h e e t .................................... 180 A ppendix F : Second C heck L ist A n aly sis S h e e t ......... 182 A ppendix G: C o m p ariso n Sheet of S incere and In sin c e re S p e e c h e s .......................................... 187 A ppendix H: Speech C ontent A n aly sis S h e e t .................. 191 A ppendix 1: Language and Syntax A n aly sis Sheet . . . . 194 A ppendix J : Sam ple S peaker D e s c r ip tio n ...................... 197 Appendix K: T ra n s c rip tio n s of S p e e c h e s ...................... 203 Appendix L: Raw D ata: T abulation of S peaker B ehavior . 248 1 LIST O F TABLES T able P ag e 1. O b serv ed Ite m s and C la ssific a tio n s Included in T abulation of Raw D a t a ........................................... 88 2. T o ta ls of O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s of S p eak ers . . . . 94 3. P e rc e n ta g e of T o ta l N um ber of S p eak ers Showing C hange in O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s betw een S in cere Speech and In sin c e re S p e e c h ................... 112 4. O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s C om m on to A ll S p eak ers M ost O ften R ated by A udiences to be S in cere and D ifferin g from In sin c e re S p e a k e r s ........................ 123 5. O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s C om m on to A ll S p eak ers M ost O ften R ated by A udiences to be In s in c e re and D ifferin g fro m S in cere S p e a k e r s ............................ 129 6. O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s C om m on to A ll S p eak ers C o n cern in g W hose S in ce rity o r In sin c e rity A udiences Could L e a s t A g ree which w ere D istin ctiv ely D ifferen t fro m S p eak e rs Judged M ost S incere o r M ost I n s in c e r e ................................................................................ 135 7. O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s of S p eak ers A bout W hose S in ce rity o r In sin c e rity A udiences C ould L e a st A g re e — R elativ e to Ite m s Found to be H eld in C om m on by S p eak ers M ost O ften Judged S in cere . . 139 8. O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s of S p eak ers about Whose S in ce rity o r In s in c e rity A udiences Could L e a s t A g ree — R elativ e to Ite m s Found to be H eld in C om m on by S p eak ers M ost O ften Judged In sin c e re . 140 9. In sta n c e s in w hich S p eak ers About W hose S in cerity and In s in c e rity A udiences Could L e a s t A g ree D eviated fro m B e h a v io rs H eld in C om m on by S p eak e rs M ost O ften Judged S in cere ............................ 141 iv V I T able P ag e 10. In sta n c e s in w hich S p ea k e rs A bout W hose S in cerity and In s in c e rity A udiences Could L e a s t A gree D eviated fro m B e h a v io rs H eld in C om m on by S p eak ers M ost O ften Judged I n s i n c e r e ................... . 142 11. O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s of S p eak ers Judged S incere by P ro p o rtio n s of .80 to .90 of A udiences R elativ e to Ite m s Found to be H eld in C om m on by S p ea k e rs M ost O ften Judged S i n c e r e .................................................... 145 12. O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s of S p eak ers Judged S in cere by P ro p o rtio n s of .80 to .90 of A udiences R elative to Ite m s Found to be H eld in C om m on by S p eak ers M ost O ften Judged I n s i n c e r e ............................................... 147 13. In sta n c e s in w hich S p eak e rs Judged S in cere by P r o p o rtio n s of .80 to .90 of A udiences D eviated fro m B e h av io rs H eld in C om m on by S p eak ers M ost O ften Judged S i n c e r e ........................................................................... 148 14. In sta n c e s in w hich S p eak ers Judged S in cere by P r o p o rtio n s of .80 to .90 of A udiences D eviated fro m B e h av io rs H eld in C om m on by S p eak ers M ost O ften Judged I n s i n c e r e ...................................................................... 149 LIST O F ILLUSTRATIONS F ig u re 1. D iag ra m of the P la c e m e n t of C a m e ra , S p eak er, M icrophone, T im e k e e p e r, and A udience fo r F ilm in g of S p e a k e r s ............................................... 1 C H A PTER I ORIGIN AND STATEM ENT O F PR O B LEM , DEFINITIONS, AND REVIEW O F LITERA TU RE O rig in of the P ro b le m In 1950 C la rk 1 re p o rte d in h ie e m p iric a l study of audience a ttitu d e s tow ard com m only taught sta n d a rd s of public speaking th at the c h a ra c te ris tic of “ s i n c e r i t y / ’ w hile not ra te d a s e s s e n tia l to effectiv e speaking by a m a jo rity of speech te x ts studied, w as ra te d the m o st e s s e n tia l of s p e a k e rs ’ c h a r a c te r is tic s by a m a ssiv e p lu ra lity of m e m - 2 b e r s of lay au d ien ces. H ild reth b ecam e in te re s te d in the p ro b lem of audience co n cern with sp e a k e r s in c e rity , and in 1953 in v e stig a ted the p ro b lem of how a c c u ra te ly au d ien ces could identify s in c e rity in sp e ak e r s . H ild reth u sed p a ire d sin c e re and in sin c e re sp e ech e s by the sam e s p e a k e rs to te s t audience reco g n itio n , and re p o rte d th at s ta tis tic a lly au d ien ces could not a c c u ra te ly identify s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity in the 1 W illiam K eith C la rk , “ A S urvey of C e rta in A udience A ttitu d es T ow ard C om m only T aught S tan d ard s of P u b lic Speaking” (unpublished M a s te r’s th e s is , U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , L o s A n g eles, 1950). ^R ichard A . H ild re th , “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of A u d ien ces’ A bility to D istin g u ish B etw een S in cere and In sin c e re S p eech es” (un published D o cto r’s d is s e rta tio n , U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , L o s A n g eles, 1953). 1 film e d sp eech es of the tw en ty -fo u r s p e a k e rs u sed a s su b je c ts. In rev iew in g H ild re th 's d ata, the p re s e n t w rite r noted th a t s p e a k e rs u sed a s su b je c ts could b e c la s s ifie d into th re e g ro u p s a s fo l low s: (1) a sm a ll group of s p e a k e rs about whom au d ien ces w ere highly a c c u ra te in ju d g m en ts of sin c e rity ; (2) a sm a ll group of s p e a k e rs about whom au d ien ces w ere highly in a c c u ra te in ju d g m en ts of sin c e rity ; and (3) a la rg e group of s p e a k e rs , co n stitu tin g the m a jo rity , about whom au d ien c e s seem ed to re a c h little a g re e m e n t co n cern in g s in c e rity , and th e re fo re w ere c o n sid ered to ex h ib it m in im a l ab ility to d e te c t e ith e r s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity . The p re s e n t w rite r b ecam e c u rio u s c o n c e rn ing the above th re e g ro u p in g s and w ondered why som e s p e a k e rs w ere c o rre c tly id en tified m o st of the tim e , and why m any s p e a k e rs e lic ite d fro m the audience no d ec isiv e ju d g m en ts re la tiv e to s in c e rity . Since the s p e a k e rs th e m se lv e s w ere the p rin c ip a l v a ria b le s in the above study, it seem ed n e c e s s a ry to ex p lo re the b eh a v io r of the s p e a k e rs which could have been o b se rv e d by the au d ien ces. S tatem ent of the P ro b le m The o b jectiv e of th is study w as to in v e stig ate the speaking c h a r a c te r is tic s of sin c e re and in sin c e re s p e a k e rs and of s p e a k e rs who w ere m o st often judged sin c e re o r in s in c e re by a u d ien ce s. E ight q u e s tio n s fo rm u la te d by the w rite r co n cern in g the b eh a v io r of the su b ject s p e a k e rs w ere desig n ed to fu rn is h the b a s is of in v e stig a tio n . T h ese eig h t q u e stio n s, divided fo r convenience into two d iv isio n s, b ecam e the sta tem en t of the p ro b lem f o r th is study. P a r t I d e a lt with c h a r a c te r is tic s and d iffe re n c e s of sin c e re and in sin c e re s p e a k e rs , so c la ssifie d by the s p e a k e rs th e m se lv e s. P a r t II d ealt with the c h a ra c te ris tic s of s p e a k e rs whom au d ien ce s judged s in c e re , in s in c e re , o r about whose s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e . Q u estio n s co n sid ered u n d er P a r t I of the p ro b lem Included: 1. When a group of sp e a k e rs give sp e e c h e s su p p o rtin g a p o si tion in w hich they s in c e re ly b eliev e and th en give sp e ec h e s on the opposite p o sitio n in which they supposedly do not b eliev e , a re th e re sig n ifican t d iffe re n c e s in the b eh a v io r of s p e a k e rs o b se rv ed in the two s e ts of sp e ech es re la tiv e to d e liv e ry and content? 2. When a group of s p e a k e rs give sp e e c h e s su p p o rtin g a p o sitio n in w hich th ey sin c e re ly b eliev e and then give sp e ech e s on the opposite p o sitio n in w hich they supposedly do not b eliev e , a re th e re sig n ifican t n u m b e rs of s p e a k e rs in w hich ch an g es re la tiv e to d e liv e ry and content o c c u r betw een the sin c e re and in sin c e re sp eech es? Q u estio n s co n sid e re d u n d er P a r t II of the p ro b lem included: 3. A re th e re d iffe re n c e s in the o b se rv a b le c h a r a c te r is tic s of sp e a k e rs whom au d ien ces have m o st often judged to be s in c e re , sp e ak e r s whom au d ien ces have m o st often judged in s in c e re , and s p e a k e rs about whose sin c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e ? 4. A re th e re o b serv a b le c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs (both sin c e re and in sin c e re ) m o st often ra te d a s sin c e re by au d ien ces, w hich a r e d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m th o se held by sp e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s in sin c e re ? 5. A re th e re o b serv ab le c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs (both sin c e re and in sin c e re ) m o st often ra te d a s in sin c e re by au d ien ces, which a re d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m th o se held by sp e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s sin c e re ? 6. A re th e re o b serv ab le c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs (both sin c e re and in sin c e re ) con cern in g w hose s in c e rity au d i e n c e s could le a s t a g re e , w hich a re d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m those held by e ith e r s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d by au d ien ces a s sin c e re o r sp e a k e rs m o st often ra te d by au d ien ces a s in sin c e re ? 7. Do individual sp e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g ree hold o b serv e d c h a ra c te ris tic s id e n tic a l w ith c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re o r m o st often judged in sin c e re ? 8. Do individual sp e a k e rs who have b een judged sin c e re le s s often by au d ien ces hold o b se rv e d c h a r a c te r is tic s id e n tic a l with sp e a k e r s who have m o st often b een judged sin c e re o r with sp e a k e rs who have been m o st often judged in sin c e re ? D efinition of S in cerity F o r the p u rp o se s of th is study one te rm re q u ire d definition. B T h is te rm w as “ s in c e rity .” H ild reth defined s in c e rity o p e ra tio n a lly a s follow s: When an individual is given a lis t of c o n tro v e rs ia l to p ic s, and fre e ly ch o o ses the one in w hich he “ b e lie v e s m o st s i n c e r e l y / ' h is re s u ltin g sp eech on th a t topic m ay be d e s c rib e d a s s in c e re . V ice v e r s a , w hen th a t sam e individual is re q u ire d to defend the opposite of h is ch o sen sid e, h is re su ltin g speech m ay be d e s c rib e d a s in since r e . ^ T h is definition w as accep ted and u sed in the p re s e n t study. R eview of L ite ra tu re M ost e a rly w rite r s on rh e to ric s tr e s s e d the concept of e th o s , o r the p e rsu a sio n d eriv e d fro m the c h a ra c te r of the sp e a k e r. M any such w rite r s sought to d e s c rib e the com ponents w hich to th e ir m in d s c re a te d the e th ic a l ap p eal of an o ra to r. While tr a n s la to r s of th e ir w o rk s seldom u se the w ord “ s in c e rity ” in re n d e rin g the te x ts , the co n cep t of sp e a k e r s in c e rity is often c le a rly defined and im p lied in the context. F u rth e rm o re , w hile m o st rh e to ric ia n s have a ssu m e d the in flu en ce of good c h a ra c te r on both s p e a k e rs and au d ien ces, som e have sought to su g g est m eth o d s, h o w ev er a b s tra c t, of attain in g e th ic a l p e r su a sio n through d e liv ery and co n ten t. M ost su g g estio n s a re not defined in te r m s of a c tu a l speaking b e h a v io rs, but they c le a rly im ply th at it is in the p ro v in ce of the sp e a k e r to develop w ays of attain in g the d e s ire d 3Ib id ., p. 5. 6 e th ic a l effect, w h eth er o r not they a re actu ally a c o rre c t re fle c tio n of h ia r e a l b e lie fs o r m o tiv es. A risto tle s tre s s e d the p e rso n a l c h a ra c te r of the s p e a k e r when p re se n te d in such a m a n n e r a s to m ake au d ien ces b eliev e h im c re d ib le . Of the m o d es of p e rsu a sio n fu rn ish ed by the spoken w ord th e re a re th re e k in d s. The f i r s t kind depends upon the p e rs o n a l c h a ra c te r of the sp e ak er; the second on putting the audience into a c e r ta in fra m e of m ind; the th ird on the p ro o f, o r a p p a re n t proof, p ro vided by the w o rd s of the speech its e lf. P e rs u a s io n i s achieved by the speaker*s p e rso n a l c h a ra c te r when the speech is so spoken a s to m ake u s think him c re d ib le . We b eliev e good m en m o re fu lly and m o re re a d ily than o th e rs : th is is tru e g e n e ra lly w h ate v e r the q u estio n is , and ab so lu tely tru e w here e x a ct c e rta in ty i s im p o s sible and opinions a re divided. T h is kind of p e rsu a sio n , lik e the o th e rs , should be achieved by w hat the s p e a k e r sa y s, not by w hat people think of h is c h a ra c te r b efo re he b eg in s to speak. It is not tr u e , a s som e w rite r s assu m e in th e ir tr e a tis e s on r h e to r ic , th a t the p e rso n a l goodness re v e a le d by the sp e a k e r c o n trib u te s nothing to h is pow er of p e rsu a sio n ; on the c o n tra ry , h is c h a ra c te r m ay a lm o st be called the m o st effectiv e m e a n s of p e rsu a sio n he p o s s e s s e s .^ A ris to tle w as obviously co n cern ed w ith the sp e a k e r and h is im p re s s io n s on the audience at the tim e of the sp eech . The tech n iq u es fo r the attain m en t of c re d ib ility and b elief, m aking use of a p p ro p ria te language and sty le, w ere also d isc u sse d by him in the “ R h e to ric a .” Y our language w ill be a p p ro p ria te if it e x p re s s e s em o tio n and c h a ra c te r, and if it c o rre sp o n d s to its su b je ct. “ C o rre sp o n d e n c e to su b je c t’* m e a n s th at we m u st n e ith e r sp eak c a su a lly about w eighty m a tte rs , n o r solem nly about tr iv ia l ones; n o r m u s t we add o rn a m e n ta l e p ith e ts to com m on place nouns, o r the effect w ill be com ic, a s in the w orks of C leophon, who can u se p h ra s e s a s a b su rd a s “ O queenly fig-tree.** To e x p re s s em o tio n , you w ill *W. E . R o ss (ed.), The W orks of A ris to tle (O xford: The C laren d o n P r e s s , 1924), X I, 1356a. 7 em ploy the language of a n g e r in speaking of o u trag e; the language of d isg u s t and d is c re e t re lu c ta n c e to u tte r a w ord when speaking of im p iety o r fo u ln ess; the language of ex u ltatio n fo r a ta le of g lo ry , and th a t of h u m iliatio n fo r a ta le of pity; and so in a ll o th e r c a s e s . T h is a p tn e ss of language is one thing th a t m a k e s people believe in the tru th of y o u r sto ry : th e ir m in d s d raw the fa ls e co n clu sio n th a t you a re to be tru s te d fro m the fa c t th at o th e rs behave a s you do when th in g s a re a s you d e s c rib e them ; and th e re fo re th ey take y o u r s to ry to be tru e , w h eth er it is so o r not. B e sid e s, an e m o tio n a l sp e a k e r alw ays m a k e s h is audience fe e l w ith h im , even when th e re is nothing in h is arg u m e n ts; w hich is why m any s p e a k e rs tr y to overw helm th e ir audience by m e re n o ise . F u rth e rm o re , th is way of proving y o u r sto ry by d isp lay in g th ese sig n s of its g en u in en ess e x p re s s e s y o u r p e rs o n a l character.** Q u in tilian gave m o re atten tio n p e rh a p s than any of the an c ien ts to d isc u ssin g the eth o s of the o ra to r. H is fam o u s definition of an o r a to r a s “ such a s is defined by M. C ato, ‘A n h o n est m an sk illed in the a r t of s p e a k in g /” * * s ta te s h is p o sitio n c le a rly . In d e s c rib in g m o re fu lly the e th ic a l ap p eal of the sp e a k e r, Q u in tilian points out som e of the c h a r a c te r is tic s he m u st have. The eth o s, of w hich we fo rm a conception, and w hich we d e s ire to find in s p e a k e rs , is reco m m en d ed , above a ll, by good n e s s , being not only m ild and p lacid , but fo r the m o st p a rt p leasin g and p o lite, and am iab le and a ttra c tiv e to the h e a r e r s : and the g r e a te s t m e r it in the e x p re s s io n of it, is , th a t it should seem to flow fro m the n a tu re of th in g s and p e rs o n s w ith w hich we a re co n c e rn e d , so th a t the m o ra l c h a ra c te r of the sp e a k e r m ay c le a rly a p p e a r, and be reco g n ized a s it w e re , in h is d is c o u rs e .^ * * Ib id ., p. 1408a. ®J. P a t s a il (ed.), Q uintilian* s In s titu te s of the O ra to r (London: B . Law and J . W ilkie, 1774), II, 351. 7Jo h n S. W atson (ed .), Q uintilian*s In s titu te s of the O ra to ry (London: H enry G. Bohn, 1856), I, 423-24. 8 Q u in tilian ’s in te re s t in the good c h a ra c te r of the sp e a k e r seem ed fo cu sed tow ard the p ro p e r im p re s s io n of the audience. In th is r e s p e c t he r e f e r re d d ire c tly to the elem e n t of sin c e rity and audience reco g n itio n of it. B ut he who, w hile he sp e ak s i s thought a bad m an , m u st c e r ta in ly speak ineffectiv ely ; fo r he w ill not be thought to speak sin c e re ly ; if he did, h is eth o s, o r c h a ra c te r, would a p p e a r.* T h is reco g n itio n th a t au d ien ces m u st ev alu ate the c h a ra c te r and s in c e rity of the sp e a k e r w as thought by som e a u th o ritie s to ex p lain why Q u in tilian continued in h is w ork to tra in the o r a to r in th e te c h niq u es of effectiv e speaking, r a th e r than depend upon only e th o s . C la rk pointed out th a t Q u in tilian p e rh a p s reco g n ized in s in c e rity a s som ething a sp e a k e r m ig h t find n e c e s s a ry and hence m u st seek to d isg u ise . Though Q u in tilian h o ld s th a t good n ess i s the e s s e n tia l thing and s k ill in speaking only of se co n d ary im p o rta n c e , he would h a rd ly have w ritte n tw elve books on the education of an o r a to r if he had thought th a t goodness w as enough. In fa c t, not only did he b eliev e in an e la b o ra te ed u catio n , but he fu lly accep ted the fa c t th at the o ra to r m ight have to say som e th in g s w hich at f i r s t sight m ig h t seem in c o n siste n t, w ith h is dem and fo r p erfectio n of c h a r a c te r . Q uintilian did not, a s som e of the S toics did, hold th a t it w as enough to say the tru th in plain w o rd s. He knew a ll the tr ic k s of the tra d e and would not fo rb id th e ir u se to the p e rfe c t o ra to r. He ev en in one p lace go es so f a r a s to c laim in su p p o rt of h is d efin itio n of the o ra to r th a t the good m an lie s m o re p lau sib ly than the bad.® Q u in tilian ’s own w o rd s re la tiv e to a good m an having m o re ®Ibid., p. 425. g M. L . C la rk , R h eto ric a t Rom e (London: C ohen and W est, L td ., 1953), p. 117. 9 c re d ib ility in falseh o o d a re v e ry c le a r and indicate h ia co n c e rn w ith audience accep tan ce of the s in c e rity and c h a ra c te r of the sp e a k e r. But if so m e tim e s, w ith th e view to som e duty, w hich m ay h ap pen, a s I sh a ll soon shew , he sh a ll en d eav o u r to m ake p a s s fo r tru th w hat Is not, ev en then he m u st d e s e rv e a g r e a te r d e g re e of c re d ib ility fro m the judge s: w h e re a s th is v e ry p re te n c e m u st fa il of obtaining its e ffect in bad m en , fro m the contem pt th e ir judg m e n ts a re held in, and the opinion of th e ir n e v e r being c o n v e rsa n t w ith r e c titu d e .10 C ic e ro also s tre s s e d the im p o rtan ce of the e th ic a l ap p eal in a sp e a k e r and the im p re s s io n of in te g rity w hich he should m ake on an au d ie n c e. It c o n trib u te s m uch to s u c c e s s in speaking th a t the m o ra ls , p rin c ip le s , conduct, liv e s of th o se who plead c a u s e s , and of th o se fo r whom th ey p lead , should be such a s to m e r it e s te e m , and th a t th o se of th e ir a d v e rs a rie s should be such a s to d e s e rv e c e n su re ; and a lso th a t the m in d s of th o se b efo re whom the cau se i s pleaded should be m oved a s m uch a s p o ssib le to a fav o rab le feelin g , a s w ell to w ard the sp e a k e r a s to w ard him fo r whom he s p e a k s .11 C ic e ro go es fu rth e r in seeking to su g g est som e of the c h a r a c te r is tic s of the sp e a k e r w hich w ill im p re s s the au dience. While m any of h is su g g estio n s a re c o n c re te , th e re is no attem p t to d e ta il the e x a c t tr a it s signifying the *‘p ro b ity 0 which he d em an d s. B ut the q u a litie s th at a ttra c t fa v o r to the o r a to r a re a soft tone of v o ice, a countenance e x p re s siv e of m o d e sty , a m ild m a n n e r of speaking; so th a t if he a tta c k s any one w ith se v e rity , he m ay seem to do so unw illingly and fro m co m p u lsio n . It is of p e c u lia r advantage th at in d ic atio n s of good n a tu re , of lib e ra lity , of * ^ P a tsa ll, o p . c l t ., p. 354. 11J . W. W atson (ed.), C ic e ro ’s De O ra to re (New Y ork: A rth u r H inds, and C om pany, 1890), p. 132. 10 g e n tle n e ss, of piety, of g ra te fu l fe e lin g s, fre e fro m s e lfis h n e s s and a v a ric e , should a p p e a r in him ; and e v e ry thing th a t c h a ra c te ris e s m en of p ro b ity and h u m ility , not ac rim o n io u s, n o r p e rtin a c io u s, n o r litig io u s, n o r h a rs h , v e ry m uch c o n c ilia te s b enevolence, and a lie n a te s the affectio n s fro m th o se In whom such q u a litie s a r e not ap p a re n t. C e n tu rie s follow ing C ic e ro the e a rly E n g lish rh e to ric ia n Jo h n W ard s tr e s s e d the im p o rta n ce of eth o s and the c h a ra c te r of the o ra to r. Now th e re a re fo u r q u a litie s, m o re e s p e c ia lly su ited to the c h a ra c te r of an o ra to r, w hich should alw ay s a p p e a r in h is d is c o u rs e s , in o r d e r to re n d e r w hat he sa y s accep tab le to h is h e a r e r s ; and th e se a re W isdom , In te g rity , B enevolence, and M odesty.*® W ard stro n g ly ad v ised th a t the tr a i t s of c h a ra c te r w hich he dem anded be genuine, and w arned ag a in st the r e s u lt if an audience 14 found th em to be “ feigned and c o u n te rfe it.” A f u lle r d isc u ssio n of e th ic a l ap p eal with e m p h a sis on the s p e a k e r’s b e lie f in w hat he said w as p re se n te d by the eig h teen th c e n tu ry rh e to ric ia n G eorge C am p b ell. C am p b ell d isc u sse d e th ic a l proof in te r m s of the sym pathy w hich the audience had tow ard the sp e a k e r. Now the s p e a k e r’s a p p a re n t conviction of the tru th of w hat he advanceth adds to a ll h is o th e r a rg u m e n ts an ev id en ce, though not p re c is e ly the sam e, y e t n e a r akin to th a t of h is own te stim o n y . T h is h ath som e w eight even w ith the w is e s t h e a r e r s , but is e v e ry thing w ith the v u lg a r. W hatever, th e re fo re , le s s e n s sym pathy, 12Ib id „ pp. 132-33. 13 John W ard, A S ystem of O ra to ry (London: J . W ard, 1759), p. 142. * * B ert E . B ra d le y , J r . , “ The Inventio of Jo h n W ard,” Speech M onographs,XXVI:56, M arch , 1959. II m u st a lso im p a ir b e lie f. . . . H ence it hath b eco m e a com m on topic w ith rh e to ric ia n s , th a t in o r d e r to be a su c c e s sfu l o r a to r , one m u st be a good m an; f o r to b e good i s the only su re w ay of b ein g long e ste e m e d good, and to be e ste e m e d good i s p rev io u sly n e c e s s a ry to one’ s being h e a rd w ith due atten tio n and re g a rd .* " Shortly a fte rw a rd C am p b ell r e f e r r e d to “ b e lie f in the sp e ak er’s 16 s in c e r ity " a s being of g re a t im p o rta n c e . He did not, h o w ev er, d e s c rib e in d e ta il the e x act b e h a v io r in se c u rin g th is b e lie f. The sam e in siste n c e on sin c e re b elief a s an im p o rta n t p a r t of e th ic a l ap p eal c h a ra c te riz e d the w ritin g s of T h o m as S h erid an , who a lso r e f e r r e d som ew hat a b s tra c tly to the b e h a v io rs w hich com m unicate s in c e rity . When we re fle c t th a t the end of public speaking is p e rs u a s io n (fo r the view of e v e ry one who h a ra n g u e s in public i s to b rin g h is h e a r e r s into h is way of thinking); and th a t in o r d e r to p e rsu a d e o th e rs to th e b e lie f of any point, it m u st f i r s t a p p e a r, th a t the p e r son who a tte m p ts it is firm ly p ersu a d ed of the tru th of it h im se lf; how can we suppose it p o ssib le th a t he should e ffect th is , u n le s s he d e liv e rs h im s e lf in the m a n n e r w hich i s alw ay s u sed by p e rs o n s who speak in e a rn e s t? How sh a ll h is w o rd s p a s s fo r the w o rd s of tru th , when they b e a r not its stam p? L a te r in the sam e w ork, S heridan d isc u sse d the sty le and m a n n e r of the s p e a k e r a s in d ic a to rs of s in c e rity . H ow ever, the d e s c rip tio n of b e h a v io rs w as a b s tra c t and vague. 15 G eorge C am p b ell, The P h ilo so p h y of R h e to ric (New Y ork: H a rp e r and B ro th e rs , 1859), p. 119. 18Ib id ., p. 123. 17 T h o m as S heridan, L e c tu re s on E lo cu tio n (London: J . D odsley, 1781), p. 6. 13 L e t him sp eak e n tire ly fro m h ie fee ling e; end th ey w ill find m uch t r u e r eigne to m e n ife e t th e m se lv e s by, th en he could find fo r th em . L e t him elw eye heve in view , w het the ch ief end of epeeking ie ; end he w ill se e the n ec e e e ity of th e m een e propoeed to en e w er the end. T he ch ief end of e ll public e p e e k e re ie to p ereu ed e; end in o r d e r to p e re u e d e , it ie above e ll th in g e n e c e e e e ry , th et th e epeek- e r , should e t le e e t e p p e e r h im e elf to b eliev e , w het he u tte re ; but th ie cen n e v e r be the c e e e , w here th e re e re eny ev id en t m e rk e of affectetio n o r e r t . O n the c o n tra ry , when e m e n d e liv e re h im eelf in h ie u su a l m a n n e r, end w ith the sam e to n e s end g e s tu re , th e t he ie ac cu sto m ed to u s e , when he sp e ak s fro m h is h e a rt; h o w ev er, aw kw ard th e t m a n n e r m ay b e , h o w ev er ill-re g u la te d the to n e s, he w ill s till heve the advantage of being thought s in c e re ; w hich of e ll o th e rs , i s the m o st n e c e s s a ry a r tic le , to w a rd s se cu rin g atten tio n and b elief; a s affectatio n of any kind, i s the s u r e s t way to d e s tro y b o th .18 Hugh B la ir m ade plain h is p o sitio n th at the sp e a k e r should b eliev e w hat he sp eak s; how ev er, B la ir seem ed to in d icate th a t ex c e p tio n s m ig h t be n e c e s s a ry . In th e n ex t p la c e , in o r d e r to be p e rsu a siv e s p e a k e rs in a p o p u lar a sse m b ly , it i s , in m y opinion, a c a p ita l ru le , th a t we be o u rs e lv e s p e rsu a d ed of w h ate v er we reco m m en d to o th e rs . N ev er, when it can be avoided, ought we to esp o u se any side of the a rg u m en t, but w hat we b eliev e to be the tru e and the rig h t one. Seldom o r n e v e r w ill a m a n be elo q u en t, but when he is in e a rn e s t, and u tte rin g h is own s e n tim e n ts .18 The d e s ira b ility of s in c e re b elief on the p a rt of the sp e a k e r, but reco g n itio n of ex cep tio n s, w as fu rth e r developed by W hately. W hately a lso r e f e r r e d to the language and m a n n e r of fu ll b e lie f, but he w ent no f u r th e r in seeking to define such b eh av io r. 18lb ld ., pp. 148-49. 19 Hugh B la ir, L e c tu re s on R h e to ric and B e lle s L e tt r e s (P h ilad elp h ia: J a m e s K ay, Ju n . and B ro th e r, 1846), p. 286. 13 It m ay be added, th a t a P le a d e r often finde It ad v isab le to aim a t e s ta b lis h in g — in re fe re n c e to the fe e lin g s e n te rta in e d to w ard h im s e lf— w hat m a y be re g a rd e d a s a d istin c t point fro m any of the above; n am ely , the s in c e rity of h is own conviction. In any d e s c r ip tio n of co m p o sitio n , ex cep t the Speech of an A dvocate, a m a n 's m ain tain in g a c e rta in co n clu sio n , i s a p resu m p tio n th a t he i s con v inced of it h im se lf. U n le ss th e re be som e sp e c ia l re a s o n fo r doubting h is in te g rity and g o o d -faith , he is supposed to m ean w hat he sa y s, and to u se a rg u m e n ts th a t a r e , a t le a s t, s a tis fa c to ry to h im se lf. B ut it i s not so w ith a P le a d e r; who is u n d ersto o d to be advocating the c a u se of the c lie n t who hap p en s to have engaged him, and to have b een eq u ally re a d y to take the opposite sid e . T he fu lle s t b e lie f in h is u p rig h tn e s s, g o es no f u rth e r, a t the u tm o st, th an to sa tisfy u s th at he would not plead a ca u se w hich he w as co n scio u s w as g ro s s ly u n ju st, and th a t he would not r e s o r t to any u n fa ir a r tif ic e s . B ut to alle g e a ll th a t can f a irly be u rg ed on b eh alf of h is c lie n t, ev en though a s a judge, he m ig h t be in clin ed to decide the o th e r w ay, is re g a rd e d a s h is p ro fe ssio n a l duty. If, h o w ev er, he can induce a J u ry to b eliev e not only in h is own g e n e ra l in te g rity of c h a ra c te r, but a lso in h is s in c e re co n v ic tio n of the ju stic e of h is c lie n t's c a u se , th is w ill give g re a te s t ad d itio n al w eight to h is pleading, sin ce he w ill th u s b e re g a rd e d a s s o r t of w itn e ss in the c a u se . And th is acco rd in g ly is aim ed at, and often w ith s u c c e s s , by p ra c tis e d A d v o cates. T hey em ploy the language, and assu m e the m a n n e r, of fu ll b e lie f, and stro n g feelin g . The e a rly e lo c u tio n ist G ilb e rt A u stin r e f e r r e d to the im p r e s sion of the s in c e rity of the sp e a k e r a s one of the re a s o n s fo r c o n s id e r ing the im p o rtan ce of d e liv e ry in speaking. F i r s t , b ec a u se the m a jo rity a r e incapable of a p p re c ia tin g the m a tte r of a d is c o u rs e , s e p a ra te ly fro m the m a n n er; and secondly, b ecau se the m a n n e r h a s n a tu ra lly co n sid erab le in flu en ce, in p r o p o rtio n to the d e g re e of p e rsu a sio n w hich it im p r e s s e s on the h e a r e r , of the sin c e rity of the sp e a k e r. R ich ard W hately, E le m e n ts of R h eto ric (New Y ork: Sheldon and C om pany, 1867), p. 256. 21G ilb e rt A u stin , C h iro n o m ia (London: T . C ade 1 1 and W. P a v ie s , 1806), p. 188. 14 T he m o re re c e n t A m eric a n rh e to ric ia n John G enung also s tr e s s e d th e s in c e re conviction of the sp e a k e r and w arned ag a in st an y thing in the sty le of d e liv e ry w hich w ill d e s tro y the im p re s s io n . To the e sta b lish m e n t of such frie n d ly re la tio n the m o s t effectu al b a r , p e rh a p s, is the ap p earan ce of any kind of a rtific e . . . . A fte r a ll, it is only genuine c h a ra c te r and sin c e re conviction th a t can be safely re lie d on b efo re an a u d ien c e .^2 A n o th er e a rly A m e ric a n w rite r on the su b ject of s p e a k e r s in c e rity and its reco g n itio n by au d ien ces w as H olt. By s in c e rity , I m ean th at we should say what we have to say to an audience w ithout affectatio n o r a rtific ia lity : th a t we should stand s tra ig h t p h y sically , m en tally , and m o ra lly , and sp eak s in c e re ly . S in cerity is an id e al tow ard w hich m o st of u s s triv e in o u r re la tio n s to in d iv id u als and should, th e re fo re , be e a s ily reco g n ized in o u r re la tio n to an a u d ie n c e .^ S c h rie r fo rm u lated two ru le s fo r s p e a k e rs in h is c o n sid e ra tio n of the e th ic s of p e rsu a sio n . H ow ever, he pointed out th a t the ru le s did have ex cep tio n s in ac tu a l p ra c tic e . H is sta te m e n t of the ru le s fo r s p e a k e rs s tr e s s e d s in c e rity . (1) Be s in c e re , do not lie; do not sim u late a feelin g w hich is not genuine; be y o u rse lf p ersu ad ed of the c o u rse to w hich you would p ersu a d e o th e rs; 24 (2) Do not ap p eal to b ase m o tiv es and p re ju d ic e s. T h o n ssen and B a ird s tr e s s e d s in c e rity as a fa c to r in the 2^John F . G enung, T he P r a c tic a l E le m e n ts of R h eto ric (New Y ork: G inn and C om pany, 1914), pp. 449-450. 23 M rs. C h a rle s M. H olt, “ The S peaker in R elatio n to H im s e lf ,” T he Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of S peech, 1:277, O cto b e r, 1915. 24 W illiam S c h rie r, “ The E th ic s of P e rs u a s io n ,” Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of S peech, XVI:482, 1930. 15 c h a ra c te r of the sp e a k e r. “ In g e n e ra l, a sp e ak er fo c u se s atten tio n upon the p ro b ity of h is c h a ra c te r if he . . . c r e a te s the im p re s sio n of O K being co m p letely sin c e re in h is u n d erta k in g ." While not attem p tin g to d e ta il the ac tu a l b e h a v io r of the sp e a k e r, T h o n ssen and B a ird a lso pointed out th a t the s p e a k e r's s in c e rity m ay be re v e a le d through h is sty le. A d e riv a tiv e of o u r p re v io u s d isc u ssio n of sty le a s an index of the s p e a k e r 's p e rso n a lity is the re la tio n of sin c e rity to the m a n n e r of e x p re s sio n . W hether o r not sty le can e v e r se rv e a s a tru e r e fle c to r of the m an is not p re c is e ly the q u estio n . B ut th a t the state of a m a n 's faith in h is c a u se , and of h is devotion to it, m ay be re v e a le d through h is p re se n ta tio n is no doubt tr u e .26 E a rn e s t B ran d en b u rg ex p lo red the q u a litie s of a good o ra to r and dem anded high e th ic a l sta n d a rd s. “ The s in c e rity and in te g rity of the sp e a k e r m u st be w eighed. D eception ten d s to u n d erm in e so c ial 27 re la tio n s h ip s .'' L ee d e a lt with the re la tio n s h ip s betw een sin c e rity and p e r su asio n and arg u m en tatio n . He did not, how ever, attem p t to d e sc rib e the d e ta ils of b e h a v io r of the s in c e re sp e a k e r. The m an who sp e ak s w ith sin c e rity is p resu m e d to be “ fre e fro m d e c e it, d issim u la tio n o r d u p lic ity ." We tak e him to be in re a lity w hat he a p p e a rs to b e. We assu m e g en u in en ess. We e x p ect fro m h im n e ith e r h y p o c risy n o r d ish o n esty . And c e rta in ly 2 ^ L e s te r T h o n ssen and A. C ra ig B a ird , Speech C ritic is m (New Y ork: The Ronald P r e s s C om pany, 1948), p. 387. 28Ib id ., p. 425. ^ E a r n e s t B ran d en b u rg , “ Q u in tilian and the Good O r a to r ," Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of Speech, XXXIV:27, F e b ru a ry , 1948. 10 when a sp e a k e r m a n ife sts sin c e rity , it is e a sy to see why we w ill resp o n d to is s u e s a s he d o e s. And it i s eq u ally e a s y to be p e r suaded th a t sin c e rity i s a su fficien t index fo r o u r accep tan ce of a m an and w hat he stan d s fo r. In d eb a te, how ever, sin c e rity is m o s t often acco m p an ied by conviction, a r a th e r se ttle d b e lie f in th e a c c u ra c y and w isdom of w hat is said . What is said i s said w ith firm n e s s and a s s u ra n c e .28 One of the m o st fu lly developed d is c u s s io n s of s in c e rity in re la tio n to e th ic a l ap p eal w as given by B rem b eck and H ow ell, who c o n sid ered s in c e rity in its b ro ad a s p e c ts to be the p rim a ry m e a n s of e sta b lish in g the eth o s of the sp e a k e r. While not defining the d e ta ils of sin c e re b e h a v io r, they did seek to e s ta b lis h th re e le v e ls of s in c e rity w hich m ay be c h a ra c te ris tic of the sp e a k er. We can identify th re e o r d e r s of sin c e rity : P rim a r y s in c e rity , co n sistin g of u n re s e rv e d b elief in the p e rs u a s iv e p ro p o sitio n ; se co n d ary s in c e rity , stem m in g fro m a conviction th a t se c u rin g accep tan ce of the p e rsu a siv e p ro p o sitio n is so cially d e s ira b le , r e g a r d le s s of the p e rs u a d e r’s p e rso n a l fe e lin g s tow ard the sp ecific p ro p o sitio n ; and te r tia r y s in c e rity , re s tin g on the p e rs u a d e r’ s p e rso n a l re w a rd fro m the a c t of p e rsu a sio n , but being d is in te re s te d in tru th of the p ro p o sitio n and i t s so c ial c o n se q u e n c e s.28 Not only did B rem b eck and H ow ell define th re e le v e ls of sin c e rity in the sp e a k e r, but they ra is e d q u estio n s co n cern in g the c h a ra c te r is tic s in d icativ e of m o ra l c h a ra c te r in the sp e a k e r. “ But p e rso n a l v irtu e cannot co m p en sate in and of its e lf fo r the la ck of any 28 Irv in g J . L ee , “ F re e d o m fro m S peech,’’ The Southern Speech J o u rn a l, X IV :28, S ep tem b er, 1948. 29 W inston L . B re m b eck and W illiam S. H ow ell, P e rs u a s io n . A M eans of S ocial C o n tro l (New Y ork: P re n tic e -H a ll, In c ., 1952), p. 255. 17 30 co n sid e ra b le n u m b e r of c o n c re te speech a b i l i t i e s / 1 th ey sta te d , but did not fu rth e r define w hat “ sp eech a b ilitie s ’* m ig h t be included. O liv e r d e s c rib e d a s p e a k e r’s sin c e rity in te r m s of “ a sen se 31 of m is s io n .” He then d e s c rib e d two ty p e s of sp e a k e r sin c e rity : (1) sim ple em o tio n al in te n sity , w hich m ay confuse both sp e a k e r and audience a s to the h o n esty of feelin g , and (2) r e a l s in c e rity b ased upon in te lle c tu a l conviction. While O liv e r pointed out th a t em o tio n al in te n sity m ay be assu m e d o r shed by the sp e a k e r a t w ill, he did not d e s c rib e in d e ta il the b e h a v io ra l a s p e c ts of e ith e r fo rm of sin c e rity . W allace, while dem anding the quality of s in c e rity in a sp eak er, pointed out the difficulty of audience reco g n itio n of s in c e rity . “ It is e a sy to a s s e r t high sounding p u rp o ses; It is d ifficu lt fo r the lis te n e r to 32 a s s e s s the s in c e rity of th e se a s s e r tio n s .” D ick en s pointed out the im p o rtan ce of s in c e rity in a sp e a k e r, and w ent fu rth e r th an m o st w rite r s in d e sc rib in g how au d ien ces m ay re c e iv e in d ic a tio n s of sin c e rity o r in s in c e rity fro m the b eh av io r of the sp e a k e r. M ost people think they can d e te c t h y p o crisy by m an y sig n s. T hus som e sp e a k e rs a re su sp ected b ecau se they a re too glib, too Ib id ., p. 258. 31 R o b e rt R . O liv e r, The P sy ch o lo g y of P e rs u a s iv e Speech <New Y ork: L ongm ans, G reen and C om pany, 1942), p. 100. 32 K a rl R. W allace, “ An E th ic a l B a s is of C o m m u n icatio n ,” The Speech T e a c h e r, IV :3, J a n u a ry , 1955. IB flu en t, talk too fa s t; b ecau se th ey a r e the h ig h -p re s s u re type, h o t- a i r a r tis ts . O th e rs a re condem ned b ecau se they a r e too h e s ita n t, u n c e rta in , o r lu k ew arm . O th e rs b e c au se of som e sim p le m a n n e r ism , such a s a ra p id o r continuous sh iftin g of the e y e s , gulping, apologetic p o stu re , o r the m um bling of im p o rta n t w o rd s /33 S a re tt and F o s te r , w hile not being a s sp ecific in m entioning b e h a v io r, p ro p o sed th a t sin c e rity o r in s in c e rity could be d e te rm in e d by au d ien ces through p erce p tio n , su p ra lim in a l sig n s and su b lim in al sig n s. A sp e a k e r re v e a ls h im se lf th ro u g h sig n s o r c u e s w hich a re fo r the m o st p a rt w ithin h is c o n tro l, im m ed iate o r re m o te : f o r ex am p le, through the m u s c u la r tone of h is body, h is g e s tu re s , h is fa c ia l e x p re s sio n , the tim b re of h is voice and the ra te of h is u tte ra n c e .^ * M any, but not a ll, of the c o n te m p o ra ry te x ts in public speaking lis te d s in c e rity of the sp e a k e r a s e ith e r an im p o rta n t fa c to r in p e r su asio n o r n e c e s s a ry fo r effectiv e speaking. Some of th e se te x ts 35 36 37 38 included: W lnans, B rig a n c e , M u rra y , B ry an t and W allace, 33 M ilton D ickens, Speech, D ynam ic C om m unication (New Y ork: H a rc o u rt, B rac e and C om pany, 1954), p. 10. 34 Lew S a re tt and W illiam T ru fa n t F o s te r , B a sic P rin c ip le s of Speech (New Y ork: Houghton M ifflin C om pany, 1946), p. 31. 35 J a m e s A . W inans, Speech M aking (New Y ork: D. A ppleton- C en tu ry C om pany, 1938), pp. 389-90. 36 W illiam N orw ood B rig a n c e , Speech, I ts T ech n iq u es and D iscip lin e a in a F re e Society (New Y ork: A p p le to n -C e n tu ry -C ro fts, In c ., 1952), p. 384. 37 Elw ood M u rra y , The Speech P e rs o n a lity (New Y ork: J . B. L ip p in co tt C om pany, 1937), p. 71. 38 D onald C . B ry an t and K a rl R. W allace, F u n d a m e n tals of P u b lic Speaking (New Y ork: A p p le to n -C e n tu ry -C ro fts, In c., 1960), Id an in 11 12 M innick, C ro c k e r, W hite, end O liv e r, D ickey, and Z elk o . It w as evident fro m the rev iew of rh e to ric a l w o rk s fro m the a n c ie n ts to the m o d e rn p erio d th a t m o st w rite r s have p laced g re a t im p o rtan ce on the s in c e rity o r the a p p a re n t s in c e rity of the sp e a k e r a s a fa c to r In e th ic a l ap p eal. F ew w r ite r s have sought to su g g est in co n c re te d e ta il the b eh a v io r w hich ac co m p an ies e ith e r s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity . Some m o d e rn re s e a r c h w as found a lso to d eal w ith the con cep t of e th o s o r sin c e rity of sp e a k e rs. C la rk sought to d e te rm in e what e le m e n ts in the speech s itu a tion w ere c la s s e d e s s e n tia l by stan d ard sp eech te x ts and how clo sely audience ra tin g s of the re la tiv e im p o rtan ce of each elem e n t c o r r e s ponded to the ra tin g s of the te x ts . A udiences w ere asked to ra te speaking c h a ra c te ris tic s a s “ e s s e n tia l,” “ d oubtful,” o r “ non- e s s e n tia l.” E ig h ty -sev e n p e r cen t of the au d ien ces lis te d s in c e rity a s pp. 340-41. 39 Wayne C . M innick, The A rt of P e rs u a s io n (B oston: Houghton M ifflin C om pany, 1957), pp. 116-17. 40 L io n el C ro c k e r, P u b lic Speaking fo r C ollege Students (New Y ork: A m e ric a n Book C om pany, 1950), pp. 42-44. 41 E ugene E . W hite, P r a c tic a l Speech F u n d a m e n tals (New Y ork: T he M acm illan C om pany, 1960), pp. 55-56. 42 R o b e rt T . O liv e r, D a lla s C . D ickey, and H aro ld P . Z elko, C om m unicative Speech (New Y ork: The D ryden P r e s s , 1955), pp. 24- 26. 20 an e s s e n tia l c h a ra c te ris tic of effectiv e speaking. Of th o se so ra tin g , th irty p e r cen t la te r ra te d s in c e rity a s the “ m o st e s s e n tia l” single c h a ra c te ris tic . T h is w as the h ig h est ra tin g given any single c h a ra c te r is tic . C la rk concluded th at: “ S in cerity , although not ra te d 'e s s e n tia l’ by a m a jo rity of the te x ts , w as ra te d the m o st e s s e n tia l of the 43 fo u rte e n c h a ra c te ris tic s by the audience m e m b e rs .” T ra d itio n a l rh e to ric a l in siste n c e th a t sin c e rity is an e s s e n tia l fa c to r in effective speaking w as re fle c te d in p ro p o sed ra tin g s c a le s fo r speaking e ffe c tiv e n e ss. Stevens in h is p roposed ra tin g scale fo r public s p e a k e rs in cluded a s one of the ite m s: “ S in cerity : co n sid e r the fid e lity with 44 w hich the speech r e f le c ts the individual behind i t .” K now er sought to provide a m e a su re m e n t of speaking effe c tiv e n e s s u sin g both a ra tin g scale and a sp e a k e r’s p ro file fo rm . Item 13 of the R ating Scale fo r Speech C ritic is m asked: “ I s the sp e a k e r p le asa n tly unaffected and sin c e re in choice of w o rd s, language, and 45 m a n n e r? ” Item 2 of the P u b lic Speaking P ro file fo rm listed : 43 W. K. C la rk , “ A Survey of C e rta in A udience A ttitu d es to w ard C om m only T aught S tan d ard s of P u b lic Speaking,” Speech M o n o g rap h s, XVHI:69, M arch , 1951. 44 W ilm er E . Stevens, “ A R ating Scale fo r P u b lic S p e a k e rs ,” T he Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of Speech, X IV :231, A p ril, 1928. 45 F ra n k ly n K now er, “ A Suggestive Study of P u b lic Speaking R ating Scale V a lu e s,” The Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of Speech, XV:33, F e b ru a ry , 1929. 21 “ A ttitude*: s in c e rity , confidence, dignity, co n cern , dyn am ic, frie n d li n e s s , and h u m o r.” * * * M u rra y developed a fo rm fo r u se in the c ritic is m of sp e a k e rs 47 and included a s Ite m H -E : “ F re e d o m fro m in s in c e rity . ' 9 B ry an and W ilke a lso sought to e s ta b lis h the re lia b ility and v alid ity of a ra tin g sc a le fo r public sp e a k e rs. Item 9 of the sc a le read : 48 “ What is y o u r judgm ent of the s p e a k e r’s ap p a re n t s in c e rity ? ” P o s s ib le a n s w e rs lis te d included: u n q u estio n ab le, p ro b ab le, p o ssib le, q u estio n ab le, in s in c e re . C o m p arativ ely few e x p e rim e n ta l stu d ie s w ere found to d eal with the concept of e th o s and the u se of e th ic a l a p p e a ls. Some stu d ies co n sid ered the fa c to r of sin c e rity , w hile o th e rs did not. 49 H aim an sought to d is c o v e r if c e rta in fa c to rs of e th o s in s p e a k e rs co n trib u ted to the e ffe c tiv e n e ss of p e rsu a sio n . S in cerity w as a tr a it of the o v e r - a ll p e rso n a lity of s p e a k e rs included in the Btudy. F o u r sp e a k e rs, thought to p o s s e s s d iffe re n t am o u n ts of e th ic a l appeal, T — — ----- —-— — — — —; --------------------------------------------------------- 46 Ib id ., p. 35. 47 Elw ood M u rra y , “ M ental A d ju stm en ts fo r the R e lea se of C re a tiv e P o w e r in S peech,” T he Q u a rte rly Jo u rn a l of Speech, X X I:505, N o v em b er, 1935. *®A. I. B ry an and W. H. W ilke, “ A T echnique fo r R ating P u b lic S p e a k e rs ,” J o u rn a l of C onsulting P sy ch o lo g y , 5:81, 1941. 49 F ra n k ly n S. H aim an, “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of the E ffe c ts of E th o s in P u b lic S peaking,” Speech M o nographs, X V I:190-202, S ep tem b er, 1949. d e liv e re d id e n tic a l sp eech es to a u d ien ces who w ere ask ed to ra te the sp e a k e rs on sin c e rity , fa irm in d e d n e ss, p h y sic al a p p e a ra n c e , co n ceit, co m p eten ce, and lik e a b le n e ss. E ffe c tiv e n e ss of p e rsu a sio n by the sp e a k e rs w as then m e a su re d by the u se of th e W oodward sh ift-o f - opinion b a llo t. S in ce rity w as found to c o rre la te m o d e ra te ly w ith p e r su asiv e s u c c e s s . Some fa c to rs of e th o s , such a s fa irm in d e d n e ss and co m p eten ce, seem ed to be of in flu en ce. The o rig in a l opinions on the su b ject m a tte r of the B peaker ap p a re n tly did p reju d ice to som e sm a ll d eg re e the lis te n e r ’ s concept of the s p e a k e r’s e th o s . H ow ever, in d i ca tio n s th at such opinions m ight influence ev alu atio n of s in c e rity w ere in co n clu siv e. 50 H ild reth sought to te s t the h y p o th esis th a t lis te n e rs can a c c u ra te ly d istin g u ish betw een s in c e rity and in sin c e rity ; and th a t sin c e re sp e e ch e s a re m o re effectiv e than in sin c e re sp e ech e s. The sam e study sought to find if sex d iffe re n c e s a p p e a r in the judging of s in c e r ity; the re la tio n sh ip betw een an au d ien ce’s ra tin g s of a sp e a k e r’s e ffe c tiv e n e s s and its ev alu atio n of h is sin c e rity ; the re la tio n sh ip betw een a sp e a k e r’s a c tu a l sin c e rity and h is e ffe c tiv e n e ss ra tin g s; the re la tio n ship betw een the au d ien ce’s attitu d e tow ard th e s p e a k e r’s topic and its ev alu atio n of h is sin c e rity ; and the re la tio n sh ip betw een the au d ien ce’s attitu d e to w ard the s p e a k e r’s topic and its ra tin g of h is e ffe c tiv e n e ss. SO H ild re th , op. c i t . 23 T w en ty -fo u r sp e a k e rs d e liv e re d a sin c e re speech on a c o n tro v e r s ia l topic and th en d e liv e re d a speech su p p o rtin g the opposite point of view . The re s u ltin g fo rty -e ig h t sp e e c h e s w ere film ed and shown to au d ien ce s w ith no in d icatio n of a c tu a l sin c e rity of th e s p e a k e rs . P r i o r to the showing of the sp e ec h e s, au d ien ce s w ere ask ed to in d icate th e ir opinion to w ard the to p ic s. A fte r the sp e ech e s, au d ien ce s w ere ask ed to ev alu ate the sin c e rity of the s p e a k e rs and th e ir e ffe c tiv e n e ss. B ecau se of the im p o rtan ce of the H ild reth e x p e rim e n t to the p re s e n t study a m o re com plete d e s c rip tio n of the p ro c e d u re s w as included in C h a p te r II. H ild reth re p o rte d six co n clu sio n s: 1. When a sp e a k e r took two opposing stan d s on a to p ic, lay au d ien ces w ere unable to d istin g u ish betw een the sin c e re and in sin c e re sp e ech e s. 2. T h ere w ere no sig n ifican t d iffe re n c e s betw een the se x e s on th e ir ab ility to identify sin c e rity . 3. A u d ien ces showed a sig n ifican t tendency to ra te a sp e a k e r a s sin c e re when they ra te d him a s effectiv e. 4. No sig n ifican t re la tio n sh ip w as found betw een a c tu a l sin c e rity and e ffe c tiv e n e ss ra tin g s . 5. The attitu d e of a judge on the topic of a sp e a k e r had no sig n ifican t influence on the ju d g e 's id en tifica tio n of sin c e rity . 6. E ffe c tiv e n e ss ra tin g s w ere not sig n ifican tly influenced by a 24 ju d g e’s attitu d e tow ard a sp e a k e r’ s topic. P a u ls o n ^ studied the e ffe c ts of the s p e a k e r’ s p re s tig e and the “ both s id e s ” p re se n ta tio n in te r m s of audience shift of opinion. R e ten tion w as em ployed a s an o th er c rite rio n of e ffe c tiv e n e ss. R e s u lts of the study in d icated th at high p re stig e on the p a rt of the sp e a k e r re s u lte d in g r e a te r p e rc e n tag e of shift of opinion. The u se of “ both s id e s ” p re s e n tatio n did not produce any g r e a te r sig n ifican t sh ift of opinion, but did give sig n ifican tly h ig h e r rete n tio n s c o re s . No attem p t w as m ade to iso la te s in c e rity a s a specific fa c to r of sp e a k e r’ s p re s tig e . 52 L udlum studied the e ffe c ts of c e rta in tech n iq u es of c re d ib ili ty upon audience a ttitu d e s. The p u rp o se of the study w as to ev a lu a te, ex p e rim e n ta lly , the effe c ts of c e rta in a r tis tic e th ic a l p ro o fs in the speech its e lf a s tech n iq u e s fo r in c re a sin g the c re d ib ility of an a rg u m en tativ e speech to an audience. The five tech n iq u es chosen fo r u se w ere: (1) acknow ledging opposing a rg u m e n ts, (2) m a n ife stin g a high d eg ree of in te g rity , (3) seem ing to lead the th o u g h ts of the lis te n e r s e a s ily r a th e r than fo rcin g them a r b itr a r ily , (4) m aking su re alleg ed fa c ts w ere c o n siste n t with known fa c ts , and (5) showing th a t the 51 Stanley F . P a u lso n , “ T he E ffe c ts of the P re s tig e of the S peaker and A cknow ledgm ent of O pposing A rg u m en ts on A udience R etention and Shift of O pinion,” Speech M o n o g rap h s, X X I:267, N o v em b er, 1954. 52 T h o m as S. L udlum , “ E ffe c ts of C e rta in T ec h n iq u es of C re d ib ility upon A udience A ttitu d e s,” Speech M o nographs, XXV:278- 284, N o v em b er, 1958. 29 m essage w as a s re c e n t a s p o ssib le. M an ifesta tio n s of high in te g rity w ere acco m p lish ed by the u se of such p h ra s e s a s: “ I won’t tr y to hide the fa c t th a t 1 think th e . . . p a rty h a s the b e tte r p ro g ra m . T h is is why I ’m speaking fo r th e m .” A n o th er p h ra se w as: “ I ’ll n e v e r tr y to pull the wool o v e r your e y e s .” Speeches containing the e th ic a l p ro o fs and o th e r p a ra lle l sp eech es of stra ig h tfo rw a rd arg u m en tativ e n a tu re w ere d e liv e re d to au d ien ces. A L ik e rt-ty p e scale w as u se d to m e a s u re audience re s p o n s e s to the sp eech es. It w as found th a t the m ean sh ift in au d ien ce s re su ltin g fro m h e a rin g the stra ig h t arg u m e n tativ e sp e ech e s w as +2.9, w hile the m ean shift of au d ien ces h e a rin g sp e ech e s re v ise d to u tiliz e c re d ib ility tech n iq u es w as only +0.1. It w as concluded, th e re fo re , th at the u se of tech n iq u es com m only UBed fo r in c re a sin g c re d ib ility m ig h t be of le s s value than stra ig h tfo rw a rd arg u m en t in p o litica l sp eech es. While the fa c to r of “ high in te g rity ” used in the above study w as p erh a p s re la te d to sin c e rity , it w as not equated to sin c e rity in the e x p e rim e n t, and the d esig n of the study lim ite d its c o n sid e ra tio n to the tex t of th e sp eech e s only. H ow ever, the study w as of in te re s t in its a tte m p t to objectify in te r m s of co n c re te s ta te m e n ts the in d ic atio n s of e th ic a l ap p eal. 53 B en ed ict studied so c ial sta tu s a s a d im en sio n of e th o s . 53 T ed W. B en ed ict, “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of S ocial S tatus a s a D im ension of E th o s ,” (unpublished D o cto r’ s d is s e rta tio n . 20 S pecifically, he sought to d eterm in e what effect audience knowledge re g a rd in g the so c ial c la s s m e m b e rsh ip of a sp eak er would have upon th e ir opinion of h is c h a ra c te r, and to study in te rre la tio n s h ip s betw een so cial c la s s of sp e ak e r and so cial c la s s of lis te n e r. Social c la s s m e m b e rsh ip s w ere attrib u te d to five sp e a k e rs and subm itted to lis te n ing au d ien ces. The au d ien ces w ere then asked to ev alu ate the c h a ra c te r of the sp e a k e rs. It w as found th a t in fo rm atio n concerning the so cial c la s s m em b ersh ip of the sp e ak er influenced the judgm ent of the au d i ence a s to the s p e a k e r's c h a ra c te r. It w as also in d icated th a t h ig h est ra tin g s of c h a ra c te r w ere given to sp e a k e rs belonging to the sam e so c ial c la s s a s the ju d g es. It w as concluded, th e re fo re , th at so cial c la s s m em b ersh ip functions a s one of the d im en sio n s of e th o s . The fa c to r of sin c e rity w as not sp ecifically included in the study. A review of the rh e to ric a l a u th o rs of both ancient and m o d ern p e rio d s and of co n tem p o rary re s e a r c h in the field of speech showed a strong in siste n c e th at sin c e rity be co n sid ered an im p o rtan t fa c to r in the eth o s of a sp e ak e r. Some w rite r s im plied o r ad m itted th at such s in c e rity m ight be e ith e r re a l o r ap p aren t. With co n te m p o rary stu d ies rev ea lin g th at au d ien ces have not been able to d istin g u ish betw een r e a l sin c e rity , in sin c e rity , and ap p aren t sin c e rity , the im p o rtan ce of fu rth e r study of sp e ak er b eh av io r in re la tio n to audience judgm ents w as U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia, L o s A ngeles, 1958). in d icated a s im p o rta n t. Few w rite r s have d ea lt a t a ll with the co n cre te a c tio n s of sin c e re o r in sin c e re s p e a k e rs . None of the lite ra tu re r e v ealed an ex ten siv e tre a tm e n t of such b e h a v io r. The p re s e n t study w as d esig n ed to ex p lo re th is specific a re a . C H A PTER H SUBJECTS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES The p rin c ip a l r e s e a r c h m ethod used in th is study w as the d e s c rip tiv e c a se study. T he se lec tio n of m a te r ia ls f o r th is study w as m ade by e x p e rim e n ta l te ch n iq u es, how ever. F ilm e d sp e ech e s u sed fo r the study w ere m ade by H ild re th ,1 who em ployed film ed sp e ech e s in an e x p e rim e n ta l study of audience ab ility to judge a sp e a k e r’s sin c e rity and h is in s in c e rity . The c e n tra l p ro b lem of the p re s e n t study w as to d e te rm in e the c h a r a c te r is tic s of sin c e re and in sin c e re sp e a k e rs u sed in the ex p e rim e n t and the c h a r a c te r is tic s w hich au d ien ces in te rp re te d a s being sin c e rity and in s in c e rity . In th is c h a p te r the d esig n of the study is p re se n te d in two w ays: (1) a b rie f d e s c rip tio n of the study, and (2) a d e s c rip tio n of the p ro c e d u ra l d e ta ils . The la tte r sectio n w ill include (l) the p re p a ra tio n and se le c tio n of m a te r ia ls , (2) d e s c rip tio n of tech n iq u es of o b se rv a tio n , and (3) d e s c rip tio n of o b se rv a tio n a l c r ite r ia . 1 R ich ard A. H ild re th , “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of A u d ien ces’ A bility to D istin g u ish B etw een S incere and In sin c e re S p eech es” (unpub lish ed D o cto ral d is s e rta tio n , U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , Dos A n g eles, 1953). 28 29 Review of R e s e a rc h P ro c e d u re 2 H ild reth film ed both the s in c e re and in sin c e re sp e ech es of tw en ty -fo u r ex p erien ced public s p e a k e rs a t the U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia and a rra n g e d the fo rty -e ig h t sp e ech e s on fo u r r e e ls . R e e ls I and II w ere shown to the sam e audience s, w hile R eels III and IV w ere shown to o th e r au d ien ces. A u d ien ces ra te d each sp eech on the b a s is of th e ir judgm ent of the s p e a k e r’s s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity o r th e ir in a b il- 3 ity to m ake a judgm ent. H ild reth found th a t w ithin the fra m e w o rk of h is e x p e rim e n t when a sp e a k e r took two opposing sta n d s on a topic au d ien ces w ere unable to d istin g u ish betw een sin c e re and in sin c e re sp e ech e s. In sp ectio n of d ata, how ev er, re v e a le d th a t th e re w as a wide d iv erg en ce of audience opinion of the s in c e rity of som e s p e a k e rs , but th at of o th e r sp e a k e rs the au d ien ces w ere in v ary in g d e g re e s of a g re e m e n t. In the f i r s t p a rt of th is study d etailed a n a ly s is of each of the fo rty -e ig h t sp e e ch e s w as m ade in o rd e r to d eterm in e what d iffe re n c e s if any could be found betw een the sin c e re and in sin c e re sp e ech e s. A n a ly sis of the sp eech es included c o n sid e ra tio n of (1) p h y sic al a p p e a r ance and b eh av io r, (2) v o cal d e liv e ry , (3) content, and (4) language. In the la tte r p a rt of th is study c o m p a riso n s w ere m ade am ong s p e a k e rs to d eterm in e w hat c h a ra c te ris tic s w ere held in com m on by s p e a k e rs 2Ib id ., p. 33. 3Ib id ., p. 71. 30 judged s in c e re , and what c h a ra c te ris tic s w ere held in com m on by sp e a k e rs judged in s in c e re , and a n a ly sis w as m ade of the c o m p a riso n s. T hs P re p a ra tio n and S election of M a te ria ls S p e a k e rs. — T h irty -o n e ex p erien ced m ale sp e a k e rs w ere 4 selected and d e sc rib e d by H ild reth fo r h is e x p e rim e n t. A ll sp e a k e rs had had e x p e rie n ce in talk in g befo re lay au d ien ces, and a ll w ere in attendance a t e ith e r the U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia o r G eorge P ep p e rd in e C o lleg e. O nly m a le sp e a k e rs w ere u sed in o rd e r to e lim i nate the sex v a ria b le . A ges of the s p e a k e rs ran g ed fro m tw enty to fifty -fiv e , and th e ir y e a rs of speaking ex p e rien ce fro m th re e to tw enty. T opic ju d g e s. — A lis t of tw elve to p ic s w as subm itted to each of the s p e a k e rs . The lis t w as intended to fu rn ish a topic of v ita l in te r e s t to each p a rtic ip a n t. E ach topic w as sta ted in such a way a s to m ake p o ssib le w idely d iv e rg en t opinions with re fe re n c e to it. In the se lec tio n of the to p ic s, an o rig in a l lis t of tw en ty -se v en to p ic s w as subm itted to tw en ty -six ju d g es fo r th e ir p re fe re n tia l ra tin g s . T hese ju d g es w ere m e m b e rs of the speech facu lty and g rad u ate s tu d en ts in speech at the U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia . A ll of the ju d g es had ex p erien ce in speech teaching and c o n test judging. F ilm ju d g e s .— A udiences chosen to judge the sp e a k e rs w ere 4Ib id ., pp. 18ff. 31 ad u lt lay au d ien ces. No c la ssro o m au d ien ces w ere u sed . The au d ien ces u sed w ere In attendance a t m eetin g s of e sta b lish e d o rg an iz atio n s. E ach o rg an izatio n m e t the follow ing c r ite ria : (1) the m e m b ersh ip w as e n gaged in com m unity a c tiv itie s , and (2) the o rg an izatio n had a c tiv itie s calling fo r c r itic a l ev alu atio n of c u rre n t ev e n ts by m e m b e rs. O rg a n i zatio n s re p re se n te d Included: one O p tim ist club, fo u r T o a s tm a s te r and T o a s tm is tre 8 s clu b s, one B u sin e ss and P ro fe s s io n a l W omen’s club, one A m eric an A sso ciatio n of U n iv ersity Women’s C ouncil, one e le m e n ta ry te a c h e r’s group, one U n iv ersity S e c re ta rie s ’ group. R ating s c a le s . — T h re e ratin g sc a le s w ere developed to be u sed by au d ien ces in th e ir ev alu atio n s. One scale sought to m e a su re audience a ttitu d e s tow ard the topic and w as a s follow s: A ttitude tow ard the Topic 1 2 3 4 5 Strongly M od erately U ndecided M oderately Strongly opposed opposed in fav o r in fa v o r One scale sought to m e a su re audience evalu atio n of the s p e a k e r’s ’’e ffe c tiv e n e ss” and w as a s follow s: R ating of E ffe c tiv e n ess 1 2 3 4 5 A lm ost no Below A verage Above A lm ost effectiv e- av erag e effectiv e- av erag e p e rfe c t n e s s effectiv e- n e s s effectiv e- e ffe c tiv e n e s s n e s s n e s s 32 A th ird sc a le w as developed to in d icate ev alu atio n s of s in c e r ity . A trich o to m o u s scale w as u sed b ecau se the m a jo r p ro b lem w as to d is c o v e r w h eth er o r not ju d g es could s e le c t the sin c e re fro m the in sin c e re s p e a k e rs . An “ U ndecided” c a te g o ry w as included f o r the b en e fit of th o se who, im m ed iately upon h e a rin g the sp e ak e r, could not m ake a d ec isio n . The scale w as a s follow s: R ating of S in cerity : ( ) S peaker w as sin c e re ( ) S peaker w as not sin c e re ( ) 1 am undecided The use of a trich o to m o u s scale of ev alu atio n im p lied in the e x p e rim e n ta l d esig n an assu m p tio n of m u tu ally ex clu siv e c a te g o rie s . 5 H ild reth fe lt th at s in c e rity , a s co n sid ered by h is ex p e rim en t, w as adaptable to such a ra tin g . D eg ree s of the im p re s sio n of s in c e rity w ere c o n sid ered to fa ll w ithin the sc ale ca teg o ry of “ s in c e r e .” The sam e w as held to be tru e fo r the ra tin g s of “ in s in c e re ” and “ u n d e c id e d .” F ilm in g the s p e a k e rs . — S peeches of a ll th irty -o n e sp e a k e rs w ere film ed in one aftern o o n by the D ep artm en t of C inem a of the U n iv ersity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia . T o in su re clo se ad h era n ce to sch ed u les and e x p e rim e n ta l design, five d o c to ra l can d id ates at the 5Ib id ., p. 26. U n iv e rsity of Southern C a lifo rn ia w ere u sed a s m o n ito rs. Id en tificatio n of s p e a k e rs throughout the ex p e rim e n t w as done by placing a 4 x 6 inch c a rd b e a rin g a five in ch n u m e ra l on the s p e a k e r's stand d u rin g ea ch sp eech . E ach sp e a k e r w as a ssig n ed a n u m b e r fo r h is sin c e re sp eech . N u m b ers u sed in the sin c e re sp e e ch e s ran g ed fro m one to th irty -o n e . In o r d e r to se p a ra te the s in c e re fro m the in sin c e re sp e e c h e s, the s p e a k e r's n u m b er fo r the s in c e re sp eech w as in c re a s e d by fifty . T h u s sp e a k e r 1 b ecam e sp e a k e r 51 fo r h is in s in c e re sp eech , e tc . E ach sp e a k e r w as notified in advance to re p o rt to Room 110 of the U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia 's C in em a B uilding. T h is ro o m w as u se d a s the P re p a ra tio n R oom fo r the ex p e rim e n t. A M onitor m e t the s p e a k e r a t the d o o r, a ssig n e d him an E x p e rim e n ta l n u m b er, and gave him in s tru c tio n s fo r the f i r s t sp eech (see A ppendix A ). The in s tru c tio n s w ere on one sh e et. The sh e e t of in s tru c tio n s lis te d the speech to p ic s, provided f o r the choice of a topic if none of th o se lis te d w ere su itab le , d ire c te d th a t the sp e ech e s w ere to be two m in u te s in length and p e rs u a s iv e in n a tu re , and d ire c te d th a t each speech should begin with the sen ten ce “ I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t . . . " It w as fe lt by the e x p e rim e n te r th a t u n ifo rm ity of the opening sen ten ce would m o st lik ely sta b iliz e the sp e ech e s and p rev en t lo s s of tim e in m aking c le a r the p u rp o se and stand of the sp e a k e r w hich m ight o th e rw ise o c c u r in a sh o rt sp e ech . Two la rg e co n feren ce ta b le s w ere u sed fo r the 34 p re p a ra tio n of the s p e e c h e s — one tab le fo r th o se p re p a rin g sin c e re sp e ec h e s, and one tab le fo r th o se p re p a rin g in s in c e re sp e e c h e s. When M o n ito r II, who su p e rv ise d the tim e sch ed u le, w as re a d y fo r a s p e a k e r he would c a ll h is E x p e rim e n ta l n u m b e r, and would take the s p e a k e r to R oom 108 w here the a c tu a l film in g w as done. Upon e n te rin g Room 108 the sp e a k e r w as se a te d by M onitor III, and he w as p e rm itte d to lis te n to the p reced in g sp e a k e r so th at he m ight becom e acq u ain ted w ith the speaking situ atio n . When it w as tim e to speak. M onitor III conducted the sp e a k e r to the s p e a k e r’s stand and placed the c a rd b e a rin g the s p e a k e r’s E x p e rim e n ta l N u m b er on the stan d . F ig u re 1 p re s e n ts the p h y sical set-u p u sed in the film in g of the s p e a k e rs . The p o sitio n of the Single- tra c k A urikon c a m e ra w ith c o -o rd in a te d sound eq u ip m en t, sp e a k e r, tim e k e e p e r, and audience w ere held co n stan t fo r a ll s p e a k e rs . The tim e k e e p e r. M o n ito r IV, in s tru c te d the sp e a k e r about tim e sig n a ls and then sig n aled both sp e a k e r and c a m e ra m e n to begin. # A sign, p rin ted in la rg e c a p ita l le tte r s , w as attach ed to the s p e a k e r’s stand w ithin e a sy view of the s p e a k e r w arning him to begin h is speech w ith th e p h ra s e , “ I b eliev e m o st sin c e re ly , th a t [state opinion of the su b ject] b ecau se . . .” A fte r co m p letin g h is sp eech the sp e a k e r m oved to the r e a r of Room 108 w here M onitor V guided h im b ack to Room 110 w hich w as the P re p a ra tio n R oom . 35 JbO F ig . 1 .— D iag ram of the p la c e m e n t of c a m e ra , sp e a k e r, m icro p h o n e, tim e k e e p e r, and audience fo r film in g of sp e a k e rs. Code: A = Speakers* Stand, M icrophone C » T im e k e e p e r B * C a m e ra D - C u rta in B ackdrop 30 In the P re p a ra tio n R oom , M onitor VI re c e iv e d the sp e a k e r and p rese n ted him with the in stru c tio n s fo r the second sp eech . (See A ppendix B .) T h ese in stru c tio n s d ire c te d the sp e a k e r to p re p a re a speech on the ex act opposite side fro m th at on w hich he had ju s t spoken, th a t is , on the side in w hich he did not b eliev e. The in stru c tio n s also d ire c te d him to begin h is speech w ith the sam e p h ra s e , “ I b eliev e m o st sin c e re ly th a t . . . '' S p eak ers w ere asked to m ake th is sta tem en t fo r p u rp o se s of the ex p erim en t even though it w as not tru e . They w ere also asked not to re v e a l by any co n scio u s o r d ire c t sta tem en t th at they did not believe in the p ro p o sal w hich they would advocate. A fte r one h a lf-h o u r of p re p a ra tio n the sp e ak e r w as again co n ducted through the sam e p ro c e s s a s d e s c rib e d p rev io u sly , ex cep t th at he d e liv e re d h is in sin c e re speech and h is e x p e rim e n ta l n u m b er w as in c re a se d by fifty and placed on the s p e a k e r's stand fo r id en tificatio n . In allo tin g only th irty m in u tes fo r p re p a ra tio n of each speech, the e x p e rim e n te r assu m ed th a t a ll the s p e a k e rs , who w ere ex p e rien ce d in the speech field and in speech com petition, w ere ex p e rien ced in p r e p arin g sp e ech e s on sh o rt n o tic e. The p re p a ra tio n tim e given w as analogous to the ex tem p o ran eo u s speaking situ atio n in speech c o n te sts. In lim itin g the speech to a tw o-m inute length, the e x p e rim e n te r w as governed by the expediency of the e x p e rim e n ta l d esig n . In o rd e r to ed it sp eech es into an h o u r's p ro g ra m fo r p re se n ta tio n to lay g ro u p s, two m in u tes had to be the lim it fo r each sp eech if tw en ty -fo u r sp eech es 37 w ere to be inclu d ed . It w as co n sid ered th at a m inim um of tw en ty -fo u r s p e a k e rs o r fo rty -e ig h t sp e e c h e s w as d e s ira b le fo r s ta tis tic a l com pu ta tio n s . E d itin g and a sse m b ly of com pleted f ilm s . — The film w as developed and p rin ted by the U n iv ersity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia C in em a D ep artm en t and re tu rn e d to the e x p e rim e n te r fo r ed itin g . It w as d isc o v e re d th a t the in tro d u c to ry p h ra se sta tin g the s p e a k e r’s b elief w as not audible on s e v e ra l of the sp e ec h e s. One speech w as cut in the m iddle when the c a m e ra ra n out of film d u rin g the o r ig i n a l photographing. T h re e s p e a k e rs ra n o v ertim e by a lm o st a half m inute and one sp e a k e r u sed only one m inute fo r h is in s in c e re sp eech . The five s p e a k e rs m entioned above w ere elim in a ted fro m the fin al r e e ls . The content of one o th e r speech w as not c o n sid e re d a p p ro p ria te fo r p re se n ta tio n to a fem ale audience and w as e lim in a te d . Six sp e a k e rs w ere th u s elim in a te d fro m the o rig in a l to ta l of th irty -o n e , leav in g a u sab le to ta l of tw enty-five s p e a k e rs o r fifty sp e ec h e s. It w as decided to use fo u r r e e ls of tw elve sp eech es each fo r the re m a in d e r of the e x p e rim e n t. T h is p e rm itte d the show ing of two r e e ls , containing both the sin c e re and in s in c e re sp eech es by tw elve s p e a k e rs , fo r a one h our p ro g ra m . S eparate s ta tis tic a l p ro c e d u re s could be applied to each group of two re e ls . The e x p e rim e n te r decided upon the in clu sio n of both sp e ech e s 38 by each sp e a k e r in the r e e ls to be shown to g e th e r b ecau se it w as fe lt th a t au d ien ces would be able to m ake m o re d ire c t c o m p a riso n s. L im itin g the n u m b er of s p e a k e rs to tw en ty -fo u r m ade n e c e s s a r y the e lim in a tio n of one of the tw en ty -fiv e s a tis fa c to ry s p e a k e rs . T he E x p e rim e n ta l n u m b er of a ll the tw enty-five s p e a k e rs w ere placed in a h a t and one n u m b er w as draw n by lot. T hat sp e a k e r w as a lso e lim in a te d . Tw elve s p e a k e rs w ere se le c te d fro m the rem a in in g tw enty- fo u r by lo t. T h is gave a d iv isio n of sp e a k e rs to be fitte d into the two g ro u p s of r e e ls . The a c tu a l o r d e r of the s p e a k e rs w ithin the r e e ls w as e s ta b lish e d by co n sid erin g both topic and stand on the topic tak en by the sp e a k e r. To avoid “ H alo” e ffect at le a s t th re e to p ic s w ere placed betw een re p e a te d su b je c ts. Six sin c e re and six in s in c e re sp e ech e s w ere included in each r e e l w ith th e ir o rd e r depending upon the to p ic . Two m in u te s w as se t as the lim it of any sp eech , and sp e e ch e s running slig h tly o v e r the tim e lim it w ere cut at the end of the sentence ending n e a re s t the two m inute lim it. In such c a s e s c a re w as tak en to m ake su re th at the se n se of the sen ten ce and the speech w as m ain ta in ed in s o fa r a s p o ssib le . When the film s of each speech w ere sp liced to g e th e r, a length of c le a r film le a d e r, eq u iv alen t to fifteen seconds of running tim e , w as in s e rte d im m ed ia tely follow ing each sp eech . T h is allow ed fo r the tim e needed by the audience ju d g e s fo r m a rk in g of b a llo ts w ithout tu rn in g off 30 the p ro je c to r. A length of b lack le a d e r w as spliced in ju s t b efo re the beginning of ea ch sp eech a s a sig n al to tu rn off house lig h ts and p re p a re fo r the follow ing sp eech . S ecuring audience ju d g m e n ts. — A s d e s c rib e d above, se rv ic e o rg a n iz a tio n s in the L o s A n g eles a r e a c o -o p e ra te d in the study by se rv in g a s e v a lu a to rs of the s p e a k e rs . Upon a r r iv a l a t the m eetin g a t w hich the film s w ere scheduled to be shown, o rg an iz atio n m e m b e rs w ere handed audience attitu d e b a llo ts . T h ese b a llo ts w ere d esigned to d e te rm in e audience a ttitu d e s on the su b je c ts of the s p e a k e rs b efo re the audience listen e d to the sp e ec h e s. The in s tru c tio n s w ere re a d aloud to the audience and follow ing the read in g the audience m a rk e d th e ir b a llo ts. Upon com pletion of the audience attitu d e b a llo ts the b lan k s w ere co llec te d and the in s tru c tio n s and b o o k lets f o r ra tin g the s p e a k e rs w ere d is trib u te d (see A ppendix C ). The in s tru c tio n s w ere re a d fo r the au d ien ce. Q u estio n s of c la rific a tio n w ere p e rm itte d fro m the flo o r and an sw e re d . When a ll q u estio n s w ere an sw ered the p ro je c to rs w ere s ta rte d and both r e e ls w ere ru n th ro u g h with the o n e-m in u te r e e l change being the only b re a k . At the co n clu sio n of the show ing the au d i ence b a llo ts w ere c o llec ted . E v alu atio n s by ju d g es on the v a rio u s ra tin g s c a le s w ere t r a n s f e r re d fro m b a llo ts to IBM a n sw e r s h e e ts , N um ber 309, fo r tab u latio n 40 In the G rap h ic Item C ount M achine. P re s e n ta tio n of e x p e rim e n ta l d a ta . — While m any of the d ata co llec ted by H ild reth in h is e x p e rim e n t w ere not d ire c tly ap p licab le to the p re s e n t study, c e rta in p o rtio n s w ere c o n sid ered so im p o rta n t to the u n d erstan d in g of the p re s e n t p ro c e d u re s a s to w a rra n t in clu sio n . g H ild reth p re se n te d in tab u lated fo rm the fre q u e n c ie s and p ro p o rtio n s of c o r r e c t and in c o rre c t id en tificatio n s and t- r a tio s fo r sig n ifican ce of d e p a rtu re fro m eq u ality of id en tificatio n s on sin c e re and in sin c e re sp e ech es by both m a le and fem ale ju d g es fo r R e els I and H, and fo r R e e ls HI and IV. Since th e se ta b le s w ere u sed d ire c tly in c la s s ific a tio n of sp e a k e rs in th is study, they w ere included in A ppendix D. E v alu atio n of e x p e rim e n ta l te c h n iq u e s. — C e rta in ev a lu atio n s of the tech n iq u es and d e sig n s of H ild re th ’s e x p e rim e n t had to be m ade in view of its e s s e n tia l connection to the p re s e n t study. 7 F ir s t, H ild reth defined s in c e rity o p eratio n ally a s follow s: When an individual is given a lis t of c o n tro v e rs ia l to p ic s, and fre e ly ch o o ses the one in which he “ b e lie v e s m o st s in c e re ly ,” h is re su ltin g speech on th a t topic m ay be d e s c rib e d a s s in c e re . V ic e -v e rs a , when th at sam e in d iv id u al is re q u ire d to defend the opposite of h is chosen sid e, h is re su ltin g speech m ay be d e s c rib e d a s in s in c e re . The above d efin itio n , w hile not being fo rm a lly p re se n te d to the e x p e rim e n ta l s p e a k e rs, n e v e rth e le s s by v irtu e of the e x p e rim e n ta l ®Ibid., pp. 38, 54. 7Ib id ., p. 5. 41 d esig n , s tru c tu re d th e ir choice and se rv e d s a tis fa c to rily a s f a r a s the s p e a k e rs w ere co n cern ed . H ow ever, the definition w as not given to the audience ju d g es, and hence did not s tru c tu re th e ir thinking in any way. It w as p o ssib le th e re fo re th at audience ev alu atio n m ay have been in fluenced co n scio u sly o r u n co n scio u sly by o th e r m a n ife sta tio n s of so- c a lle d “ s in c e r ity ,” such a s a sin c e re b elief which m o tiv a te s the sp e a k e r to speak o r gives him the d e s ire to speak, o r a sin c e re d e s ire not to speak, even though in te lle c tu a lly the sp e a k e r b e lie v e s h is to p ic. g T h o n ssen and B a ird e x p re s se d th is concept a s the “ provoking cause fo r d isc u ssio n ” and the s p e a k e r’s “ n a tu ra l p ro m p tin g s to e x p re s s what is m o st co n g ru en t with h is th o u g h ts.” In h is d isc u ssio n of the tric h o to - g m o u s scale fo r the ra tin g of s in c e rity , H ild reth assu m ed th at sin c e rity and in s in c e rity u n d er the d esig n of the ex p e rim e n t would be m utually ex clu siv e c a te g o rie s , and the d e g re e s of im p re s s io n of s in c e rity w ere c o n sid e re d to fa ll w ithin the sc ale c a teg o ry of “ s in c e r e .” No p ro v isio n w as m ad e, how ev er, fo r the audience to d istin g u ish betw een ' ‘sin c e rity of b e lie f” and “ sin c e rity in the d e s ire to sp e a k .” T h is d is tin c tio n w as found to be a p o ssib le c o n sid e ra tio n in the a n a ly sis of sp e a k e r b e h a v io r in the light of audience ju d g m en ts. D L e s te r T h o n ssen and A . C ra ig B a ird , Speech C ritic is m (New Y ork: The Ronald P r e s s , 1948), p. 426. g H ild reth , op. c i t., p. 26. 42 Second, tim e lim its fo r the sp e ec h e s and tim e lim its fo r the p re p a ra tio n of the sp eech es w ere a r b itr a r y on the b a s is of expediency. L im itatio n of sp e ech e s to a tw o-m inute length w as done to m ake p o s s - ible the show ing of the film s to au d ien ces in a r e a lis tic situ atio n and at the sam e tim e to include su fficien t su b je c ts to m ake the r e s u lts r e l i ab le. The th irty -m in u te lim it on p re p a ra tio n w as d ecided upon to fa c ilita te the shooting sch ed u le. In both c a s e s , h o w ev er, the d e c isio n s could be defended a s being s im ila r to r e a l speaking situ a tio n s w ith w hich the sp e a k e rs w ere fa m ilia r. Since the p re s e n t study w as b ased on the r e s u lts of H ild re th ’s e x p e rim e n ta l desig n , its v alid ity can be only c o n sid e re d in te r m s of the tw o -m in u te speech and the h a lf-h o u r p re p a ra tio n tim e lim ita tio n . T h ird , the tech n iq u es and p ro c e d u re s f o r film in g the s p e a k e rs provided th a t the sin c e re speech should alw ays be film ed f ir s t. T h is re s u lte d in the sp e a k e r being subjected to the s tr e s s of a new and stran g e situ atio n d u rin g the sin c e re sp eech , but being ex p e rien ce d in th a t situ atio n du rin g h is in sin c e re speech. A s a re s u lt it could have been p o ssib le fo r a sp e a k e r to be m o re poised and effectiv e in h is second speech than in h is f i r s t sp eech , d esp ite the fa c t th at he w as supposedly in s in c e re . H ow ever, it seem ed of u tm o st im p o rta n ce th a t when a sp e a k e r chose a topic and side fo r h is f ir s t sp eech , he should have no w arning th at he would be asked to give a second sp eech . T h is and o th e r d a n g e rs seem ed a lm o st unavoidable if h alf the s p e a k e rs had 43 b een in som e fash io n re q u e ste d to give an in s in c e re sp eech f ir s t. T he re f o r e , the sam e o rd e r w as u sed in a ll c a s e s on the ground th a t le s s b ia s would be in tro d u ced by th is p ro ced u re than by attem p tin g to ro ta te the speaking o rd e r. F o u rth , both sp eech e s by a sp e a k e r w ere included in the re e ls show n to au d ien ce s. A lthough the sp e ech e s w ere se p a ra te d fro m ea ch o th e r as w idely as p o ssib le , a n a ly sis of sp e ech e s and audience r e sponse pointed to the p o ssib ility of som e “ h a lo ” effect as a co n trib u tin g fa c to r to audience ju d g m en ts. W hile the position of speech to p ics sought to m in im ize the “ h alo ” effect of sp eech to p ic s, the in clu sio n of both sp e ech e s by s p e a k e rs tended to produce “ h alo ” effect of s p e a k e rs . C onceivably th is could have led to p o ssib le re s tr ic tiv e ev alu atio n s on the p a rt of the audience ju d g es. F o r ex am p le, if a sp e a k e r w ere ra te d s in c e re by an individual judge the f ir s t tim e he w as shown to the a u d i en ce, th is sam e judge would be m o re lik ely to ra te him in sin c e re on his second sp eech , d esp ite any p o ssib le o v e rt actio n s on the p a rt of the sp e a k e r. F ifth , the cutting of co n clu sio n s fro m som e of the sp e ech e s w hich in length w ent o v e r the tw o -m in u te tim e lim it, w hile elim in a tin g one v a ria b le , in tro d u ced a n o th e r v a ria b le in the rem o v a l of the c o m p letely p re p a re d s tru c tu re of the sp eech o r the “ g e s ta lt” effect p r e sen ted by the sp e a k e r. Since audience im p re s s io n m ay often be influenced by the m ood o r m a n n e r of the fin a l sta te m e n ts of a sp eech , 44 the deletion of th e se fin al se n ten c es and thoughts m ay have m ade a d ifferen ce in audience evaluation. T h is becam e a lim itin g fa c to r in the p re se n t study when a n a ly sis w as attem pted of the d e liv ery and content of speech co n clu sio n s. Since the p re se n t study w as b ased d ire c tly on the d e sc rip tio n and a n a ly sis of the sp e a k e rs film ed , the re s u lts of th is study m u st be view ed w ithin the s tru c tu re s and lim ita tio n s of the e x p e rim en ta l d e sign d e sc rib e d on the preced in g pages. The follow ing section of th is c h a p te r w ill d e sc rib e the tech n iq u es, c r ite r ia , and m ethods used in the d e sc rip tio n and evaluation of the sp eech es. T echniques of O b serv atio n O b serv atio n and a n a ly sis of the fo rty -e ig h t sp eech es w as done by the au th o r alone. The d ecisio n to use the individual evaluation of one p e rso n a s the b a s is of the study w as ju stified by the follow ing c i r cu m stan c es. F ir s t, the au th o r w as an ex p erien ced speech ev a lu ato r, having taught public speaking fo r m o re than ten y e a rs . Second, the o b se rv a tio n s which w ere dem anded w ere not judgm ents of sin c e rity o r effectiv en e ss, but r a th e r o b se rv a tio n s of b eh av io r which could be m ade objectively by a tra in e d o b s e rv e r. S im ilar o b se rv a tio n s of o v e rt b eh a v io r had been m ade by M cEvoy.*^ T h ird , the study w as by its ^ J . E dw ard M cEvoy, “ An E x p erim en tal Study of the F a c to rs of E ye C ontact in F ilm e d S p eech es” (unpublished D o cto ral d iss e rta tio n . U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia, L o s A ngeles, 1953), p. 35. 49 n a tu re d e s c rip tiv e , p resu p p o sin g such individual o b se rv a tio n . F o u rth , the d esig n of the p ro b lem and the scope of the d e sc rip tio n p reclu d ed the p o ssib ility of having a g r e a te r n u m b e r of o b s e rv e rs view and d e sc rib e a ll fo rty -e ig h t sp e ech e s. In o b se rv in g and d e sc rib in g the sp e ech e s and s p e a k e rs , it w as decided to u se a r e a s of tra d itio n a l rh e to ric a l in v e stig a tio n w hich could be applied to the c a s e s u n d er study. F o u r a r e a s w ere ch o sen fo r in v estig atio n : (1) p h y sical d e liv e ry , (2) v o cal d e liv e ry , (3) sp eech co n ten t, and (4) language. O b serv atio n al p ro c e d u re s fo r p h y sic a l and v o cal d e liv e ry . — In - o r d e r to fa c ilita te the o b je ctiv ity of the o b s e rv e r, it w as d ecid ed to m ake the in itia l view ings of the sp e ech e s a s u n s tru c tu re d a s p o ssib le . A rough fo rm , r e f e r re d to h e r e a fte r a s the F i r s t A n a ly sis Sheet, listin g a r e a s n o rm a lly used in o b serv in g p h y sical and v o cal d e liv e ry w as d e v ise d . (See A ppendix E .) A re a s c o n sid ered u n d er p h y sical d e liv e ry included p o stu re , g ro s s m ov em en t, fa c ia l e x p re s s io n , re fle c tio n of m ood, eye co n tact, hand and a rm g e s tu re s , and u n c la ssifie d b e h a v io rs. A re a s co n sid e re d u n d er v o cal d e liv e ry included fo rc e , q u ality of v o ice, fluency, a rtic u la tio n , v o cal v a rie ty , w arm th and d ire c tn e s s , e n th u s i a s m , and u n c la ssifie d b e h a v io rs. T h is fo rm w as u sed to re c o rd the f i r s t d e s c rip tio n s of b e h a v io rs in a g ro s s m a n n e r. Since the e x p e ri m e n ta l n u m b e r of each sp e a k e r w as v isib le on the film , the o b s e rv e r 4 6 knew fro m th e beginning w hich s p e a k e rs w ere sin c e re and w hich s p e a k e rs w ere in s in c e re . H ow ever, d u rin g th is f i r s t stag e of o b s e rv a tio n , th e o b s e rv e r did n o t c o n sid e r audience ev alu atio n s of s in c e rity of the sp e a k e r. The technique of the f i r s t view ings w as to view ea ch sp e a k e r two o r th re e tim e s w hile seeking to ev alu ate both p h y sic al and v o cal d e liv e ry . N ext the fo u r r e e ls of film w ere ru n through the p ro je c to r w ithout th e audio, providing the o b s e rv e r w ith the p h y sical ac tiv ity of the s p e a k e rs but w ithout the v o cal. S ubsequently, the film s w ere again ru n through the p ro je c to r w ith the audio on but with the p ic tu re blocked, p ro v id in g the o b s e rv e r w ith only the v o ca l a c tiv ity of the sp e a k e rs. The fin a l ru n th ro u g h of the film s d u rin g th is f i r s t phase included both p ic tu re and sound fo r a fin a l view ing. The d e s c rip tio n s re c o rd e d on th is f ir s t phase w ere co n sid ered to be u n s tru c tu re d in th a t the ite m s lis te d w ere a r e a s of o b se rv a tio n , but not sp ecific p re -p h ra s e d d e s c rip tio n s to be checked. On the b a s is of th e se p re lim in a ry o b se rv a tio n s, a m o re s tru c tu re d check lis t fo rm w as d ev ised fo r p u rp o se s of re c o rd in g o b se rv a tio n s fo r p u rp o se s of c o m p a riso n . The fo rm w as called the Second C heck L is t A n a ly sis Sheet (see A ppendix F ). A ll re s p o n s e s e n te re d on the in itia l fo rm w ere ex am in ed and p ro p e r ite m s w ere included in the second check lis t to re c o rd such o b se rv a tio n s. In addition, w idely used and accep ted te x ts in th e field of public speaking w ere exam ined to d e term in e p o ssib le 4 7 1 ite m s w hich should be included in the Second C heck L is t A n a ly sis Sheet, but w hich m ig h t have b een o m itted in th e f i r s t d ra ft. A u th o rs who w ere found to su g g est check lis t fo rm s f o r speech o b se rv a tio n and 11 12 13 a n a ly s is included D ick en s, S oper, and C ro m w e ll and M onroe. M any ite m s suggested by th e se a u th o rs w ere a lso inclu d ed by the ob s e r v e r in the Second C heck L is t A n a ly sis Sheet. W ith the second fo rm b e fo re h im , the o b s e rv e r next re p e a te d the s e r ie s of view ing and liste n in g . A co m p lete fo rm w as checked fo r ea ch sp eech . When it w as found th a t the ite m s lis te d w ere not adequate d e s c rip tio n of b e h a v io rs o b se rv e d , p ro v isio n w as m ade to re c o rd m o re com plete d e s c rip tio n s . T he fo rm s a lso p rovided fo r g e n e ra l im p r e s sio n s and su m m a riz a tio n s of the sp eech a s a w hole. No attem p t w as m ade in the fo rm u latio n of the Second C heck L is t A n a ly sis Sheet to e s ta b lis h o r ju stify a new rh e to ric a l ev alu atio n d ev ice. R a th e r the fo rm w as view ed only a s a convenient m e a n s of re p o rtin g sp e c ific s of o b se rv a tio n . With the d e s c rip tio n s of the sp e e ch e s re c o rd e d a s co m p letely a s p o ssib le on the Second C heck L is t A n a ly sis Sheet, the o b s e rv e r then * ^M ilton D ick en s, Speech, D ynam ic C o m m u n icatio n , pp. 411- 423. 12 P a u l L . S oper, B a sic P u b lic Speaking (New Y ork: O xford U n iv ersity P r e s s , 1956), p. 286. 13 H arv ey C ro m w ell and A lan H . M onroe, W orking fo r M ore E ffectiv e Speech (New Y ork: Scott, F o re s m a n and C om pany, 1955), p. 95. 4 8 sought to re c o rd h is o b se rv a tio n s on a th ird fo rm which would fu rn ish p a ra lle l d e s c rip tio n s of each sp e a k e r’s sin c e re and in sin c e re speech fo r p u rp o se s of d ire c t co m p ariso n . F o r th is purpose a th ird fo rm w as d ev ised to p e rm it the reco rd in g sid e -b y -sid e of d e sc rip tiv e ite m s found in the Second C heck L is t A n aly sis Sheet fo r sin c e re and in sin c e re sp eech es. T h is fo rm w as ca lle d the C o m p ariso n Sheet of S incere and In sin c e re S peeches (see A ppendix Q). T h is m ade p o ssib le d ire c t co m p a riso n by in sp ectio n . A s a fin a l check on the ac c u ra c y of the d e s c rip tio n s, the follow ing p ro c e d u re s w ere u sed. F ir s t, the C o m p ariso n Sheet w as filled out com pletely a s p o ssib le by u sin g in fo rm atio n re c o rd e d in the Second C heck lis t A n aly sis S heets fo r both sin c e re and in sin c e re sp eech es. Second, two p ro je c to rs w ere set up so th at both sp e ech e s by each sp e ak er could be view ed in im m ed iate su c cessio n w ithout having to com plete a re e l o r w ithout having to change re e ls . T h is device w as m an d ato ry b ecau se only one speech by each sp e ak er w as on one re e l. F o r ex am p le, if a sp e a k e r’s sin c e re speech w as included on R eel No. 1, h is in sin c e re speech w as included on R eel No. 11. S p eak e rs included on R e els 111 and IV w ere lik ew ise p a ire d . It w as fe lt by the o b s e rv e r, th at d esp ite d etailed ob se rv a tio n s re c o rd e d , th e re w as a need to view the sin c e re and in sin c e re sp eech es in su c cessio n fo r p u rp o ses of d ire c t co m p ariso n . T h e re fo re , the sp e a k e rs w ere view ed and o b se rv a tio n s w ere re c o rd e d , p a rtic u la rly a s they involved d iffe re n c e s o r s im ila ritie s betw een the two sp eech es. 4 9 If th e o b s e rv e r w as In doubt he would im m ed ia tely rew ind the film and view the two sp e ec h e s a second tim e . A fte r th e fin a l view ing of the sp e ec h e s in such a m a n n e r, the o b s e rv e r re c o rd e d h is f i r s t d efin ite g e n e ra lis a tio n s re la tiv e to d iffe r e n c e s b etw een the sin c e re and in s in c e re sp e e ch e s. T hen fro m the d e s c rip tio n s re c o rd e d on the Second C heck L is t A n a ly sis Sheet and the C o m p ariso n Sheet, the o b s e rv e r w rote d e s c rip tio n s of the p h y sic al and v o cal a s p e c ts of each sp eech . An ex am p le of such a d e s c rip tio n is included in A ppendix J . He then tab u lated the d e s c rip tio n s of each sp eech a s is found in the Raw D ata (See A ppendix L). O b se rv a tio n p ro c e d u re s fo r speech co n ten t. — T he f i r s t step in o b se rv in g the content of the fo rty -e ig h t sp e e c h e s film ed w as to s e c u re m a n u s c rip ts of the sp e e c h e s. Since the d esig n of the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t did not re s u lt in su b m issio n of w ritte n m a n u s c rip ts by the s p e a k e rs , it w as n e c e s s a ry to tra n s c rib e the sp e ech e s fro m the sound tra c k of the film . T h is w as done by re c o rd in g the sound tra c k of the sp e ech e s on m ag n etic tape to fa c ilita te co n tro l of the playback, and then tra n s c rib in g the sp e ech es fro m tap e to m a n u s c rip t. M a n u sc rip ts of a ll the sp e ech e s u sed in th is study w ere included in A ppendix K. The tra n s c rip tio n of the sp eech m a n u s c rip ts by the o b s e rv e r posed s e v e ra l p ro b le m s. F i r s t , the punctuation and sentence d iv isio n u sed in the m a n u s c rip ts w ere obviously the im p re s s io n of the o b s e rv e rs 50 on h e a rin g the sp eech . Second, th e re w ere found to be a few w o rd s w hich w ere g arb le d , and w hich could only be in te rp re te d in lig h t of th e context o r not a t a ll. T h ird , any atte m p t a t outlining the sp eech obvi o u sly had to be the im p re s s io n of the o b s e rv e r, and not the w ork of the sp e a k e r. It w as fe lt, how ev er, th a t th ese im p re s s io n s of the o b s e rv e r would be re a lis tic In view of the fa c t th at the au d ien ces had only h e a rd and not re a d the sp eech es. In the a n a ly sis of the content it w as d ecided to tr e a t the sp e e c h e s a s p e rsu a siv e sp e e ch e s, since the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t had so s tru c tu re d them by dem anding sta te m e n ts of b elief co n cern in g a c o n tro v e r s ia l is s u e . F o u r g e n e ra l a r e a s of a n a ly sis w ere esta b lish e d : o rg an iz atio n , m a te r ia ls , m otive ap p e als, and e th ic a l a p p e a ls. O nce again, it w as fe lt th a t the f i r s t a n a ly sis by the o b s e rv e r should be a s u n stru c tu re d a s p o ssib le . H ow ever, the a r e a s of a n a ly s is by th e ir v e ry n a tu re p resu p p o sed som e stru c tu rin g . In o r d e r to f a c ili tate re c o rd in g of o b se rv a tio n s, th e re fo re , a Speech C ontent A n a ly sis Sheet w as p re p a re d (see A ppendix H). Ite m s cho sen w ere in the m a in su g g ested by sta n d ard a u th o rs in the field , and w ill be d e s c rib e d in g r e a te r d e ta il in the la tte r p a rt of th is c h a p te r. In o rd e r to p rev en t co m p lete s tru c tu rin g , h o w ev er, am ple space w as m ade av ailab le to re c o rd im p re s s io n s w hich m ight not fit any of the included ite m s . The f i r s t step by the o b s e rv e r w as to outline the sp eech . T hen the a p p lic able ite m s on the Speech C ontent A n a ly sis Sheet w ere checked o r fille d . 51 O b serv atio n p ro c e d u re s fo r language and sy n tax . — O b s e rv a tio n s co n cern in g language and syntax of the sp eech es w ere m ade fro m the tra n s c rib e d m a n u s c rip ts . The o b s e rv e r again faced the sam e p ro b le m s a s w ere d e s c rib e d above u n d er p ro c e d u re s fo r o b se rv a tio n s of speech content. In d eterm in in g the b a s is of o b se rv a tio n , an attem p t w as m ade to provide fo r the d e s c rip tio n of a s m any fa c to rs a s p o ssib le of la n guage choice and sty le. In o rd e r to keep the e m p h a sis upon the a c tu a l d e ta ils of language ch o ice, it w as decided th a t a n a ly s is by m e a n s of one of s e v e ra l fo rm u la s fo r content a n a ly sis o r re a d a b ility , such a s the 14 F le s c h fo rm u la, would not be b e s t suited fo r th is study, since the e m p h a sis in th is study w as on the ex act phenom enon o b serv ed and not on m a th e m a tic a l su m m a riz a tio n s. C e rta in ite m s suggested by such te s ts w ere included, how ever. O b se rv a tio n s concern in g language and syntax w ere m ade on the b a s is of the e n tire speech and not any one o r s e v e ra l p a rts . Since the sp e e c h e s w ere sh o rt, it w as fe lt th a t a single o b se rv a tio n of the to ta l speech w as v alid in each c a s e . The o b s e rv e r sought to re c o rd ex a m p le s of language o r c o n stru c tio n s w hich would illu s tra te the a n a l y s is on the L anguage and Syntax A n aly sis Sheet (see Appendix I). Ite m s w ere chosen a s a r e a s of o b se rv a tio n which would give 14 Rudolf F le s c h , How to T e s t R ead ab ility (New Y ork: H a rp e r and B ro s ., 1951), pp. 1-10. 52 o pportunity f o r a m o re co m p lete d e s c rip tio n of the content of the sp eech es fro m an u n stru c tu re d view point. F o u r g e n e ra l a r e a s of o b se rv a tio n w ere chosen: (1) S ta tistic a l Inventory, w hich included counting of to ta l w o rd s, n u m b er of p e rso n a l w o rd s, and the n u m b er of f i r s t p e rso n p ro nouns. ( 2 ) Im a g e ry and m ean in g , w hich included o b s e r v a tio n s of am biguity o r p re c isio n , c o n c re te n e s s , c la rity , and re la tiv e o b jectiv ity of w o rd s. (3) Style, w hich included o b se rv a tio n s of econom y, o rig in a lity o r tr ite n e s s , re la tiv e sim p lic ity , fo rm a lity , fig u re s of sp eech , a llu sio n s, sentence length and sentence co m p lex ity . (4) G e n e r al, which included o b se rv a tio n s of a p p ro p ria te n e s s , v a rie ty , and re p e titio n . F u ll d e s c rip tio n of th ese ite m s w ill be included la te r in th is c h a p te r. A fte r the L anguage and Syntax A n a ly sis Sheet had been co m p leted , the in fo rm atio n contained th e re o n w as ta b u lated in the raw d ata. D e sc rip tio n of O b se rv a tio n a l C r ite r ia T he developm ent of the a r e a s of o b se rv a tio n and the c r ite r i a fo r d e c isio n s re la tiv e to o b se rv a tio n p re se n te d two m a jo r d iffic u ltie s 15 to th e o b s e rv e r. F i r s t , the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n ta l d esig n of H ild reth provided th a t only tra in e d and ex p e rie n c e d s p e a k e rs w ere ch o sen fo r film in g . It w as found, th e re fo re , th a t m any tra d itio n a l c la s s ific a tio n s of c r itic a l a n a ly s is would not provide d istin g u ish in g c h a r a c te r is tic s ^ H ild r e th , op. c it., p. 18. 53 am ong the s p e a k e rs. F o r ex am p le, if a ll the sp e a k e rs could be c la s s i fied a s having good “ voice quality** due to a lack of h o a rs e n e s s , h a rs h n e s s , n a sa lity , e tc ., then th e re would be no distin g u ish in g fe a tu re which could be exam ined f o r its effect on the audience ju d g es. It w as fe lt, th e re fo re , th at the o b s e rv e r should attem p t a s d etailed an o b serv atio n a s n e c e s s a ry to provide d istin g u ish ab le c h a ra c te ris tic s. Second, since the o b s e rv e r w as w orking only with film s , m uch of the in fo rm atio n w hich could be obtained re a d ily fro m an individual sp e ak er w as not av ailab le. F o r ex am p le, s ta tis tic s co n cern in g height, w eight, and c o lo r of the sp e a k e r could only be e stim a te d , although when p o ssib le, p ro c e d u re s w ere u sed to m in im ize su b jectiv ity . In so fa r a s p o ssib le, the o b s e rv e r sought to include in h is ob se rv a tio n a s com plete a range of d istin g u ish ab le b e h a v io rs a s p o ssib le re g a rd le s s of th e ir ap p aren t rela tio n to the im m ed iate p ro b lem con- 16 sid e re d . A s T honssen and B aird point out, “ the c ritic who would give h is r e a d e rs a p ictu re of a sp e ak er should co n sid e r even the 'non- e ssen tials.* O ften tim es th e se 'n o n -e sse n tials* fig u re p ro m in en tly in the judgm ents of m en . . .** An explanation and d e sc rip tio n of c e rta in a r e a s of o b serv atio n and the c r ite r ia u sed by the o b s e rv e r in re p o rtin g h is o b se rv atio n follow s. O b serv atio n of d r e s s . — A ll sp e a k e rs film ed w ere re q u ire d to 16 T h o n ssen and B a ird , op. c it., p. 441. w ea r a co a t and tie . T h is p rev en ted wide d iffe re n c e s in d r e s s . Since the s p e a k e rs w ere photographed in b lack and w hite film , the d istin g u ish ing c h a ra c te ris tic of c o lo r w as elim in a ted fro m clothing and bodily a p p e a ra n c e . A s film ed , the c o lo r of the s p e a k e rs ’ c o a ts ran g ed fro m b lack to a v e ry light g ra y . P a tte rn e d d esig n of the m a te r ia l w as so m e tim e s n o ticed . M ost of the sp e a k e rs w ore fo u r-in -h a n d tie s of solid d esig n . Some tie s had d e sig n s w hich p ro je c te d ev en in b la ck and w hite film . A few s p e a k e rs w ore bow tie s . Since m o s t of the v a ria b le s u su a lly c o n sid e re d in the ev alu atio n of d r e s s w ere e lim in a ted b y the e x p e rim e n ta l d esig n , the o b s e rv e r u sed the follow ing c r ite r i a in h is c la ssific a tio n . Any d istin g u ish in g fe a tu re of the s p e a k e r’s d r e s s w hich would be lik ely to c a ll atten tio n to h is d r e s s a s being d iffe re n t fro m o th e rs w as c la s s ifie d a s m edium ly c o n s e rv a tiv e . A ll o th e r d r e s s w as c la s s ifie d a s c o n s e rv a tiv e . Specific c r ite r i a of c la s s ific a tio n w ere: ( 1 ) a g ra y o r d a rk su it and n o rm a l fo u r-in -h a n d tie w as c la s s ifie d a s co n se rv a tiv e ; ( 2 ) bow tie s w ere c la s s ifie d a s m ed iu m ly co n se rv a tiv e ; (3) strik in g d e sig n s in the p a tte rn of the tie o r co at w ere c la s s ifie d a s m edium ly c o n se rv a tiv e . O b serv atio n of a g e . — A s sta te d e a r l i e r in th is c h a p te r, the age of th e s p e a k e rs ran g ed fro m tw enty y e a r s to fifty -fiv e y e a rs . O bviously, the e x tre m e s of im m a tu rity o r the v e ry aged w ere e lim i n ated . H ow ever, the o b s e rv e r fe lt th a t the im p re s s io n of age would 5fl have b een fe lt by the au d ien ce s, due to th e wide d iv erg en ce in a p p e a r an ce. He th e re fo re follow ed th re e a r b itr a r y c la s s ific a tio n s : (1) If the audience w as pro b ab ly co n sc io u s of the youthful ap p e aran c e of the sp e a k e r, e ith e r in re g a rd to ap p e aran c e o r m a n n e r, the s p e a k e r w as c la ssifie d a s a youth. (2 ) If the audience w as not im m e d ia te ly co n scio u s of e ith e r of the e x tre m e s of age the s p e a k e r w as c la s s ifie d a s an ad u lt. (3) If th e audience w as c o n scio u s of the advanced age of the sp e a k e r, e ith e r fro m ap p e aran c e o r m a n n e r, the sp e a k e r w as c la s s ifie d a s an o ld e r ad u lt. C o lo r and co m p lex io n . — O bviously, no e s tim a tio n of c o lo r w as p o ssib le on b lack and white film . H ow ever, it w as p o ssib le to c la s s ify the c o lo r of h a ir a s blond, b la ck , d a rk , o r g ra y . If u n u su al fe a tu re s w ere a p p a re n t, such a s e x c e ss iv e ly d a rk o r heavy ey eb ro w s o r b a ld n e ss, then such fe a tu re s w ere noted. H eight of s p e a k e r. — E x ac t height of the sp e a k e r w as c o n sid e re d u n im p o rtan t in film ed sp e e ch e s. R a th e r, an a tte m p t w as m ade to d e te rm in e the siz e of im age w hich w as a p p a re n t to the audience in re la tio n to th e to ta l size of the p ro je c te d fra m e . In o r d e r to d e te rm in e th is im age s iz e , a sc ale in in ch es w as p re p a re d n u m b erin g “ 0 ” th ro u g h “ 36” . T h is scale w as attach ed to the c e n te r of the s c re e n . T he m o tion p ic tu re p ro je c to r w as then p laced so th at the le n s w as e x a c tly 18 fe e t fro m the su rfa c e of the s c re e n and the film s w ere view ed. T h is 56 gave a to ta l p ro je c te d fra m e m e a su rin g 29 3/4 in c h e s high and 40 in ch es w ide. The p ro je c to r w as ad ju sted so th a t the bottom of the p ro je cte d fra m e w as at the m a rk of * *0 " on the p re p a re d sc a le . By read in g the sc a le at a point in d icated by the top of the s p e a k e r's head it w as p o ssib le to d eterm in e a m e a su re m e n t of im age siz e a c c u ra te enough fo r p u rp o se s of th is study. Since the p o sitio n of the c a m e ra and the s p e a k e r's stand did not change d u rin g film in g , th is m e a su re m e n t w as v alid fo r a ll of the sp e a k e rs. The m e a s u re m e n ts w ere re c o rd e d in in c h es fo r p u rp o se s of co m p ariso n . In c a se of v a ria tio n , the la rg e s t read in g held fo r any length of tim e w as u sed . In d e sc rib in g the s p e a k e r's h eig h t fro m the m e a s u re m e n ts of re la tiv e siz e of p ro je c ted im ag e, a r b itr a r y lim its w ere im p o sed . S p eak ers whose p ro jec te d im age m e a su re d 24 3/4 in c h es o r le s s w ere d esig n ated a s sh o rt. S p eak ers w hose p ro jec ted im age m e a su re d 25 in ch es through 26 3/4 in c h e s w ere d esig n ated a s a v e ra g e . T hose s p e a k e rs w hose p ro jec ted im age m e a su re d 27 in c h e s and o v e r w ere d esig n ated a s ta ll. A cco rd in g to th e se m e a s u re m e n ts , two sp e a k e rs w ere found to be sh o rt, 17 to be a v e ra g e , and five to be ta ll. P o s tu r e . — P o s tu re w as c o n sid e re d an im p o rta n t fa c to r in o v e r - a ll audience im p re s sio n . F o u r c la s s ific a tio n s of o b serv ed b e h a v io r w ere m ad e. (1) A sp e a k e r w as said to have stiff p o stu re when h is body seem ed to be held rig id ly e r e c t w ith little o r no seem in g flex ib ility in the sp in e. U sually the hands and a rm s w ere placed in a b a sic position a t the sid e s. (2 ) A sp e a k e r w as said to have m edium p o stu re when he held h im self e r e c t, but had m o re flex ib ility in the back and sh o u ld e rs. H ands and a rm s m ight be placed on the stan d o r e l s e w h ere. (3) A sp e a k e r w as said to be relax ed when th e re w as s a tis fa c to ry e re c tn e s s , but with no rig id ity o r se lf-c o n s c io u sn e ss. U sually good e a sy m ovem ent was p o ssib le. (4) A sp e a k e r w as said to be slouched when h is body w as deem ed to b a sic a lly not m ain tain e re c t c a rria g e . The sp e a k e r m ight lean on the stand o r cau se uneven c a rria g e of the back and sh o u ld ers by the aw kw ard positioning of the hands and a rm s . T ypes of m o v em en t.— In o rd e r to c la ssify the ty p es of p h y si ca l m ovem ent which m ight o c c u r, the follow ing d efin itio n s w ere follow ed by the o b se rv e r: (1) When the m ovem ent of the body o r p a rts th e re o f o c c u rre d at such a tim e a s to coincide with the em phatic sta tem en t of thought obviously im p o rta n t to the arg u m en t, the action w as c la ssifie d as “ m ovem ent fo r e m p h a s is .” (2) When the m ovem ent w as a sh ift of position during a tra n s itio n a l sta te m e n t o r betw een s ta te m en ts th a t em p h asized nothing, the m ovem ent w as c la ssifie d a s “ m o v e m en t fo r tra n s itio n .” (3) When m ovem ent o c c u rre d th at could not be connected, e ith e r by tim in g , co in cid en ce, o r fo rc e with the thought being e x p re s se d , the m ovem ent w as c la ssifie d as “ random m o v em en t.” 58 T h is la tte r type of m ovem ent w as m o st often seen in the sw ay of the sp e a k e r’s body. Random m o v em en t. — If no in sta n c e s of body sh ift o r sw ay o r o th e r random m ovem ent w as o b serv e d , the sp e a k e r w as said to have used none. If one o r two in sta n ce s o c c u rre d he was said to have u sed so m e. If th re e o r m o re in sta n c e s o c c u rre d , he w as said to have used random m ovem ent often. G ro ss body m o v em en t. — O bviously, w alking about durin g the sp eech es w as preclu d ed by the design of the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t. How e v e r, to d istin g u ish betw een a rm and head g e s tu re s and the m ovem ents involving m o re of the body, the o b s e rv e r u sed the te rm “ g ro s s body m o v em en t.” G ro s s body m ovem ent w as defined in two w ays: (l)a com plete change in position of the body, u su ally indicating a sh ift of foot position; and (2 ) a noticeable change of the u p p er p a rt of the body, u su ally indicating a shift of weight on the fee t o r a change in the d is tance o r position of the body in re la tio n to the s p e a k e r’s stan d . T h is m ovem ent m ight o cc u r alone o r in connection with o th e r g e s tu re s . Such m ovem ent w as co n sid ered im p o rtan t enough to objectify in film ed sp eech es w here such m ovem ent, although slig h t, b eco m es s ig nifican t due to the la rg e p o rtio n of th e v isu a l a re a occupied by the sp e a k e r’s im age. If no in stan ce of g ro ss body m ovem ent w as o b se rv e d , the 59 sp e a k e r w as said to have none. If one o r two In s ta n c e s w ere o b se rv e d he w as said to have so m e. If th re e o r m o re in s ta n c e s w ere o b se rv e d he w as said to u se such m o v em en t often. G e s tu re s . — G e s tu re s w hich did not n e c e s s a rily involve the e n tire body w ere c la s s ifie d a s one of th re e k in d s. (1) C onventional g e s tu re s w ere defined a s m o v e m e n ts of the h an d s and a r m s , u su a lly d e s c rib e d a s pointing, clen ch in g f is t, dow nw ard o r upw ard m o v em en t of the hand, and o th e r s im ila r m o v em en t. Such m o v em en t w as intended to give e m p h a s is to the thought e x p re s s e d , b u t not v is u a l im a g e ry . If the sp e a k e r u sed no such g e s tu re he w as said to have u sed none. If he u sed such g e s tu re one, tw o, o r th re e tim e s he w as sa id to have u se d som e. If he u sed fo u r o r m o re such g e s tu re s he w as said to have u sed th em often. (2) D e sc rip tiv e g e s tu re s w ere defined a s m o v em en ts d esig n ed to re s u lt d ire c tly o r in d ire c tly in v isu a l im a g e ry in the m ind of the v ie w e rs . Such g e s tu re s w ere u su a lly su g g estiv e of siz e , shape o r lo catio n . If no in s ta n c e s of such g e s tu re w as o b se rv e d the s p e a k e r w as said to u se none. If one o r two in s ta n c e s w ere o b se rv e d he w as said to u se so m e. If th re e o r m o re in s ta n c e s w ere u sed he w as sa id to u se such g e s tu re s often. (3) H ead g e s tu re s w ere defined a s m o v em en ts of the h ead fo r the p u rp o se of re in fo rc in g the spoken thought. Such g e s tu re s u su a lly included e ith e r a nodding m o v em en t o r a n eg ativ e shaking m o v em en t. T hey did not include m o v em en t of the head in 00 shifting g aze, n o r did th ey include fa c ia l e x p re s sio n . If the sp e a k e r u sed no such g e s tu re s he w as said to have used none. If he u sed one, tw o, o r th re e such g e s tu re s he w as said to have used som e. If he used fo u r o r m o re such g e s tu re s he w as said to u se them often. F a c ia l e x p re s s io n . — O b serv atio n s co n cern in g fa c ia l e x p re s sion w ere c la ssifie d in two b ro ad a r e a s . F i r s t w as the b asic o v e r-a ll m ood o r feelin g re fle c te d in the fa c e . Such m oods w ere re g a rd e d to be one of fo u r kinds: (1 ) se rio u s , which was c h a ra c te riz e d by ste rn n e ss, no sm ilin g , so m e tim es a frow n; ( 2 ) pained, which w as c h a ra c te riz e d by e x p re s s io n s of u n h ap p in ess, d is ta s te , o r d isc o m fo rt not d ire c tly r e lated to the thought o r su b ject; (3) p le asa n t, w hich w as c h a ra c te riz e d by an outgoing co n sc io u sn e ss of the audience and an attem p t to e s ta b lish a w arm ra p p o rt, and w as often in d icated by a lack of frow ning and som e suggestion of sm iling; (4) n e u tra l, which showed no reco g n izab le m ood o r feelin g . Second, w ere changes in fa c ia l e x p re ssio n to a s s is t in the com m unication of id ea o r to re in fo rc e som e p a rtic u la r thought o r fe e l ing. If the sp e a k e r showed no in stan ce of fa c ia l e x p re ssio n to re in fo rc e thought he w as said to have u sed none. If he used one o r two in sta n c e s he w as said to use som e. If he used th re e o r m o re in sta n c e s he w as said to have used them often. D irectio n of g aze. — A s shown in F ig u re 1, the c a m e ra used in the film in g of the sp eech e s w as lo cated to the le ft of the sp e a k e r. The sm a ll audience of o b s e rv e rs p re s e n t du rin g the film in g grouped th e m s e lv e s g e n e ra lly on the s p e a k e r’s rig h t. T he tim e k e e p e r sa t in th e c e n te r. T h is a rra n g e m e n t p re se n te d an u n n atu ra l situ atio n to s p e a k e rs tra in e d to a d d re s s live au d ien ce s r a th e r than m ovie o r te le v isio n au d i en c e s. In o rd e r fo r a sp e a k e r to give the im p re s s io n of d ire c t eye co n tact to the audience view ing the film s , he had to look d ire c tly into the le n s of th e c a m e ra d u rin g the film in g p ro c e s s . F ew of th e s p e a k e rs w ere found to do th is c o n siste n tly . E ye gaze w as found to fa ll g e n e r ally into th re e c a te g o rie s: (1 ) at the c a m e ra , (2 ) a t the studio audience to the view ing audiences* le ft, and (3) at the s p e a k e r’s n o te s. O nly o cc asio n al g la n c e s w ere o b se rv e d d ire c te d s tra ig h t ahead o r up in a random g aze. 17 M cEvoy in h is study m e a su re d the tim e which each s p e a k e r spent in looking at the au d ien ce, the c a m e ra , and a t h is n o te s. McEvoy*s m e a s u re m e n ts w ere included by th is o b s e rv e r in h is d e s c rip tio n s . In addition, the d ire c tio n of the gaze d u rin g the f ir s t sentence of the speech and the fin a l se n te n c es of the speech w as noted. T he s p e a k e rs w ere o b serv ed to d e te rm in e if th ey re a d the f i r s t sen ten ce fro m th e ir n o te s, p a rtly re a d the sentence and p a rtly e x tem p o riz e d , o r did not re a d at a ll. The sam e o b se rv a tio n s w ere m ade re la tiv e to the la s t sentence and the e n tire sp eech . 17 M cEvoy, op. clt. 62 V oice q u a lity . — V oice quality h a s tra d itio n a lly b een defined by 18 18 2 0 a u th o ritie s including A n d erso n , B rig a n c e, H ahn, e t a l ., a s being re la tiv e to the p re se n c e o r ab sen ce of n a sa lity , h a rs h n e s s , h o a rs e n e s s , th in n e ss, o r la ck of c a rry in g pow er, b re a th in e s s , th ro a tin e s s , and fau lty pitch le v el. The d esig n of the o rig in a l ex p e rim en t tended to p reclu d e the in clu sio n of v o ic e s with obvious d e fic ie n c ie s in q u ality a s so defined. H ow ever, the o b s e rv e r w as co n scio u s of the re la tiv e p le a sa n tn e ss o r u n p le a sa n tn e ss of the s p e a k e rs ’ v o ic e s in re la tio n to each o th e r. A n o th er fa c e t of v o cal q u ality o b se rv ed w as the im p re s s io n of m a tu rity in the voice a s co m p ared to a few c a s e s of youthful th in n e ss c h a ra c te riz e d by a lack of fu lln e s s and pow er and often accom panied by a heightened p itch le v e l. Some e ffo rt w as m ade to reco g n ize any ex istin g te n sio n s in the voice due to n e rv o u sn e ss. C a re w as tak en to d istin g u ish n e rv o u s te n sio n in the voice fro m in ten sity , which w as defined a s a d e lib e ra te te n sin g of the th ro a t m u s c le s fo r p u rp o se s of e m p h a sis o r effect, and w hich n o rm a lly w as of sh o rt d u ratio n . S p eak ers w ere said to have e ith e r som e ten sio n o r no ten sio n . T hey w ere said to u se 18 V irg il A . A nderson, T ra in in g the Speaking V oice (New Y ork: O xford U n iv e rsity P r e s s , 1942), pp. 62-77. 19 B rig a n c e , Speech, I ts T ech n iq u es and D isc ip lin e s in a F re e S o ciety , pp. 370-373. 20 E lis e H ahn, e t a l., B a sic V oice T ra in in g f o r Speech (New Y ork: M cG raw -H ill Book C om pany, 1957), pp. 67-69. 03 in te n sity none, som e o r often a s had been the c a se w ith g e s tu re s . F o rc e and v o lu m e. — O b serv atio n w as m ade co n cern in g the fo rc e o r volum e le v e l of the v o ic e s, d esp ite the fa c t th at such le v e ls w ere su sc ep tib le to e le c tro n ic am p lificatio n e ith e r at the tim e of film ing o r at the tim e of p ro jec tio n o r both. D ifferen t volum e le v e ls w ere found to e x is t am ong the s p e a k e rs , how ev er, and th e re fo re two c l a s s ific a tio n s, w eak and stro n g , w ere u se d . A d istin ctio n w as m ad e betw een v a rie ty in volum e, which m ig h t o c c u r w ithin the sam e sen ten ce and include w ord e m p h a sis, and c o n tra s t in volum e le v e l betw een se c tio n s of the sp eech . The la tte r would involve d iffe re n t volum e le v e ls a c com panying g ro u p s of se n te n c e s o r thought g ro u p s throughout the sp eech . O nce ag ain , two o r th re e in sta n c e s of such use of volum e w as said to be som e u se , w hile m o re fre q u en t in sta n c e s w ere re c o rd e d a s being used often. R a te . — T he d e te rm in a tio n of ra te w as c o n sid e re d to be a tw o fold p ro b lem . F i r s t , th e re w as the ra te of u tte ra n c e p e r m in u te, w hich w as e a s ily d eterm in e d by dividing the to ta l n u m b er of w o rd s by the to ta l tim e of the speech in m in u te s. Second, th e re w as the c o n s id e ra tion of how v a ria tio n s of r a te , if any, w ere u sed . The o b s e rv e r sought to d e te rm in e if th e sp e a k e r u sed any v a rie ty of r a te in the sp eech , p a rtic u la rly in re la tio n to v a rio u s se c tio n s of the sp eech . He also noted the technique of ra te v a ria tio n a s to w h eth er it involved only slow 64 p re c is e speaking o r the u se of v a rie ty in d u ratio n and p au se. In th e o b se rv a tio n of p au se, an attem p t w as m ad e to d is tin guish betw een pause u sed to em p h asize o r re in fo rc e thought, and pause w hich seem ed to re s u lt fro m lack of flu en cy . T h is d istin g u ish in g c h a r a c te r is tic w as tak en to be the p ro b a b ility of e m p h a sis in re la tio n to the context of the thought and the accom panying fo rc e . T he o b s e rv e r a lso sought to d ete rm in e if a stop w as u sed betw een se n te n c e s o r thought g ro u p s. In o rd e r to d istin g u ish it fro m a p au se, the te rm stop w as u sed to denote an o ra l punctuation to s e p a ra te thought but not n e c e s s a rily to em p h asize it. O nce again c la s s ific a tio n s w ere none, so m e, and often to denote u se . In o b serv in g d u ratio n an attem p t w as m ade to d istin g u ish betw een d u ra tio n u sed to em p h asize o r re in fo rc e thought and th a t w hich m ig h t conceivably be the re s u lt of a lack of fluency. A gain the d is tin g u ish in g c h a ra c te ris tic w as ta k en to be the p ro b ab ility of e m p h a sis in re la tio n to the context of the thought o r the accom panying fo rc e and in te n sity . P itc h . — O b se rv atio n s of pitch le v e ls in the speakers* v o ices w ere co n cern ed w ith two a r e a s . F i r s t , the av erag e pitch le v e l c h a r a c te r is tic of the speakers* v o ic es w as n o ticed . It w as fe lt th a t sin ce a ll of the s p e a k e rs w ere m a le th at p itch le v el could conceivably play an im p o rta n t ro le in audience re a c tio n s . H ere ag ain the d esig n of the *8 o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t tended to p reclu d e wide v a rie ty in o v e r - a ll pitch le v e l, since a ll of th e s p e a k e rs w ere ex p e rien ced public s p e a k e rs . H ow ever, som e v a ria tio n s in the av e ra g e p itch le v e ls w e re noticed and re c o rd e d . In o r d e r to se c u re an o bjective m e a s u re of av erag e pitch le v e ls, the o b s e rv e r c a te g o riz e d the s p e a k e rs ' v o ic e s acco rd in g to 21 th e ir p o sitio n on the m u s ic a l s c a le . M o ses in d icated the n o rm al ran g e of the adult m a le voice a s being fro m A 2 to E 3 , w hich is a ran g e 22 one octave below M iddle C . Ju d so n and W eaver p lace the av e ra g e pitch of the m a le voice a t 128-144 double v ib ra tio n s o r c y c le s p e r second. Since C 3 is 128 c y c le s p e r second, the two s o u rc e s w ere in g e n e ra l a g re e d . U sing the m u s ic a l sc a le a s the b a s is of m e a su re m e n t, the o b s e rv e r liste n e d to the sound tra c k of the film ed s p e a k e rs and co m p ared th e ir voice le v e ls to n o tes played on a piano. The tone con tr o l of the p r o je c to r’s a m p lifie r w as placed at the m id point. C o m p a r iso n and c la ssific a tio n w as m ade by e a r o v e r the p erio d of the sp eech . W hile the d ire c t co m p ariso n of the spoken voice to m u s ic a l tone is h a z a rd o u s, it w as found th a t g ro s s m e a s u re m e n ts could be attain ed . The pitch w as th e re fo re c la s s ifie d a c co rd in g to the note to w hich the 21 P a u l J . M o ses, The V oice of N e u ro sis (New Y ork: G rune and S tratto n , 1954), p. 38. 22 L ym an S p icer Ju d so n and A ndrew T h o m as W eaver, V oice Science (New Y ork: A ppleton, C en tu ry , C ro fts , 1942), p. 283. 66 voice m o st often c o rresp o n d e d . W hile not a s a c c u ra te a s e le c tro n ic m e a su re m e n t, it w as fe lt th a t such m e a su re m e n t w as su fficien tly a c c u ra te fo r the p re s e n t study, since the p rim a ry g o al w as a b a s is of c o m p ariso n of pitch am ong the s p e a k e rs . V oices w ere c la ssifie d a s follow s: (1) low, in d icatin g an av erag e key of A 2 to C 3 ; (2) m ed iu m , Indicating an av erag e key of D 3 to F 3 ; (3) high, in d icatin g an av e rag e key of G 3 to B 3 . A second a r e a of in v estig atio n in the o b se rv a tio n of pitch in volved v a rie ty of pitch w ithin one voice fo r p u rp o se s of e m p h a sis o r to a s s is t com m unication. If pitch p a tte rn s , re c u rrin g com b in atio n s of pitch le v e ls w ithin p h ra s e s o r se n te n c e s, becam e n o ticeab le they w ere indicated a s being u sed none, som e o r m uch. An attem p t w as also m ade to d e te rm in e the u su a l b eh av io r of the v o cal p itch le v e l a t the end of se n te n c e s o r thought. F lu e n c y . — O b serv atio n of fluency am ong the s p e a k e rs w as again co m p licated by the design of the o rig in a l ex p e rim en t in using ex p e rien ced sp e a k e rs. H ow ever, d iffe re n c e s re la tiv e to fluency could be o b se rv e d . 23 U tzin g er studied the effect of fluency upon the r e c a ll of l i s te n e rs and th e ir ev a lu atio n s of p le a sa n tn e ss and concluded th at r e c a ll 23 V ernon A lfred U tzin g er, “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of the E ffe c ts of V erb al F lu en c y Upon the L is te n e r ” {unpublished D o cto ral d is s e rta tio n , U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , 1952), p. 79. 67 of lis te n e r* w as not sig n ific an tly influenced by v ary in g d e g re e s of flu en cy , but th a t flu en t p re s e n ta tio n s w ere sig n ifican tly m o re p le a sa n t to the lis te n e r th an m edium o r n o n -flu en t p re s e n ta tio n s . H ow ever, he found th a t m ed iu m ly flu en t d e liv e rie s w ere only in sig n ifica n tly m o re p le a sa n t th an n o n -flu en t d e liv e rie s . W hile h is study u sed in fo rm ativ e 24 m a te ria l, U tzin g er su g g ested th a t if the ta lk s u se d in the e x p e rim e n t had been p e rsu a siv e , the e ffe c ts of v ary in g d e g re e s of fluency would p e rh a p s be sig n ific an t. U tzin g er defined fluency a s a “ q u ality of d e liv e ry co n sistin g of a continuous flow of w o rd s grouped in m ean in g fu l u n its of m a te r ia l 25 w ith a m inim um n u m b er of b r e a k s .” B re a k s w ere f u rth e r defined a s in te rru p tio n s in speaking w hich a re p u rp o s e le s s and u n n e c e s s a ry to u n d ersta n d in g the m ean in g of the spoken sen ten ce. B re a k s w ere c l a s sified a s ( 1 ) v o cal h e s ita n c ie s , o r m e a n in g le ss p a u se s betw een w ords; (2 ) v o calized p a u se s, o r v o ca liz atio n s of m e a n in g le ss sounds, such a s “ ah ” and “ e r ” ; (3) v o cal h a lts , o r p a u se s b etw een sy lla b le s w ithin a w ord; and (4) v o cal re p e titio n s o r re p e a tin g of sy lla b le s o r w o rd s in a m a n n e r s im ila r to “ s tu tte rin g .” In d istin g u ish in g betw een the flu en t lev el, the m ed iu m flu en t 26 le v e l, and the n o n -flu en t le v e l, U tz in g e r defined the flu en t le v e l a s c h a ra c te riz e d by fo u r b re a k s , including one h e sita n c y , two v o ca liz ed 24Ib id „ p. 80 25Ib jd ., p. 10. 26lb id ., p. 19. 68 p au ses, and one h alt. The m edium flu en t le v el w as c h a ra c te ris e d by 32 b re a k s o r in te rru p tio n s, including 1 2 h e s ita n c ie s , 1 1 v o calized p au ses, 5 vocal h a lts , and 4 re p e titio n s. T he non-fluent le v e l w as c h a ra c te r ized by 64 b re a k s o r in te rru p tio n s, including 24 h e s ita n c ie s , 22 v o calized p au ses, 1 0 vocal h a lts, and 8 re p e titio n s . In d eterm in in g fluency, the o b s e rv e r fe lt th at the scale of evaluation u sed by U tzin g er w as obviously too wide to d istin g u ish b e tw een ex p erien ced sp e a k e rs d ealt with in th is study. F u rth e rm o re , it w as fe lt, a s U tzinger*a r e s u lts seem ed to in d icate, th a t the e ffects of the lack of fluency w ere not cum ulative, and th a t the g re a te s t audience reac tio n co m es at the point when the sp e a k e r’s difficulty in fluency f ir s t b eco m es ap p aren t. H ence, with m any sp e a k e rs in the group u sed in th is study not rev e a lin g any b re a k s o r h e s ita n c ie s in th e ir d e liv e ry , it w as felt th at any b re a k o r in te rru p tio n in a speech m ig h t be tak en by the o b serv in g audience a s a b re a k in fluency. On the o th e r hand, a s 27 G ray and B rad en pointed out, fluency could not be m istak e n fo r r a - 28 pidity of u tte ra n c e . G ray and B rad en liste d re q u ire m e n ts fo r the achievem ent of fluency as: ( 1 ) a thorough knowledge of the points which the sp e a k e r in ten d s to p re se n t; (2 ) a thorough knowledge of su p p orting m a te ria l; (3) a sufficient com m and of language so a s to ^ G i l e s Wilke son G ray and Waldo W. B rad e n , P u b lic Speaking: P rin c ip le s and P ra c tic e (New Y ork: H a rp e r B ro th e rs , 1951), p. 533. O Q Ib id ., p. 533. 59 elim in a te the groping fo r w ords; (4) avoidance of e x p re s s io n s auch a a **uh,” “ ah ” and “ a n d -a ” and o th e r au p erflu o u a v o c a liz a tio n s; and (5) au fficien t aelf-co n fid en ce. W hile th eae a re re q u ire m e n ta fo r ach iev e m en t of fluency and not a acale of m e a su re m e n t, the o b a e rv e r fe lt th a t c o n v e rse ly , any sym ptom in the a p e a k e r w hich would in d icate w eakneaa in an y of the above a r e a a m ig h t alao in d icate a d ifficu lty in fluency. U aing U tz in g e r's d efin itio n s, th e re fo re , the o b a e rv e r decided on the follow ing c la a a iflc a tio n s fo r re p o rtin g the fluency of the sp e a k - e ra : ( 1 ) e x c e lle n t fluency, c h a ra c te riz e d by not m o re th an one b re a k o r h e sita tio n o r je rk y rh y th m w hich would in d icate d ifficu lty in thought p ro c e s s e s o r la ck of poise; ( 2 ) m edium fluency, c h a ra c te riz e d by two o r th re e b re a k s o r h e s ita n c ie s , o r som e je rk y rh y th m s in d icatin g som e d ifficu lty , if only fo r a m o m en t, in thought p ro c e s s e s o r poiae; (3) p o o r flu en cy , c h a ra c te riz e d by fo u r o r m o re obvious b re a k s o r h e s ita n c ie s o r je rk y rh y th m s su fficien t in n a tu re to c le a rly in d icate d ifficu lty in fo rm u latin g thought o r d ifficu lty in the u se of language, o r a lack of p o ise. A rtic u la tio n . — F o r the p u rp o se s of th is study a rtic u la tio n w as defined aa a c c u ra c y in the u tte ra n c e of language so u n d s. D esp ite the e x p e rie n c e of the s p e a k e rs u sed in th is study, it w as found th a t th e re w as som e v a ria n c e in the d eg ree of a c c u ra te a rtic u la tio n u se d . T h re e TO a r b itr a r y c la ssific a tio n s w ere u sed in re co rd in g a rtic u la tio n : ( 1 ) Qood a rtic u la tio n included those v o ices which had obvious c la rity of u tte r ance and p ro jec tio n . (2) A verage a rtic u la tio n Included th o se v o ices w hich showed som e le s s a c c u ra c y of enunciation and som e m uffling of p ro jec tio n u su ally caused by le s s en erg y in the u se of a rtic u la to ry o rg a n s. (3) P o o r a rtic u la tio n included those v o ices which exhibited e r r o r s in enunciation and p ro jectio n . G e n e ra l sty le of d e liv e ry . — C la ssific a tio n of the style of d e liv e ry used by the sp e a k e rs p re se n te d s e rio u s p ro b lem s to the ob s e rv e r. F ir s t, the desig n of the p re se n t study dem anded o b serv atio n of what w as done by the sp e a k e rs and not value jud g m en ts. T h ere w as i som e q uestion a s to w hether the style of a sp e a k er w as p erh ap s the sum to ta l of o b se rv a tio n s d esc rib e d p rev io u sly in th is c h a p te r. H ow ever, having m ade the p r io r o b se rv a tio n s, the o b s e rv e r fe lt th a t d e te rm in a tion of speaking style would not only give fo cu s to p r io r o b se rv a tio n s, but also m ake the p ic tu re of sp e a k er b eh av io r m o re co m p lete. Second, it w as found th at the lite ra tu re w as su rp risin g ly lacking in the d e s c rip tio n of sty le s of d e liv ery in te rm s of o v e rt b eh av io r. In g en eral, speech a u th o ritie s liste d two s ty le s of d eliv ery — co n v e rsatio n a l and o ra to ric a l. H ow ever, d efin itio n s of the above te rm s w ere vague. C o n v e rsatio n a l sty le w as u su ally defined in te rm s of sim ila rity to co n v e rsatio n , and o ra to ric a l style w as re la te d to “ elo cu tio n .” 71 29 W inans m ade a d istin ctio n betw een “ c o n v e rsa tio n a l s ty ls ” and “ c o n v e rsa tio n a l q u a lity .” The fo rm e r he defined a s “ th e sty le w hich in tone and com p o sitio n is a s n e a r a c tu a l c o n v e rsa tio n a s m ay w ell be in sp eech m ak in g .’* The la tte r he in d icated r e f e r s to “ co m m u n ic a tiv e n e ss” and m aking lis te n e r s fe e l th a t the sp e a k e r “ had b u s in e s s w ith th e m .” M ost of the v a ria n c e s in d e liv e ry w hich W inans and succeeding a u th o rs have d e sc rib e d have included d e g re e s of f o r m a lity and in fo rm a lity and the d em an d s of audience size and s ta tu s. In c la ssify in g sp e a k e r sty le the o b s e rv e r se t up th re e a r b i tr a r y c la s s ific a tio n s fo r the film ed sp eech es re fle c tiv e of accep ted s ta n d a rd s of thought in the fie ld . The th re e c la s s ific a tio n s w ere d e fined a s follow s: ( 1 ) In fo rm a l c o n v e rsa tio n a l sty le w as a sty le in w hich the tone, language, and m a n n e r w ere a s n e a r to actu al co n v e rsa tio n a s w as p o ssib le in a sp eech . The voice had a v e ry flex ib le and in tim ate q u ality , w ith no im p re s s io n of a su stain ed v o lum e. The lis te n e r w as co n scio u s of a c o n v e rsa tio n a l situ atio n and not of an audience o r public speaking situ atio n . (2) F o rm a l public speaking sty le w as a sty le in w hich the tone w as s im ila r to co n v e rsatio n ex c ep t th a t the d e liv e ry w as m o re fo rm a l in com position and c o n tro l. T h e re w as le s s fle x ib ility , p a rtic u la rly in p itch . V olum e w as m o re su stain e d . T he lis te n e r w as co n scio u s of a “ public speaking situ a tio n .” (3) O ra to ric a l o r pom pous 29 J a m e s A. W inans, Speech M aking, pp. 20-21. 7 3 sty le w as a style c h a ra c te riz e d by a definite p a tte rn of v a rio u s fo rm s of a r b itr a r y cad en ce. It w as a d istin c tiv e sty le w hich did not rem in d the lis te n e r of co n v e rsatio n . P itc h and ra te p a tte rn s w ere d efin ite. W hile co m m u n icatio n m ig h t have taken p la c e , the lis te n e r w as co n sc io u s not only of the “ public speaking situ a tio n ,” but also of the te c h n iq u es of the sp e a k e r w ithin th at situ atio n . To fu rth e r supplem ent the c la ssific a tio n of sty le , the o b s e rv e r u sed the te rm “ d id a c tic ” to indicate a s im ila rity to the tone u su ally a s so c ia te d w ith in stru c tio n . The d id actic tone u su ally included a te n dency to w ard dogm atic sta te m e n ts and m a n n e r w hich seem ed to im ply in stru c tio n in stead of p e rsu a sio n . O b serv atio n of speech c o n te n t. — P o u r g e n e ra l a r e a s of o b se rv a tio n re la tiv e to sp eech content w ere se t up by the o b s e rv e r, in cluding o rg a n iz atio n , m a te ria ls , m otive ap p eals and e th ic a l ap p eals. T h ese a r e a s w ere d eterm in ed fo r convenience in re c o rd in g o b s e rv a tio n s and w ere not n e c e s s a rily co n sid ered a s m u tu ally ex clu siv e a r e a s . A s stated p rev io u sly , the d esig n of the o rig in a l ex p e rim e n t p ro vided th at a ll of the s p e a k e rs used w ere ex p e rien ce d s p e a k e rs , and th e re fo re w ell v e rs e d in speech o rg an iz atio n and p e rsu a siv e te c h n iq u es. In o r d e r to provide d istin g u ish ab le c h a ra c te ris tic s , th e re fo re , it w as n e c e s s a ry to a ttem p t to m ake o b se rv a tio n s a s m in u te a s p ra c tic a b le . H ow ever, an attem p t w as m ade again not to co m p letely 73 s tru c tu re the o b s e rv e r, and am ple sp a ce on the S peech C ontent A n aly sis S h eet w as provided to re c o rd c la s s ific a tio n s not o th e rw ise in d icated on the fo rm . E xplanation of ite m s o b serv ed u n d er each c la s s ific a tio n w ere a s follow s: 1. O rg an izatio n . C a re fu l atten tio n w as given to the in tro d u c tio n , body and co n clu sio n of the sp e ech e s. The d esig n of the o rig in a l ex p e rim e n t p rev en ted v a rie ty in tech n iq u es used in the in tro d u c tio n s. 30 A ll s p e a k e rs had b een in stru c te d by H ild reth to begin th e ir sp e ech e s with the w o rd s “ I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t [state opinion of su b ject] b ecau se . . .” In c a se o th e r m a te ria l of an in tro d u c to ry n a tu re w as included p r io r to the body of the sp eech , h o w ev er, such m a te r ia l w as noted on the C ontent A n aly sis S h eet. In o b se rv in g the content of the body of the sp e e c h e s, the n u m b e r of m ain points in the speech w as noted. D ecisio n w as also m ade a s to w h eth er the g e n e ra l o rg an iz atio n of arg u m en t and m a te r ia ls w as d ire c t o r in d ire c t. T he d ire c t m ethod of o rg an iz atio n a s d e s c rib e d by 31 D ick en s a ssu m ed th a t the fav o red attitu d e, b elief, o r opinion of the sp e a k e r w as sta ted f i r s t and th en follow ed by su p p o rtin g m a te r ia ls o r a rg u m e n ts. T h is w as the sam e m ethod r e f e r r e d to by som e a u th o rs, 30 H ild re th , op. c i t ., p. 29. 31 D ick en s, op. c i t., pp. 388-389. 7 4 32 including M onroe, a s the d id actic m ethod, and by o th e rs , including 33 G ray and B rad e n , aa the deductive m ethod. The in d ire c t m ethod of o rg a n isa tio n assu m ed th a t the m a te r ia ls and evidence m ig h t be given f ir s t, and co n clu sio n s draw n fro m th e m . T h is m ethod was a lso often r e f e r r e d to as th e im p lica tiv e o r inductive m ethod of o rg an iz atio n . O bviously, the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t m ade the d ire c t ap p ro ach g e n e ra lly u sed by the s p e a k e rs , due to the opening se n ten c e. H ow ever, som e d iffe re n c e s w ere found in the m ethod of developing the re m a in d e r of the in tro d u ctio n and the r e s t of the sp eech . A lso o b serv e d in the body of the sp e ec h e s w as the type of a rra n g e m e n t of points and m a te ria l. T y p es of a rra n g e m e n ts lis te d on the Speech C ontent A n aly sis S h eet included: e n u m eratio n , tim e o rd e r, space o r d e r , c lim a c tic o rd e r, p ro b le m -so lu tio n , cau se and effect, m o tiv ated seq u en ce, and som e o th e r to be d e s c rib e d by the o b s e rv e r. The ite m s u sed w ere found to be d e s c rib e d w ith som e v a ria n c e by 34 35 36 37 B rig a n c e , B ry a n t and W allace, D ick en s, G ray and B rad en , 32 A lan H. M onroe, P rin c ip le s and T y p es of Speech (New Y ork: S co tt, F o re s m a n and C om pany, 1955), pp. 241-242. 33 G ra y and B ra d e n , op. c it.. pp. 358-359. 34 B rig a n c e , op. c i t., pp. 213-217. 35 D onald C . B ry an t and K a rl R. W allace, O ra l C om m unication (New Y ork: A ppleton, C en tu ry and C ro fts , In c ., 1954), pp. 65-68. 36 D ick en s, op. c i t., pp. 274-275. 37 G ra y and B rad en , op. c i t ., p. 360. 71 38 39 M onroe, and S a re tt and F o s te r . P a r tic u la r atten tio n w as given to w h eth er o r not c la rity of the o rg a n isa tio n had been accen tu ated by a p rev iew of p ro p o sed p o in ts, by the n u m b erin g of p o in ts, o r by c le a r tra n s itio n s . The co n clu sio n w as o b se rv e d to d e te rm in e w h eth er it w as a sim p le su m m ary , an ap p eal, a sim p le re s ta te m e n t, a stro n g a ffirm a tio n of b e lie f, o r if th e re w as no co n clu sio n a t a ll. Due to the lim ita tio n of tim e it w as found th at co n clu sio n s w ere so m e tim e s o m itted by the sp e a k e r o r cu t fro m the film by the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n te r. 2. M a te ria ls . Two a r e a s c o n sid e re d by the o b s e rv e r in the a n a ly s is of the content of the sp e ech e s w ere su p p o rtin g m a te r ia ls and the fa c to rs of in te re s t. The fo rm e r w as a c la ssific a tio n of m a te r ia ls a s to content and u se , w hile the la tte r w as c la ssific a tio n acco rd in g to p sy ch o lo g ical ap p eal. Speech m a te r ia ls lis te d on the S peech C ontent A n a ly sis S heet included: d efin itio n s, c o m p a riso n s, illu s tra tio n s , in s ta n c e s , te stim o n y , s ta tis tic s , ex p lan atio n , d e s c rip tio n , rh e to ric a l q u e stio n s, and r e s ta te m e n t. The lis t of sp eech m a te r ia ls u sed w as com piled fro m s e v e ra l 40 41 sta n d a rd te x ts in the field including: B rig a n c e , B ry an t and W allace, 38 M onroe, op. c it., pp. 261-265. 39 S a re tt and F o s te r , B a sic P rin c ip le s of S p eech , pp. 349-358. 40 B rig a n c e , op. c i t ., p. 245. * 1B ry a n t and W allace, op. c it., pp. 86-95. re D ick e n s , 4 2 G ra y and B ra d e n , 4 2 M o n r o e ,^ S a re tt and F o s te r ,4 ® and S o p er.4 ® F a c to r* of In te re s t lis te d on the S peech C ontent A n a ly sis S h eet included: sig n ific an ce, h u m o r, u n iq u en ess, fa m ilia rity , p ro b le m s, c o n c re te n e s s , an tag o n ism , v a ria tio n , p ro x im ity , and su sp e n se . If o th e rs could be reco g n ized they w ere re c o rd e d . T he lis t u sed w as 47 com piled fro m sta n d ard speech te x ts including: B ry an t and W allace, 48 49 50 D ick en s, G ra y and B rad en , and M onroe. T o avoid too su b jectiv e ev alu atio n of the fa c to rs of in te re s t u sed by a sp e a k e r, the o b s e rv e r did not re c o rd th e ir use u n le ss it w as c le a rly and obviously u sed by the sp e a k e r a s a d e lib e ra te technique. 3. M otive a p p e a ls. SLnce a ll sp e ech e s o b se rv e d in th is study w ere c la s s ifie d a s p e rs u a s iv e , it w as fe lt th a t o b se rv a tio n should be 42 D ick en s, op. c i t ., pp. 95-110. 43 G ra y and B rad en , op. c it., p. 281. 44 M onroe, op. c it., p. 221. 45 S a re tt and F o s te r , op. c it., pp. 422-437. 46 S o p e r, op. c it., p. 85. 47 B ry an t and W allace, op. c it., pp. 97-107. 48 D ick en s, op. c i t., p. 320. 49 G ra y and B rad e n , op. c it., p. 90. 50 M onroe, op. c it., p. 252. 77 m ade a a to the m otive ap p e a ls which the sp e a k e r u sed . M otive ap p eals w ere defined a s a p p e a ls to the sp ecific se n tim e n ts, em o tio n s, and d e s ir e s by w hich the sp e a k e r sought to se t into actio n the p rim a ry m o tiv e s o r d riv e s of the audience re la tiv e to h is p e rsu a siv e goal. B ecau se of the wide ran g e of p o ssib le m otive a p p e a ls, it w as found th a t no speech te x t h a s attem p ted to lis t a ll p o ssib le v a ria tio n s . F o r conven ience in re p o rtin g o b se rv a tio n s, how ever, a lis t of th irty -fiv e m otive ap p e als w as included on the C ontent A n aly sis S h eet. A dequate space w as p rovided to re c o rd ap p eals not re a d ily c la ssifie d u n d er th e se h ead in g s. The lis t included: to m ake m oney, to be h ealth y , to avoid d a n g e r, sex u al a ttra c tio n , m a rria g e , to b eg et and r e a r c h ild re n , c a re fo r p a re n ts , to have frie n d s , enjoy p h y sical c o m fo rts, gain so c ia l ap p ro v al, conform to c u sto m s, have p e rso n a l fre ed o m , m a in ta in self re s p e c t, peace of m ind, sa tisfy c u rio s ity , have ad v e n tu res, com pete su c c e ssfu lly w ith o th e rs , help o th e r people, have w orthw hile re lig io n , ach iev e id e a ls , se c u rity , ex p lo ra tio n , c re a tin g , fe a r, lo y alty , p a trio t is m , en jo y m en t of beauty, pow er and a u th o rity , rep u ta tio n , h e ro w o r sh ip , sym pathy, f a ir play, duty, se lf p re s e rv a tio n , and su b m issio n . T h is lis t w as com piled fro m ite m s su ggested by the follow ing au th o rs 51 52 of sta n d a rd speech te x ts: B rig a n c e , B ry an t and W allace, 51 B rig a n c e , op. c i t ., p. 105. 52 B ry a n t and W allace, op. c i t ., pp. 193-194. 7 8 D ick e n s, 5 5 G ra y and B ra d e n , 5 4 M o n ro e, 5 5 O liv e r, D ickey and Z elk o . 5 5 One ad d itio n al m otive ap p eal w as added by the o b a e rv e r w hich w aa not Included on any sta n d a rd lia t. T h is m otive ap p eal w as to the id e a of im p ro v in g ed u catio n , both aa ap p licab le to an individual and aa ap p licab le to the b ro a d fie ld of ed u catio n . M any s p e a k e rs w ere found to ap p eal to th is concept w ithout f u rth e r expansion. Since a ll of the s p e a k e rs w ere e ith e r stu d en ts o r te a c h e rs th is w as co n sid ered to be a b a s ic te n e t h eld stro n g ly by a ll. 4. E th ic a l ap p e als. C e rta in o b se rv a tio n s n e c e s s a ry to th is study w ere c la s s ifie d a s e th ic a l ap p e als. T h is w as done in sp ite of the fa c t th a t e th ic a l ap p eals have been often a s so c ia te d w ith the concept of s in c e rity , w hich w as the b a s ic p ro b lem of the study. T h o n ssen and 57 B a ird lis te d a s one of the m eth o d s of e sta b lish in g p ro b ity of c h a ra c t e r the c re a tin g of “ the im p re s s io n of being co m p letely s in c e re in h is u n d e r sta n d in g .’ * O bviously, it would have b een p resu m p tu o u s fo r the o b s e rv e r to ev alu ate s in c e rity in its a b s tra c t concept. It w as fe lt, how ev er, th a t since the s p e a k e rs film ed w ere a ll tra in e d a s s p e a k e rs , th at c e rta in o b se rv a b le and co n scio u s a p p e als, u su a lly r e f e r r e d to a s 5 5 D ick en s, op. c it., pp. 381-382. ®*Gray and B ra d e n , op. c i t., pp. 57-71. ^®M onroe, op. c i t ., p. 196. liv e r, D ickey, and Z elko, C om m unicative Speech, pp. 273-274. 57 T h o n ssen and B a ird , op. c i t ., p. 387. 79 “ e th ic a l,” would be u se d and could be reco g n ized and Included in th is study. Ite m s lis te d on the C ontent A n a ly sis S h eet w ere ta k en fro m B8 T h o n sse n and B a ird and included the follow ing ite m s c la s s ifie d u n d e r A risto tle * s c o n stitu e n ts of e th ic a l proof: p ro b ity of c h a ra c te r, s a g a c ity , a sso c ia tio n w ith the v irtu o u s and e le v a te d , p ra is e on se lf o r c a u se , lin k s o p p osition w ith the u n v irtu o u s, p o in ts to p e rso n a l e x p e rie n c e , se e k s to c re a te im p re s s io n of s in c e rity in the content of the sp eech , u s e s com m on s e n se , u s e s ta c t and m o d e ra tio n , d isp la y s good ta s te , fa m ilia r w ith the in te r e s ts of the day, in te lle c tu a l in te g rity , id e n tifie s se lf w ith h e a r e r s and p ro b le m s, p ro p e r b alan ce of su itab le p ra is e fo r au d ien ce, ca n d o r and s tra ig h tfo rw a rd n e s s , ta c t and c o n sid e ra tio n in reb u k e, o ffse ts p e rso n a l re a s o n s fo r sp eech , and re v e a ls p e rso n a b le q u a litie s. The above ite m s, it w as fe lt, could be o b se rv e d a s a c tu a l b e h a v io ra l te ch n iq u es in d e liv e ry o r co m p o sitio n . H ow ever, in o rd e r to m ake o b se rv a tio n s le s s su b je ctiv e, the a p p e a ls w ere not lis te d a s u sed u n le ss it w as c le a rly in d icated th at the s p e a k e r w as u sin g such an ap p eal in a c o n scio u s way. The ite m re g a rd in g s in c e rity w as included in the lis t, but th is ite m w as co n sid e re d to have b een u sed by a sp e a k e r only when the sp e a k e r u sed the w ord “ s in c e r e ” re la tiv e to h is stan d in a p o rtio n of h is sp eech o th e r than the opening se n ten c e . A m ple SBlbid. 80 p ro v isio n w as m ade f o r re c o rd in g any o th e r ap p eal w hich m ig h t be re la te d to the e th ic a l a re a . O b serv atio n of language and sy n ta x . — In the o b se rv a tio n of language and syntax u sed by the s p e a k e rs , fo u r g e n e ra l a r e a s w ere ch o sen fo r in c lu sio n in a L anguage and Syntax A n aly sis Sheet. T h is a n a ly s is sh e e t w as desig n ed fo r convenience in re p o rtin g , and w as not intended to be n e c e s s a rily an ex h au stiv e lis t of m u tu ally ex clu siv e ite m s . The ite m s included on the sh e e t w ere se le c te d a r b itr a r ily by the o b s e rv e r in an attem p t to c o v e r a s m any a r e a s of language u se and sty le a s could be d e s c rib e d p ra c tic a lly . M ost of the ite m s se le c te d had 59 b een d e s c rib e d by sta n d ard te x ts in th e field including: B rig a n c e , 60 61 62 63 B ry a n t and W allace, D ick en s, F le s c h , G ray and B rad e n , 64 65 6 6 67 M onroe, W hite and H e n d e rlid e r, S oper, and W eaver and N ess. ^^ B rig an ce, op. c i t ., p. 304. B ry an t and W allace, op. c i t ., p. 215. ®*Dickens, op. c i t ., pp. 175-177. ® ^Flesch, op. c i t ., pp. 2-8. ® 3G ray and B ra d e n , op. c i t ., pp. 444-447. ®^M onroe, op. c i t ., pp. 363-366. ® 3E ugene E . W hite and C la ir R. H e n d e rlid e r, P r a c tic a l P u b lic Speaking (New Y ork: The M acm illan C om pany, 1954), p. 263. ®®Soper, op. c i t ., pp. 275-285. ^ A n d re w T h o m as W eaver and O rd ean G e rh a rd N e ss, The F u n d a m e n ta ls and F o rm s of Speech (New Y ork: The O d y ssey P r e s s , 1957, p. 344. 81 Some of the lte m e included on the L anguage A n a ly sis S h eet c a rr ie d ap p licatio n to co n cep ts of thought a s w ell a s of w o rd s. F o r in sta n c e , the ev alu atio n of c o n c re te n e s s in the sp e e c h e s w as ap p lied to the speakers* a tte m p ts to s e c u re c o n c re te u n d ersta n d in g of a thought, a s w ell a s the u se of a c o n c re te w ord. In d e te rm in in g the d eg ree of usag e am ong th e v a rio u s ite m s o b se rv e d , it w as found th a t c la s s ific a tio n s had to be s tr ic t due to the b re v ity of the sp e e c h e s. A few w o rd s of slan g would give the im p re s s io n of in fo rm a lity to a sp eech of two m in u te s d u ra tio n , w h e re a s th is m ig h t not have been the c a se in a lo n g e r sp eech . F o r th is re a s o n it w as d e te rm in e d to m ak e s tr ic t c la s s ific a tio n s . W hen a s p o ssib le , a c tu a l ex a m p le s fro m the sp e ech e s w ere re c o rd e d by the o b s e rv e r on the A n aly sis S h e e ts. The fo u r g e n e ra l a r e a s included on the L anguage and Syntax A n aly sis S h eet and the ite m s o b se rv e d u n d er ea ch a re a s follow s: 1. S ta tistic a l in v en to ry . In o r d e r to have a b a s is of c o m p a ri son, the to ta l n u m b e r of w o rd s in e ach sp eech w as d e te rm in e d . N ext the n u m b er of p e rso n a l w o rd s w ere counted. P e rs o n a l w o rd s w ere 68 defined ac co rd in g to F le s c h a s the f ir s t, second, and th ird p e rso n pronouns (except n e u te r pro n o u n s), pron o u n s r e f e r rin g to people, a ll w o rd s having m a scu lin e o r fem inine g en d e r, and the group w o rd s “ p eople” and “ fo lk s .” Since the p e rso n of the s p e a k e r w as so 68 F le s c h , op. c i t ., pp. 2-8. 8 2 im p o rta n t in th is study In re la tio n to ev alu atio n of s in c e rity , a count w as a lso m ad e of a ll f ir s t p e rso n pronouns w hich would include the sp e a k e r. In o r d e r to be able to study sen ten ce s tru c tu re and co m p o si tio n , the n u m b e r of se n ten c e s in the speech w as d eterm in ed . N ext the to ta l n u m b er of w o rd s w as divided by the n u m b e r of se n ten c es to d e te r m ine the av e ra g e sentence length. Since the ran g e of sentence length w as a lso im p o rta n t, the n u m b er of w o rd s in the s h o rte s t sen ten ce and the n u m b e r of w ords in the lo n g est sen ten ce w ere also re c o rd e d . L a st, the n u m b e r of each kind of sentence w a i d e term in ed . 2. Im a g e ry and m eaning. F o u r a r e a s w ere o b se rv ed u n d er th is h eading. F i r s t , the re la tiv e am biguity o r p re c is io n of the language w as o b se rv e d . A m biguous language w as defined a s language fille d w ith te r m s of doubtful m ean in g , o r te r m s capable of being u n d ersto o d in two o r m o re p o ssib le s e n s e s . P re c is e language, on the o th e r hand, w as c o n sid ered to be re la te d to e x a c tn e ss of im a g e ry . If a t le a s t o n e-h alf of the se n te n c e s of the speech included am biguous te rm s , the speech w as c o n sid ered to be often am biguous. T he speech w as c o n sid ered to have som e am biguity if th e re w ere a t le a s t one o r two am biguous te rm s . If th e re w ere no am biguous te r m s , the sp eech w as c o n sid e re d n e v e r am biguous. Second, the c o n c re te n e s s of the language and thought co n cep ts w ere o b se rv e d . C o n c re te n e ss w as defined a s the callin g up of p ast e x p e rie n c e s of the lis te n e r in o rd e r to a ttain und erstan d in g o r aro u se feelin g . If a t le a s t one half of the sen ten ces in the speech contained co n crete co n cep ts, the speech w as co n sid ered often co n c re te. If th e re w ere two o r th re e ex am p les of c o n c re te n e ss in the speech it w as con sid e re d to have som e c o n c re te n e ss. If th e re w ere no e a sily re c o g n iz able ex am p les of c o n c re te n e ss, the speech w as co n sid ered to be n ev e r co n c re te. T h ird , the c la rity of the language w as o b serv ed . C la rity w as defined a s th at quality of the language which would aro u se specific m eaning, w hether fro m p ast ex p erien ce o r not. Since c la rity acco rd in g to th is definition w as a v e ry subjective concept, the o b s e rv e r approached it fro m the point of view of g e n e ra l o r sp ecialized v o cab u lary . If the language could be e a sily u nderstood by ev eryone, the sp e a k e r is said to have u sed c la rity . If it w as fa irly w ell understood by ev eryone, the sp eak er w as said to have used som e c la rity . If the language w as such a s to be c h a ra c te ris tic of a sp e cial field , o r if sp e cia l o r advanced tra in in g w as re q u ire d to u n d erstan d ex actly o r e a sily , then the speech w as c la ssifie d a s seldom c le a r. F o u rth , the use of loaded w ords w as o b serv ed . Loaded w ords w ere defined a s w ords which c a rrie d an em o tio n al connotation o v e r and above the ex act m eaning of the w o rd s. If they o c c u rre d in at le a s t one half of the se n ten ces, they w ere said to be often u sed . If one o r two ex am p les w ere used in the speech they w ere co n sid ered to have been 84 u sed som e. If none o c c u rre d they w ere c la ssifie d a s n ev e r u sed . 3. SLx a r e a s w ere o b serv ed u n d er the g e n e ra l heading of sty le , which w as tak en to include both w ord choice and sentence c o m p o sition. F ir s t, the tendency of the sp e a k e r to e ith e r econom y o r w o rd i n e s s w as co n sid ered . An u n n e c e ssa ry w ord w as defined a s a connective p h ra se o r w ord which w as not n e c e s s a ry fo r c le a r tra n sitio n , o r a w ord o r p h ra se which rep ea ted a m odification alre ad y und ersto o d by the context and did so w ithout adding fu rth e r m eaning o r e m p h a sis. If th e re w ere two o r le s s obvious ex am p les of u n n e c e ssa ry w ords o r p h ra s e s included, the sp e ak er w as co n sid ered to have used econom y of w o rd s. If th e re w ere fro m th ree to six ex am p les of obvious f ille r o r u n n e c e ssa ry w ords o r p h ra s e s included, the sp e ak e r w as co n sid ered to have u sed som e econom y. If th e re w ere m o re u n n ec essary w ords o r p h ra s e s in the speech the sp e a k er w as co n sid ered to have used no econom y. Second, the re la tiv e o rig in a lity o r tr ite n e s s of the s p e a k e r’s language and e x p re s sio n s w ere o b serv ed . If th e re w ere no ex am p les of tr ite n e s s in the speech, the speech w as c la ssifie d a s n e v e r tr ite . If one to th re e ex am p le s of tr ite n e s s w ere found, the speech w as co n s id e re d to have som e trite n e s s . If m o re than th re e ex am p les w ere found the speech w as co n sid ered to be often tr ite . T h ird , the sim p licity o r o rn a te n e ss of the language w as SB o b se rv e d . O rn ate language w as c o n sid e re d to be the choice of lengthy, o b sc u re w o rd s w hich c a rr y w ithin the context of the sp eech no ad d itio n a l m ean in g th an a m o re com m only u n d ersto o d w ord. S im plicity w as c o n sid e re d to be th e o p p o site. If th e re w ere no ex a m p le s of o rn ate w ord ch o ice, the sp eech w as c o n sid e re d to be n e v e r o rn a te . If th e re w ere one o r two c le a r ex a m p le s of o m a te n e s s , the speech w as c o n sid e re d to have som e o rn a te n e s s . If th e re w ere m o re e x a m p le s, the speech w as c la ssifie d a s often o rn a te . F o u rth , the fo rm a lity of the language chosen w as o b se rv e d . F o rm a lity w as c o n sid ered to be a q u ality w hich could be defined on a continuum betw een slan g o r com m only u sed idiom and v e ry im p e rs o n a l ac ad e m ic sty le . Due to the b re v ity of the sp e ech e s, a few ex a m p le s w ere w eighed h eav ily . If the sp eech included som e slang o r c o n v e r sa tio n al c o n s tru c tio n s it w as co n sid ered to be n e v e r fo rm a l. If it included no slang but w as not acad e m ic, it w as co n sid ered to have som e fo rm a lity . If it contained no slan g and did co n tain fo rm a l acad em ic c o n stru c tio n throughout, it w as c o n sid e re d to be often fo rm a l. F ifth , fig u re s of speech w ere o b se rv e d . F ig u re s of speech included sim ile , m e ta p h o r, m etonym y, synecdoche, p e rso n ific a tio n , and a p o stro p h e . C la ssific a tio n s w ere: n e v e r u sed , seldom u se d , in d icatin g the u se of pne o r two fig u re s of sp eech , and often u se d , in d icatin g a g r e a te r u se . S ixth, the u se of a llu sio n s w as o b se rv e d . A llu sio n s w ere 86 defined a s an In d ire c t, v eiled , o r im p lied re fe re n c e s to a n o th e r so u rc e , sp e a k e r, o r w ork w hich w as u sed by the sp e a k e r, but w hich w as not ad m itted by the s p e a k e r a s being such a re fe re n c e . C la s s ific a tio n s w ere again: n e v e r u se d , seldom u sed , in d icatin g one o r two u s e s , and often u sed , in d icatin g a m o re ex ten siv e u se . 4. O e n e ra l. Two a r e a s of o b se rv a tio n w ere included u n d e r th is heading. F i r s t , w as th e a p p ro p ria te n e s s of language. If the language in v a ria b ly seem ed to fit th e su b ject, sp e a k e r and o cc asio n , it w as c o n sid ered n e v e r in a p p ro p ria te . If th e re w ere one o r two exam ples of language not fittin g , it w as c la ssifie d a s having som e in a p p ro p ria te language. If th e re w ere m o re than two ex a m p le s, the sp eech w as co n sid e re d often in a p p ro p ria te . Second, v a rie ty of w ord choice w as co n sid ered . If th e re w as no obvious o v erw o rk in g of a w ord o r p h ra s e , the sp e a k e r w as c o n sid e re d a s n e v e r lacking v a rie ty . If th e re w as som e o v erw o rk in g of a w ord o r p h ra se in a t le a s t one p a rt of the sp eech , the sp e a k e r w as c o n sid e re d a s lacking som e v a rie ty . If th e re w as a co n stan t o v erw o rk in g of a w ord o r p h ra s e , the sp e a k e r w as c o n sid ered to often lack v a rie ty . T ab u latio n of raw d a ta . — On the b a s is of o b se rv a tio n s m ade on the s e v e ra l a n a ly s is sh e e ts u sed by the o b s e rv e r, tab u latio n w as m ade of the c h a r a c te r is tic s of each sp e a k e r fo r each of h is two sp e ec h e s. Some ite m s included on the a n a ly sis sh e e ts w ere found not 87 to apply to any sp e a k e r, and w ere dropped fro m fu rth e r co n sid eratio n a s a m a tte r of expediency in re p o rtin g . F o r in sta n c e , m any of the m otive ap p eals lis te d on the a n a ly sis sh e e ts w ere not u sed by any sp e a k e r. A to ta l of one hundred and tw enty ite m s re la tiv e to o b se rv e d c h a ra c te ris tic s w ere included in the fin al tab u latio n of raw d a ta . The one hundred and tw enty ite m s and the c la ssific a tio n u sed u n d er each a re lis te d in T able 1. 8 8 TA BLE 1 OBSERV ED ITE M S AND CLA SSIFICA TION S INCLUDED IN TABULATION O F RAW DATA Item No. N am e of O b serv ed Ite m s D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s U sed 1 S p e a k e r's d r e s s C o n se rv a tiv e , M edium 2 S p e a k e r's age Y o u th -A d u lt-O ld er adult 3 C o lo r of h a ir B lo n d -B la c k -D a rk -G ra y 4 Im age height (In in ch es) 5 P o s tu re S tiff-M ed iu m -R elax ed - SLouched 6 B odily sh ift o r sw ay (random m ovem ent) None - som e -o ften 7 G ro s s B ody m ovem ent None - som e -o fte n 8 H ead g e s tu re s None - som e -o ften 9 C onventional g e s tu re s None - som e - of ten 1 0 D e sc rip tiv e g e s tu re s None - som e - often 1 1 T im in g of g e s tu re s G o o d -m ix ed -p o o r 1 2 F o rc e of g e s tu re s G o o d -m ix ed -p o o r 13 F a c ia l e x p re s sio n fo r e m p h a sis None - som e -o ften 14 R eflectio n of m ood P le a s a n t - S erio u s pained - none 15 T im e looked a t n o tes (In seco n d s and p e r cent) 16 T im e looked a t c a m e ra (In seco n d s and p e r cent) 17 T im e looked at studio audience (In seco n d s and p e r cent) 18 R ead opening sentence Y e s -p a rtly -n o 19 R ead speech Y e s -p a rtly -n o 2 0 R ead la s t sentence Y e s -p a rtly -n o 2 1 B ro k e m ood at end of speech Y es-n o 2 2 M a tu rity of voice M ature - youthful 23 P le a s a n t voice quality Y es-n o 24 T en sio n in voice Som e-none 25 U se of In ten sity None - som e -o ften 26 F o rc e le v e l W e ak -stro n g 27 V olum e c o n tra s t betw een se c tio n s None - som e -o ften 28 V a rie ty of volum e None - som e -o ften 29 W ords p e r m inute (In n u m b e r of w ords) 30 U se of d u ratio n fo r e m p h a sis None - som e - often Item No. 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 8 9 TA BLE 1 — C ontinued N am e of O b serv ed Ite m s D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s U sed U se of pause S to p s betw een se n te n c e s V a rie ty of ra te R ate c o n tra s t betw een se ctio n s V a rie ty in pitch P itc h p a tte rn P itc h le v e l at sen ten ce end A v erag e pitch le v e l F lu en cy A rticu la tio n O pening en th u siasm C losing en th u siasm S peaking S tyle D idactic tone U sed in tro d u c to ry m a te r ia ls N um ber of m a in p o in ts S peech o rg an iz atio n S p eech a rra n g e m e n t G ave p rev iew of p o in ts N um bered p o in ts C le a r tra n s itio n s F o rm of conclusion U se of d efin itio n s U se of c o m p a riso n s U se of illu s tra tio n s U se of in sta n c e s U se of testim o n y U se of s ta tis tic s U se of ex planation U se of d e s c rip tio n None- some -often Seldom-often None - some -often None - some -often None - some-much None - some -much Up-same-down Low-medium-high Excellent-medium-poor Good-average- poor Excellent-m edium-poor Excellent-medium - poor C onve r sational- Public speaking-Oratorical none - some -much some-none (number) D irect-indirect Enumeration-Time - space -C lim actic-Problem - solution-Cause and effect -Motivated sequence Yes-no Yes-no Y es-som e-no Summ ary-Affirm ati on- Appeal-Re statement-None None - some -often None - some - of ten None - some - often None - some - often None - some -often None-som e-often None - some - often None - some - often TA BLE 1 — C ontinued Item No. N am e of O b eerv ed Item D e sc rip tiv e T e rm U sed 61 Uee of rh e to ric a l q u estio n s None - som e -o ften 62 U se of re s ta te m e n t None - som e -o ften 63 In te r e s t fa c to rs* sig n ific a n c e None - som e -often 64 I n te r e s t fa c to rs -h u m o r None - som e -o ften 65 In te r e s t fa c to rs -u n iq u e n e s s None - som e -o ften 6 6 In te r e s t fa c to rs -fa m ilia rity None - som e -o ften 67 I n te r e s t fa c to rs -p ro b le m s None - som e -o ften 6 8 I n te r e s t fa c to rs -c o n c re te n e s s None - som e -often 69 Inte re s t fa c to rs-a n ta g o n ism None - som e - often 70 I n te r e s t fa c to rs -v a ria tio n None - som e - of ten 71 I n te r e s t fa c to rs -p ro x im ity None - som e -o ften 72 In te r e s t fa c to rs -s u s p e n s e N o n e-so m e-o ften 73 M otive a p p e a l-s o c ia l ap p ro v al Y es-n o 74 M otive ap p e al-to com pete Y es-n o 75 M otive ap p e a l-h ea lth Y es-n o 76 M otive a p p e al-p ea ce of m ind Y es-n o 77 M otive a p p e a l-to m ake m oney Y es-n o 78 M otive a p p e a l-p e rso n a l freed o m Y es-n o 79 M otive a p p e a l-p a trio tis m Y es-n o 80 M otive a p p e a l-s e lf p re s e rv a tio n Y es-n o 81 M otive a p p e a l-re lig io n Y es-n o 82 M otive ap p e al-to help o th e rs Y es-n o 83 M otive ap p eal-h av e and r e a r c h ild re n Y es-n o 84 M otive ap p eal-av o id d an g er Y es-n o 85 M otive ap p e al-p o w er and au th o rity Y es-n o 8 6 M otive a p p e a l-c a re fo r p a re n ts Y es-n o 87 M otive a p p e a l-s e c u rity Y es-n o 8 8 M otive ap p e a l-im p ro v e education Y es-n o 89 A s s o c ia te s se lf w ith v irtu o u s Y es-n o 90 P o in ts to p e rso n a l ex p e rien ce Y es-n o 91 TA B LE 1 — C ontinued Item No. N am e of O b serv ed Item D e sc rip tiv e T e rm U sed 91 Id e n tifie s self w ith h e a r e r s Y es-n o 92 C an d o r and stra ig h tfo rw a rd n e ss used Y es-n o 93 S e ek s im p re s sio n of sin c e rity Y es-n o 94 L in k s opp o sitio n to u n v irtu o u s Y es-n o 95 U se s ta c t and m o d e ra tio n Y es-n o 96 U se s am biguous te r m s O ften - som e - neve r 97 U se s co n c re te language Of te n -so m e - neve r 98 U sed c la rity of language Y e s-so m e -s e ld o m 99 U se of loaded w o rd s O ften - som e -n e v e r 1 0 0 U sed econom y of w o rd s Y e s-so m e -n o 1 0 1 U sed tr ite n e s s in language O ften - som e -n ev e r 1 0 2 O rn a te n e s s in language O ften- som e -none 103 U se of fo rm a lity in language None - som e - often 104 U se of fig u re s of speech N e v e r- seldom -often 105 U se of allu sio n s N eve r - seld o m -often 106 In a p p ro p ria te language u sed N e v e r-so m e -o fte n 107 L acked v a rie ty in w ording N eve r - som e - often 108 T o ta l n u m b e r of w o rd s (num ber) 109 P e rc e n ta g e of p e rso n a l w o rd s (p ercen tag e) 1 1 0 P e rc e n ta g e of 1st p e rso n a l pronouns (p ercen tag e) 1 1 1 T o ta l n u m b e r of se n te n c e s (num ber) 1 1 2 A verage w o rd s p e r sentence (num ber) 113 W ords in s h o rte s t sen ten ce (num ber) 114 W ords in lo n g est sen ten ce (num ber) 115 N u m b er of sim p le se n te n c e s (num ber) 116 N u m b er of com pound se n te n c e s (num ber) 117 N um ber of com plex se n ten c es (num ber) 118 N u m b er of d e c la ra tiv e se n te n c e s (num ber) 119 N u m b er of e x c la m a to ry se n te n c e s (num ber) 1 2 0 N um ber of in te rro g a to ry se n ten c es (num ber) 1 C H A PTER HI PRESEN TA TIO N AND IN TERPR ETA TIO N O F DATA The p ro b lem fo r th is study w as sta te d in te r m s of q u estio n s divided into two d iv isio n s. P a r t I d ea lt w ith c h a ra c te ris tic s and d iffe r e n c e s of s in c e re and in sin c e re s p e a k e rs , so c la s s ifie d by the s p e a k e rs th e m se lv e s, and d eterm in ed by o b se rv a tio n of the sp e ec h e s. In such in v estig a tio n no u se w as m ade of audience ev alu atio n , but the in d icatio n of s in c e rity o r in sin c e rity m ade by the s p e a k e rs th e m se lv e s w ithin the d esig n of the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t w as u se d . P a r t II d e a lt with the c h a r a c te r is tic s of sp e a k e rs whom au d ien ces judged s in c e re , in s in c e re , o r about w hose sin c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e . F o r p u rp o se s of c la rity in a rra n g e m e n t, the d ata fo r th is study and in te rp re ta tio n s of the d a ta w ill be p re se n te d a s r e p o r ts of o b se rv a tio n s re la tiv e to each of the q u estio n s ra is e d in the sta te m e n t of the p ro b lem . P a r t I Q u estio n 1. — When a group of s p e a k e rs give sp e e c h e s su p p o rtin g a p o sitio n in w hich they s in c e re ly b eliev e and then give sp e ec h e s on the opposite p o sition in w hich they supposedly do not b elie v e , a re th e re sig n ifican t d iffe re n c e s in the b e h a v io r of s p e a k e rs 92 93 o b se rv e d In the two s e ts of sp e ech es re la tiv e to d e liv e ry and content? T he o b se rv ed c h a r a c te r is tic s of ea c h s p e a k e r re la tiv e to 120 ite m s of o b se rv a tio n w ere ta b u lated in the raw d ata (Appendix L ). The to ta ls of o b se rv e d c h a ra c te ris tic s f o r each ite m found in the s in c e re and in s in c e re sp e e c h e s by the tw en ty -fo u r s p e a k e rs w ere tab u lated in T ab le 2. The to ta ls of o b se rv e d c h a ra c te ris tic s w ere c o n sid e re d to be only a v e ry g ro s s m e a n s of in d icatin g p o ssib le d iffe re n c e s betw een s in c e re and in sin c e re s p e a k e rs . SLnce the grouping of d ata in such a m a n n e r m ade no allow ance fo r the d iffe re n c e s in speaking h a b its, m a n n e r s , o r p re p a ra tio n of the su b je c ts, th ey could not be tak en to be re lia b le b a s e s fo r p red ic tio n of b eh av io r. It w as assu m e d th a t w hen tw en ty -fo u r s p e a k e rs w ere o b se rv e d re la tiv e to 1 2 0 ite m s of b e h a v io ra l c h a ra c te ris tic s th e re would be som e d iffe re n c e s betw een sp e ec h e s. T ab u latio n s of o b se rv e d c h a r a c te r is tic s in th is study, how ever, showed v e ry little change in to ta l c h a r a c te r is tic s betw een sin c e re and in sin c e re s p e a k e rs . In no in stan c e w ere sig n ifican t d iffe re n c e s found involving the change in a m a jo rity of s p e a k e rs re la tiv e to a single ite m . Some ite m s of p h y sic al d e liv e ry o b se rv e d showed w hat m ig h t be c o n sid ered slig h t im p ro v em en t in the in s in c e re sp eech . It is p o ssib le to s u rm is e th a t the e x p e rim e n ta l d esig n w hich c o n siste n tly p laced the in s in c e re sp eech a s the second speech fo r each sp e a k e r m ay 94 TA BLE 2 TO TA LS O F OBSERVED CHARACTERISTICS O F SPEAKERS Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s S « 8 -a a s. O S D O 4 » • 1-9 | s. « 03 * # 1 1 # 1. S p e a k e r’s D re s s : 2 . 3. C o n serv ativ e 13 13 5 5 5 M ed. C o n serv ativ e 1 1 1 1 5 3 3 S p e a k e r's Age: Youth 8 8 4 1 3 A dult 13 13 6 6 5 O ld e r A dult 3 3 0 1 0 C o lo r of H air: Blond 3 3 2 1 0 B lack 1 1 1 1 4 4 3 D ark 1 0 1 0 4 3 5 G ray 0 0 0 0 0 Im age H eight: Short 2 2 0 0 0 A v erag e 17 17 8 8 5 T a ll 5 5 2 0 3 P o s tu re : Stiff 2 2 0 2 0 M edium 1 0 1 1 2 1 3 R elaxed 1 0 9 8 3 5 Slouched 2 2 0 2 0 Body Shift o r Sway: None 0 2 2 1 0 Some 17 16 6 6 5 O ften 7 6 2 1 3 G ro s s Body M ovem ent: None 2 1 17 7 7 8 Some 3 7 3 1 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 9fl TA BLE 2 — C ontinued Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s s i S ' S I z 1 = ! i Most Often 1 t f i fl s l * l | | u f 8 . H ead G e stu re s: Npne 9 7 2 2 5 Some 8 1 0 2 4 3 O ften 7 7 6 2 0 9. C onventional G e stu re s: None 8 6 1 2 2 Some 8 9 3 2 2 O ften 8 9 6 4 4 10. D e sc rip tiv e G e stu re s: None 23 2 1 8 7 6 Some 0 2 1 0 1 O ften 1 1 1 1 1 11. T im in g of G e stu re s: Good 19 18 8 5 3 M ixed 1 3 0 0 2 P o o r 2 0 0 2 1 12. F o rc e of G e stu re s: Good 1 0 8 6 1 0 M ixed 8 8 4 4 4 P o o r 4 5 0 2 2 13. F a c ia l E x p re s s io n s fo r E m p h asis: None 1 0 8 2 4 2 Some 1 1 1 1 5 3 3 O ften 3 5 3 1 3 114. R eflectio n of Mood: P le a s a n t 5 4 5 0 2 S erious 16 15 5 6 4 P ain e d 3 4 0 2 2 None 0 1 0 0 0 15. T im e Looked a t N otes: (A verage of p e rc e n ta g e s) 27.5% 28.3 12.2 39 41.5% TA BLE 2 — C ontinued Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s ■ f l) ^ l l Insincere 1 Speakers 1 Most Often Judged fl . 3 * t o j ; 8 « | i i f 1 £ < a B 16. T im e Looked a t C a m e ra : (A verage of p e rc e n ta g e s) 35% 32.3 51 j6 24.7 23.3 17. T im e Looked a t A udience: (A verage of p e rc e n ta g e s) 35.8% 37.6 34. 5 34.5 33.3 18. R ead O pening S en ten ce: Y es 8 9 0 4 5 P a r tly 7 6 6 2 2 No 9 9 4 2 1 19. R ead S peech: Y es 1 2 0 1 0 P a rtly 5 5 0 1 3 No 18 17 1 0 6 5 20. R ead L a s t S entence: Y es 2 4 0 2 0 P a r tly 1 1 0 0 0 No 2 1 16 8 2 5 21. B ro k e Mood at End of Speech: Y es 4 8 2 6 3 No 2 0 16 8 2 5 22. M a tu rity of V oice: M ature 2 1 2 1 9 8 7 Y outhful 3 3 1 0 1 23. P le a s a n t V oice Q uality: Y es 2 0 2 0 1 0 6 7 No 4 4 0 2 1 24. T en sio n in V oice: Som e 1 0 1 2 2 5 2 None 14 1 2 8 3 6 07 TA B LE 2 — C ontinued Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s g « • *a a 8 . C O 00 25. U se of In ten sity : 26. 27. 30. 31 32. None 2 0 18 5 8 8 Some 3 5 4 0 0 O ften 1 1 1 0 0 F o rc e L evel: W eak 4 4 0 3 3 dtrong 2 0 2 0 1 0 5 5 V olum e C o n tra st betw een Sections: None 13 1 2 2 5 7 Some 9 1 1 7 3 1 O ften 2 1 1 0 0 28. V a rie ty of V olum e: None 4 2 0 1 2 Some 15 16 6 6 4 O ften 5 6 4 1 2 29. W ords P e r M inute: (A verage) U se of D u ratio n fo r E m p h asis: 148.8 153.5 156 129 141.3 None 1 2 1 1 4 4 5 Some 8 1 0 2 3 3 O ften 4 3 4 1 0 U se of P a u se fo r E m p h asis: None: 6 4 2 2 4 Some 13 2 0 7 4 4 O ften 5 0 1 4 4 Stops betw een S entences: Seldom 2 2 1 1 2 O ften 2 2 2 2 9 7 6 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued 98 E EE £ * 2 • 5 » Item s and Descriptive T erm s £ « ® • S t S S ' O * S'S I -3 t i S s& l 5 * J a s . I s * f a o f - a ? {•< 33. V a rie ty of R ate: None 3 2 1 1 1 Some 19 18 4 7 6 O ften 2 4 5 0 1 34. R ate C o n tra s ts betw een Sections: None 16 13 2 7 5 Some 8 1 1 8 1 3 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 35. V a riety in P itch : None 2 3 0 0 1 Some 16 14 4 6 5 M uch 6 7 6 2 1 E x ce ssiv e 0 0 0 0 0 36. P itc h P a tte rn : None 1 2 1 1 8 4 3 Some 1 1 13 2 4 5 Much 1 0 0 0 0 37. P itc h L ev el at Sentence End: Up 0 0 0 0 0 Same 6 4 2 2 1 Down 18 2 0 8 6 7 38. A v erag e P itc h L evel: Low 7 7 1 4 3 M edium 13 13 6 3 5 High 4 4 3 1 0 39. F lu en cy : E x ce llen t 1 1 1 0 8 1 3 M edium 7 1 2 2 3 2 P o o r 6 2 0 4 3 99 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued a a e ■ pm Ite m s and D esc rip tiv e T e rm s g o < 5 ’ fl g < 5 tj • fl ^ s | a | s 6 g ts S > | 1 1 ■ < I I s i S'S-S S * ! 1 ? £ coco fl m S ^ i f l 40. A rtic u la tio n : 43. 44. Good 13 13 8 4 5 A verage 1 0 1 0 1 4 3 P o o r 1 1 1 0 0 O pening E n th u siasm : E x ce llen t 14 15 8 3 3 M edium 2 1 0 1 1 P o o r 8 8 0 4 4 C losing E n th u siasm : E x cellen t 4 3 5 0 0 M edium 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 P o o r 9 9 2 7 6 S peaking S tyle: C o n v e rsa tio n a l 5 3 5 1 2 P u b lic Speaking 18 2 0 5 6 6 O ra to ric a l 1 1 0 1 0 D id actic Tone: None 14 13 9 3 4 Som e 7 7 1 2 3 M uch 3 4 0 3 1 U sed In tro d u c to ry M a te ria ls: Some 5 2 0 3 1 None 19 2 2 1 0 5 7 N um ber of m ain points: (av erag e) 2 2 . 2 2 . 1 2 2 . 1 47. S peech O rg an izatio n : D ire c t In d ire c t 23 23 1 1 9 1 8 0 8 0 100 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s 2 « 8 1 S 8. c q m u v 0 1 d u 1 8. co d i o S w I 9 -8 d I 8 S - o 8 * Jf-3 jt C J Q « | L " 1.3s 48. Speech A rran g em en t: E n u m eratio n 16 19 4 7 7 P ro b le m - Solution 7 4 4 1 1 M otivated Seq. 0 1 1 0 0 T im e 1 0 1 0 0 S pace 0 0 0 0 0 49. Gave P re v ie w of P o in ts: Y es 6 8 6 0 0 No 18 13 7 6 5 50. N um bered P o in ts: Y es 6 1 1 3 2 3 No 18 13 7 6 5 51. C le a r T ra n s itio n s : Y es 17 17 1 0 5 5 S o m etim es 1 0 0 0 0 No 6 7 0 3 3 52. F o rm of C onclusion: S u m m ary 7 4 3 2 2 A ffirm atio n 1 6 2 0 1 A ppeal 5 4 3 1 1 R e sta tem en t 4 4 1 2 1 None 7 6 1 3 3 53. U se of D efinitions: None 18 2 2 8 5 7 Som e 6 2 2 3 1 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 54. U se of C o m p ariso n s: None 2 1 2 0 1 0 6 8 Som e 3 4 0 2 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 101 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s I s 8 * a & 09 09 1 55. U se of Illu s tra tio n s : None 2 0 2 2 6 7 7 Som e 4 2 4 1 1 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 56. U se of In sta n c e s: None 1 1 14 4 5 4 Som e 13 1 0 6 3 4 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 57. U se of T estim o n y : None 18 2 1 8 7 6 Som e 6 3 2 1 2 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 58. U se of S ta tistic s: None 23 24 1 0 8 8 Som e 1 0 0 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 59. U se of E xplanation: None 5 0 1 2 2 Som e 19 24 9 6 6 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 60. U se of D esc rip tio n : None 17 1 1 3 6 6 Som e 7 13 7 2 2 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 61. U se of R h e to ric a l Q uestion: None 15 2 1 8 5 6 Som e 8 3 1 3 2 O ften 1 0 1 0 0 62. U se of R e sta tem en t: None 13 9 4 5 5 Som e 1 1 15 6 3 3 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 102 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued fl fl t : ^ J Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e m s g S ■ * » P & • l | l | 3 a 2 a o T s fl o T 2 09 oa 5 09 63. I n te r e s t F a c t o r s — S ignificance: None 19 16 4 8 7 Som e 5 8 6 0 1 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 64. I n te r e s t F a c to r s — H um or: None 23 2 2 9 8 8 Som e 1 2 1 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 65. In te re s t F a c to rs — U niqueness: None 24 24 1 0 8 8 Som e 0 0 0 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 . I n te r e s t F a c to r s — F a m ilia rity : None 24 2 2 1 0 8 8 Som e 0 2 0 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 67. I n te r e s t F a c to rs — P ro b le m s : None 16 18 7 7 6 Som e 7 6 3 0 2 O ften 1 0 0 1 0 6 8 . I n te r e s t F a c to r s — C o n c re te n e ss: None 14 15 7 7 5 Som e 1 0 0 3 1 3 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued 103 Item s and Descriptive Term s j! ■ e e S t 2 S t • a S 3 ! 3 s & g t 6 J § a s . l s . S - a S p - s i f I I - S|- iS’ S a fi'Ss 3 go co Jqoa S>-»qq S ► - » >3 * 4 69. In te re e t F a c to rs — A ntagonism : None 23 2 2 1 0 8 Som e 1 2 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 70. In te r e s t F a c to rs — V ariatio n : None 24 24 1 0 8 Som e 0 0 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 71. In te r e s t F a c to rs — P ro x im ity : None 2 2 24 1 0 7 Som e 2 0 0 1 O ften 0 0 0 0 72. I n te r e s t F a c to rs — Suspense: None 24 24 1 0 8 Som e 0 0 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 73. M otive A ppeal — S o cial A pproval: Y es 2 1 0 No 2 2 23 1 0 74. M otive A p p ea l— to C om pete: Y es 2 2 0 No 2 2 2 2 1 0 75. M otive A p p ea l— H ealth: Y es 2 2 1 No 2 2 2 2 9 o o o - j ^ - 3 * - * o o c d o ^ -a oooo Least Able t o Agree 104 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s 76. M otive A p p eal— P e a c e of M ind: Y es No 77. M otive A ppeal — M ake M oney: Y es No 78. M otive A ppeal — P e rs o n a l F re e d o m : Y es No 79. M otive A ppeal — P a trio tis m : Y es No 80. M otive A p p eal----- S e lf-P re s e rv a tio n : Y es No 81. M otive A ppeal — R eligion: Y es No 82. M otive A p p ea l— H elp O th e rs: Y es No 83. M otive A p p ea l— Have and R e a r C h ild ren : Y es No 0 24 0 24 2 22 4 20 1 23 3 21 1 23 1 23 1 23 1 23 6 18 6 18 0 24 1 23 1 23 2 22 0 10 0 10 2 8 2 8 0 10 1 9 0 10 2 8 0 8 0 8 0 8 0 8 0 8 0 8 1 7 0 8 0 8 0 8 0 8 0 8 0 8 1 7 0 8 0 8 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued 106 Ite m s and D esc rip tiv e T e rm s £ « 8 3 . 3 S . 03 05 S S 1-3 1 1 a B 5-c C £ ^ *s S w d i t o*g 8 H i S £ 5 3 e ja 2 < * e s ? JSs 84. M otive A p p ea l— Avoid D anger: Y es 0 1 1 0 0 No 24 23 9 8 8 85. M otive A p p ea l— P o w e r and A u th o rity : Y es 1 1 1 0 0 No 23 23 9 8 8 8 6 . M otive A ppeal — C a re f o r P a re n ts : Y es 1 0 0 1 0 No 23 24 1 0 7 8 87. M otive A p p eal— S ecurity: Y es 1 1 0 1 0 No 23 23 1 0 7 8 8 8 . M otive A ppeal — Im p ro v e E ducation: Y es 0 4 0 1 1 No 24 2 0 1 0 7 7 89. E th ic a l A p p e a l— A sso c iate S elf w ith V irtu o u s: Y es 3 1 0 0 1 No 2 1 23 1 0 8 8 90. E th ic a l A p p ea l— P o in ts to P e rs o n a l E x p erien ce: Y es 7 3 3 1 4 No 17 2 1 7 7 8 91. E th ic a l A p p eal— Id e n tifie s S elf w ith H e a re rs : Y es 2 2 2 1 0 No 2 2 2 2 8 7 8 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued 106 Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s S incere S peakers Insincere S peakers Most Often Judged S incere Most Often t •rt 0 i i Audience Least Able t o A gree 92. E th ic a l A p p eal— C an d o r A S tra ig h tfo rw a rd n e ss U sed: Y es 2 0 1 l 0 No 2 2 24 9 7 8 93. E th ic a l A p p eal— S eek s Im p re s s io n of S in c e rity : Y es 4 3 1 2 1 No 2 0 2 1 9 6 7 94. E th ic a l A ppeal — L in k s O pposition to U nvirtuous: Y es 0 2 0 0 0 No 24 2 2 1 0 8 8 95. E th ic a l A p p ea l— U ses T a c t and M oderation: Y es 0 0 0 0 0 No 24 24 1 0 8 8 96. U se s A m biguous T e rm s : O ften 2 2 0 2 2 Som e 1 0 16 4 3 4 N ev er 1 2 6 6 3 2 97. U se s C o n crete L an g u ag e: O ften 3 4 0 1 3 Som e 16 7 8 2 3 N ev er 5 13 2 5 2 98. U se s C la rity in L anguage: Y es 17 18 9 4 4 Som e 6 5 1 4 3 S eldom 1 1 0 0 1 99. U se of L oaded W ords: O ften 1 2 0 0 0 Som e 5 1 1 3 4 4 N ev er 18 1 1 7 4 4 107 TA BLE 2 — C ontinued Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s S incere S peakers Insincere S peakers Most Often Judged S incere fl 1 £ ©■g | I n m •-» £ s | S i l l < i B 1 0 0 . U sed E conom y of W ords: Y es 2 0 17 7 6 6 Som e 1 6 2 1 2 No 3 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 . U sed T rite n e s s of L anguage: O ften 0 0 0 0 0 Som e 3 7 1 2 1 N ev er 2 1 17 9 6 7 1 0 2 . O rn a te n e s s in L anguage: O ften 0 0 0 0 0 Som e 4 9 2 3 1 None 2 0 13 8 5 7 103. U se of F o rm a lity in L anguage: None 0 4 2 0 0 Som e 16 1 1 6 2 7 O ften 8 9 2 6 1 104. U se of F ig u re s of S peech: N ev er 23 2 1 9 8 8 Seldom 1 3 1 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 105. U se of A llu sio n s: N ev er 23 2 0 9 8 8 S eldom 1 4 1 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 106. In a p p ro p ria te L anguage: N ev er 24 24 1 0 8 8 Som e 0 0 0 0 0 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 107. L acked V a rie ty in W ording: N ev er 17 18 1 0 3 6 Som e 7 6 0 5 2 O ften 0 0 0 0 0 10) TABLE 2 — C ontinued Ite m s and D e sc rip tiv e T e rm s Sincere S peakers Insincere S peakers Most Often Judged S incere Most Often Judged Insincere • i . 2 3 i * ■ 5 .3 2 108. T o ta l N u m b er of W ords: (av erag e) 288.2 288.2 316.3 254 286.8 109. P e rc e n ta g e of P e rs o n a l W ords U sed (av erag e) 9% 8 % 9.6% 8 .6 % 8 * 1 1 0 . P e rc e n ta g e of F i r s t P e rs o n P ro n o u n s U sed (av erag e) 3.9% 3.2% 3.6% 2.9% 2.7% 1 1 1 . T o tal N u m b er of S entences: 14 13.7 13.9 14 14.7 1 1 2 . A v erag e W ords p e r S en ten ce: 20.4 20.7 24.3 19.9 19.9 113. W ords in S h o rtest S entence: (av erag e) 6 7.9 7.3 6 . 6 5.8 114. W ords in L o n g est S entence: (av erag e) 46.7 46.2 58.6 39.5 42 115. N u m b er of S im ple S en te n c es (average): 7.8 7.4 6.3 7.1 7.5 116. N u m b er of Com pound S e n te n ces (average): 2.3 2 . 8 2.4 2.7 3 117, N u m b er of C om plex S en te n c es (av erag e): 5 3.8 5.2 4.1 3.8 118. N u m b er of D ec larativ e S e n te n c e s (av erag e): 13.6 13.5 12.3 1 2 . 8 14 119. N u m b er of E x cla m a to ry S en te n c es (av erag e): 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 . N u m b er of In te rro g a to ry S en te n ces (av erag e): 1 . 0 0 . 6 1.5 1 . 1 0.7 109 have co n trib u ted to th is r e s u lt, since s p e a k e rs m ig h t have tended to be m o re ad ju sted to the r a th e r a r tif ic ia l speaking situ atio n d u rin g the second sp eech . A gain, the lim ite d tim e betw een the two sp e ec h e s m ay have co n trib u ted to ch an g es in u se of sp eech m a te r ia ls and the a rra n g e m e n t and content of the sp e e c h e s. A few m o re sin c e re s p e a k e rs tended to u se m o re m a te r ia ls ca llin g fo r p r io r know ledge. T h is m ay have b een p a rtly due to the p o ssib ility th a t know ledge of the su b je ct and of its m a te r ia ls w as one of the d e term in in g fa c to rs in the s p e a k e r 's choice of a su b ject fo r the s in c e re sp eech . T h is w as in d i c ated by the la r g e r n u m b er of s p e a k e rs who r e f e r r e d to p e rso n a l ex p e rie n c e in the sin c e re sp eech . Slight d iffe re n c e s betw een sin c e re and in s in c e re s p e a k e rs w ere m o st noticed am ong som e ite m s re la tiv e to language u sa g e . Som e in s in c e re s p e a k e rs used m o re am biguous language and fe w e r co n c re te te r m s . Y et c la rity in language w as alm o st co n stan t. It w as p o ssib le to s u rm is e th a t e ith e r p r io r know ledge of the su b ject o r re la tiv e s in c e rity of the s p e a k e rs m ay have been co n trib u tin g fa c to rs , but the fo rm e r w as m o st lik e ly , due to the effect of ex p e rie n ce and knowledge on the co n c re te n e s s of language. The in c re a s e in the u se of loaded w o rd s by in s in c e re s p e a k e rs m ay have re s u lte d fro m an attem p t to co m p en sate fo r lack of s e c u rity in b e lie f, y et it also m ay have been en co u rag ed by in c re a s e d s e c u rity in the speaking situ atio n d u rin g the second sp eech . It w as c le a rly in d icated by clo se o b se rv a tio n th at the to talin g 110 of c h a ra c te ris tic s of s in c e re and in s in c e re s p e a k e rs re v e a le d no s ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s in the o b se rv e d b eh a v io r of th e two g ro u p s re la tiv e to d e liv e ry and content. Q uestion 2 . — W hen a group of s p e a k e rs give sp e e c h e s su p p o rtin g a p o sitio n in w hich th ey s in c e re ly b eliev e and th en give sp e ech e s on the opposite p o sitio n in w hich they supposedly do not b e lie v e , a r e th e re sig n ifican t n u m b e r of s p e a k e rs in w hich ch an g es re la tiv e to d e liv e ry and content o c c u r betw een the sin c e re and in s in c e re sp eech e s? W hile the o b se rv a tio n s d e s c rib e d u n d er Q uestion 1 w ere d e signed to denote d iffe re n c e s in the c h a r a c te r is tic s of two g ro u p s of s p e a k e rs , the o b se rv a tio n s re q u ire d by Q uestion 2 w ere to d e te rm in e a c tu a l ch an g es in b eh a v io r w hich m ig h t have tak en place when s p e a k e rs shifted fro m th e ir sin c e re to in s in c e re sp eech . O b serv atio n s w ere confined to tab u latin g ch an g es o c c u rrin g in d e liv e ry and co n ten t of individual sp e a k e rs and only to such ite m s w here ch an g es o c c u rre d and not to the to ta l of sp e a k e r c h a r a c te r is tic s a s w as done u n d er Q uestion 1. O nce again it w as n e c e s s a ry to reco g n ize the advantage given the in s in c e re sp e a k e r by the d esig n of the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t. It w as p o ssib le , th e re fo re , to o b se rv e ch an g es w hich could be c la s s ifie d a s co n stru c tiv e betw een the s in c e re and in sin c e re sp e e c h e s and w hich Ill conceivably m ig h t be a r e s u lt of in c re a s e d fa m ilia rity w ith the speaking situ atio n . E ac h sp e a k e r w as o b se rv e d to d isc o v e r w hat ch an g es w ere d isc e rn a b le in h is in s in c e re speech a s co m p ared to h is s in c e re sp eech . If the change in d icated a d e te rio ra tio n in d e liv e ry o r .content, o r a l e s s e r use of c h a ra c te ris tic s and b e h a v io rs tra d itio n a lly ac ce p te d a s being a s s e ts to effective speaking, such change w as c la s s ifie d a s denoting a w orsen in g of speaking b e h a v io rs. If the change o b se rv e d in d icated an in c re a s e in the u se of b e h a v io rs tra d itio n a lly accep ted a s being a s s e ts to effectiv e speaking such a change w as c la s s ifie d a s denoting an im p ro v em en t of speaking b e h a v io rs. O n c e rta in ite m s included fo r o b se rv a tio n no ju stific a tio n could be found f o r assu m in g a change in d icated e ith e r a w o rsen in g o r an im p ro v em en t, and in such c a s e s only the to ta l change w as tab u lated . An ex am p le would be ite m s re la tiv e to the u se of a p a rtic u la r fa c to r of in te re s t w hich m ig h t be u n n e c e ss a ry if o th e r fa c to rs had been u se d , o r if it did not fit the su b je c t of the speech. The p e rc e n ta g e s of the to ta l n u m b e r of s p e a k e rs show ing change in o b se rv e d c h a r a c te r is tic s betw een th e ir sin c e re and in s in c e re sp e ec h e s a re tab u lated in T able 3. C hanges w ere noticed in s p e a k e rs re la tiv e to 101 of the 120 ite m s included fo r co m p ariso n . In only 21 ite m s , h o w ev er, w ere to ta l ch an g es o b se rv e d involving o n e -th ird o r m o re of the s p e a k e rs . Of th is 113 TA B LE 3 PER C EN TA G E O F TOTAL NUMBER O F SPE A K ER S SHOWING CHANGE IN O BSERV ED C H A R A C TER ISTIC S BETW EEN SIN CERE S PE E C H AND IN SIN C ERE SPEECH Item Change D enoting W orsening 8 Change D enoting Im p ro v em en t8 T o ta l Change O b serv ed 1 2 3 4 5 4 4 6 4 16.6 2 0 . 8 7 4 25 29 8 4 12.5 16.6 9 25 2 0 . 8 45.8 1 0 4 8 12.4 1 1 4 8 12.5 1 2 25 12.5 37.5 13 8 25 33.2 14 16.6 8 25 15b 29 33.2 62.5 16b 41.6 25 6 6 . 6 17b 25 29 54 18 16.6 16.6 33.2 19 12.5 4 16.6 2 0 8 8 2 1 25 12.5 37.5 2 2 23 24 16.6 8 25 25 12.5 12.5 26 27 12.5 12.5 25 28 16.6 16.6 a W here the n a tu re of the ite m p rev en ted ev alu atio n of w o rs e n ing o r im p ro v em en t, only the to ta l is in d icated . ^Included if o v e r 5% change noted. cln clu d ed if o v e r 6 wpm change noted. 29c 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 TA B LE 3 — C ontinued Change Change D enoting D enoting W orsening* Im p ro v em en t* 20.8 29 12.5 8 4 8 4 16.6 8 12.5 12.5 8 8 25 20.8 8 20.8 8 8 12.5 8 16.6 12.5 8 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 TA BLE 3 — C ontinued Change Change D enoting D enoting W oreening* Im p ro v em en t* 33.2 8 41.8 12.5 4 12.5 45.8 16.6 16.6 16.6 2 0 . 8 25 4 8 2 0 . 8 8 Item 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 TA BLE 3 — C ontinued Change Change D enoting D enoting W oraeninga Im p ro v em en t8 , 4 16.6 16.6 25 110 n u m b e r, only eig h t ite m s show ed sig n ifican t d iffe re n c e s betw een ch an g es denoting a w o rsen in g of the sp eech and ch an g es denoting an im p ro v em en t. In each of th e e ig h t ite m s it w as found th at som e s p e a k e rs im p ro v ed , w hile a su b sta n tia lly g r e a te r n u m b er show ed w o rsen in g re la tiv e to the p a rtic u la r c h a ra c te ris tic . O n the rem a in in g ite m s show ing change of o n e -th ird o r m o re of the s p e a k e rs , the d if fe re n c e betw een the n u m b er of s p e a k e rs show ing d e te rio ra tio n and th o se show ing im p ro v em en t was n eg lig ib le. A few ite m s show ed la rg e ch an g es, but w ere not in d icativ e of q u ality change. R a th e r changes could be ex p ected as a r e s u lt of the c h a ra c te r of the ite m s . Ite m s 12, 16, 21, 30, 31, 96, 97, and 99 show ed a la r g e r n u m b e r of s p e a k e rs d e te rio ra tin g re la tiv e to th e se ite m s in th e ir in s in c e re sp e ech . The f i r s t five of th e se ite m s d e a lt w ith d e liv e ry , w hile the la s t th re e d e a lt w ith language and w ording. Since only one of the above eig h t ite m s show ed a change in a b a re tw o -th ird s of the s p e a k e rs , and sin ce in a ll c a s e s the v a ria b le s and ex cep tio n s w ere so g re a t, it w as fe lt th a t ev en th e se ite m s show ed no sig n ific a n t tre n d in b eh a v io r r e l a tiv e to change betw een the sp e e c h e s w hich could be d efin itely linked to s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity of the s p e a k e rs . It w as concluded, th e re fo re , th a t when s p e a k e rs gave sp e ech e s on a topic in w hich they supposedly b eliev ed , and then gave sp e e c h e s on the opposite p o sitio n in w hich they supposedly did not b e lie v e , m any ch an g es in b e h a v io r w ere o b se rv e d . T h ese ch an g es, h o w ev er, did not 11T fa ll into a c o n siste n t p a tte rn and w ere not sig n ific an t enough in n u m b e r to in d icate a re la tio n to the fa c to rs of s in c e rity o r in sin c e rity . A n sw ers to q u estio n s u n d er P a r t I of th is c h a p te r in d icated th a t a n a ly sis of sp e a k e rs acco rd in g to th e ir own c la s s ific a tio n of s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity show ed no sig n ifican t d iffe re n c e s e ith e r in group b e h a v io rs o r changes w ithin the s p e a k e rs betw een sp e e c h e s. P a r t II w as desig n ed to study b eh a v io r of sp e a k e rs c la s s ifie d as s in c e re o r in sin c e re by au d ien ces. P a r t H Q uestion 3 . — A re th e re d iffe re n c e s in the o b se rv ab le c h a ra c te r is tic s of sp e a k e rs whom au d ien ces have m o st often judged to be s in c e re , s p e a k e rs whom au d ien ces have m o st often judged in s in c e re , and s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t ag ree ? The tab u lated fre q u e n c ie s and p ro p o rtio n s of c o r r e c t and in c o r r e c t id en tifica tio n s of sin c e re and in s in c e re sp e ec h e s a s re c o rd e d by H ild reth in the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t a re lis te d in A ppendix D. In choosing s p e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re by au d ien ces, two c r ite r i a w ere u sed . F i r s t , only s p e a k e rs who re c e iv e d the h ig h est p o ssib le p ro p o rtio n s of s in c e re ra tin g s w ere chosen. Second, sin ce H ild re th 1 found th e re w as a g r e a te r tendency fo r au d ien ces to ra n k 1 R ich ard A . H ild reth , “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of A u d ien ces' A b ility to D istin g u ish B etw een S in cere and In sin c e re S p e e c h e s" (un published D o c to r's d is s e rta tio n , U n iv ersity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia , L os A n g eles, 1953). s p e a k e rs a s sin c e re ra th e r th an in s in c e re , an eq u al n u m b er of actu ally sin c e re and ac tu ally in sin c e re s p e a k e rs w ere chosen in an a tte m p t to m ake p o ssib le r e s u lts of o b se rv a tio n s re fle c t audience o b se rv a tio n s and not speaking c h a ra c te ris tic s of sin c e re and in s in c e re s p e a k e rs . It w as found th a t out of 24 sin c e re sp e e ch e s only five sp e a k e rs re c e iv e d a p ro p o rtio n of .80 o r above of audience ju d g m en ts a s being s in c e re . Of the 24 in sin c e re s p e a k e rs , how ever, 13 sp e a k e rs re c e iv e d a p ro p o rtio n of .80 o r above of audience judgm ents a s being s in c e re . Of th e se 13 s p e a k e rs , five re c e iv e d a p ro p o rtio n of .90 o r above of audience ju d g m e n ts a s being s in c e re . It w as decided, th e re fo re , to s e le c t the five s in c e re s p e a k e rs whom .80 o r m o re of the audience c o n sid ere d s in c e re , and the five in sin c e re sp e a k e rs whom .90 o r m o re of the audience co n sid e re d s in c e re a s the su b je cts to be co n sid ered a s s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s being s in c e r e . To have expanded the choice of the ac tu ally sin c e re group would have fo rc e d the in clu sio n of sp e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e . S p eak ers chosen fo r in clu sio n in th is group included sp e a k e rs w ith E x p e rim e n ta l N um b e r s 29, 32, 22, 13, 6 , 69, 77, 63, 61, 58. In choosing s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re , the u se of the c r ite r ia fo r the choice of s p e a k e rs judged sin c e re w as f i r s t attem p ted . H ow ever, it w as found to be im p ra c tic a l due to the s c a rc ity of s p e a k e rs w hich had been c le a rly judged a s in s in c e re . A u d ien ces in the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t had tended to judge m o st s p e a k e rs s in c e re . 119 O nly eig h t s p e a k e rs w ere found to have b een judged by a p ro p o rtio n of .50 o r m o re of the au d ien ces to be in s in c e re . Of th e se eig h t, six w ere a c tu a lly s in c e re , w hile two w ere in s in c e re . Since an eq u al d iv isio n betw een th e ac tu ally s in c e re and in s in c e re s p e a k e rs would h av e p ro duced too few s p e a k e rs to be sig n ifican t in ev alu atio n , it w as d ecided to o b se rv e a ll eig h t s p e a k e rs who w ere judged in s in c e re by .50 o r m o re of the au d ien ce. T o include s p e a k e rs judged in s in c e re by le s s th an .50 of th e audience would have been im p ro p e r ac co rd in g to d efin itio n of the c la s s ific a tio n its e lf. S p eak ers ch o sen fo r in clu sio n in th is group in cluded s p e a k e rs with E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 31, 17, 23, 1, 7, 5, 84, 78. In choosing s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity au d ien ce s could le a s t a g re e an a tte m p t w as m ade to find s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity au d ien ces w ere m o st eq u ally divided in opinion. It w as a lso fe lt th at fo r p u rp o se s of c o m p a riso n a group of a t le a s t eig h t o r ten s p e a k e rs should be ch o sen a s had b een done w ith the o th e r two g ro u p s. It w as found th a t eight s p e a k e rs had re c e iv e d d iv isio n of p r o p o rtio n s of audience ju d g m en ts ran g in g fro m .45 to .55. It w as decided, th e re fo re , to include a ll eight s p e a k e rs w hose p ro p o rtio n s of ju d g m en ts fe ll w ithin th is ra n g e . S p eak ers ch o sen fo r in c lu sio n in th is group included s p e a k e rs w ith E x p e rim e n ta l N u m b ers 4, 28, 5, 16, 11, 80, 78, and 55. T o ta ls of o b serv ed c h a r a c te r is tic s fo r ea ch of 120 ite m s fo r ea ch of the th re e g ro u p s d e s c rib e d a re ta b u lated in T able 2. 120 Insp ectio n and co m p ariso n of the ite m s liste d showed th at c h a ra c te r is tic s of the sp e a k e rs in the th re e groups in m any in sta n c e s w ere the sam e o r s im ila r. H ow ever, it w as also shown th at on som e ite m s, such a s Item 21, th e re w as a d istin ctiv e d ifferen ce. It w as c le a rly indicated by the a n a ly sis m ade re la tiv e to Q uestion 3 th a t m o re d iffe re n ce s w ere found in o b serv ed b eh av io r of sp e a k e rs c la ssifie d according to sin c e rity o r in sin c e rity by audience ju dgm ents th an w ere found am ong sp e a k e rs who w ere c la ssifie d by th e ir own choice. Q uestion 4 . — A re th e re o b serv ab le c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs (both sin c e re and in sin c e re ) m o st often rate d a s sin c e re by au d ien ces, w hich a re d istin ctiv ely d iffere n t fro m those held by sp e a k e rs m o st often rate d a s in sin cere? A n sw ers to p rev io u s q u estio n s in th is study showed th at no g re a t d iffe re n c e s w ere found to e x ist betw een sin c e re and in sin c e re sp e a k e rs included in the o rig in a l ex p e rim e n t. O th er a n sw e rs showed th at th e re w ere m any s im ila ritie s betw een sp e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re and those m o st often judged in sin c e re by au d ien ces. It w as decided, th e re fo re , to iso late c h a ra c te ris tic s w hich w ere held in co m m on by each group of sp e a k e rs but not held in com m on by both. The significance of th is a re a of in v estig atio n w as that it sought to ex p lo re the p o ssib ility of d eterm in in g c h a ra c te ris tic s of sp e a k e rs which m ight 121 be fa c to rs in in d icatin g s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity to an au d ien ce. In choosing s p e a k e rs f o r a n a ly s is in re la tio n to th is q u estio n , it w as fe lt th a t if p o ssib le a s im ila r n u m b er of s p e a k e rs should be u se d a s would be u se d in the in v e stig a tio n of in sin c e re s p e a k e rs (see Q u estio n 5). Since only five s p e a k e rs w ere found to m e e t the c r ite r ia of Q uestion 5, a cut off point w as sought w hich would lim it the n u m b er of s in c e re s p e a k e rs to be c o n sid e re d . It w as found th a t six s p e a k e rs w ere ra te d s in c e re by a p ro p o rtio n of .90 o r above of the au d ien ce s. The six s p e a k e rs w ere ch o sen , th e re fo re , to be the su b je c ts of the a n a ly sis u n d e r th is q u estio n and subsequent c o m p a riso n s. W hile the p ro p o rtio n s of audience ev alu atio n w ere m uch h ig h e r than those of in s in c e re s p e a k e rs ch o sen fo r s im ila r study, it w as fe lt th a t th is did not in v alid ate the c o m p a riso n s, sin ce in the o rig in a l e x p e rim e n t it w as found th a t the au d ien ces tended to judge s p e a k e rs a s being sin c e re m o re often th an a s being in s in c e re . Since the sp e a k e r m o st often judged in s in c e re re c e iv e d only a p ro p o rtio n of .78 of in s in c e re au d i en ce re s p o n s e s , it w as obvious th a t no b a s is of choice w hich would # * • dem and s im ila r audience re s p o n s e s fo r s in c e re sp e a k e rs would be p ra c tic a l. Of the group of six s p e a k e rs ch o sen it w as in te re s tin g to note th a t only one s p e a k e r had ac tu ally d e liv e re d a s in c e re sp eech . O b serv ed c h a r a c te r is tic s of the six s in c e re s p e a k e rs w ere tab u lated to g e th e r and co m p ared with those of the five in sin c e re s p e a k e rs . Ite m s found to be held in com m on by the sin c e re s p e a k e rs 122 w ere co m p ared d ire c tly to the re s p o n s e s on th at ite m am ong the in s in c e re s p e a k e rs. If the re s p o n s e s w ere the sam e o r s im ila r enough to m ake stro n g d istin c tio n s im p o ssib le , th en the ite m w as dropped fro m c o n sid e ra tio n . H ow ever, if th e re w as a c o n siste n t p a tte rn of d iffe r en c e, the ite m w as included fo r study. W hile the o b se rv a tio n s u n d er som e ite m s m ig h t have d iffered in d e g re e , they w ere often included fo r study if they in d icated the p re se n c e of a speaking c h a ra c te ris tic r a th e r th an its ab sen ce , and if the ab sen ce of th is c h a ra c te ris tic w as noticed am ong in s in c e re s p e a k e rs . F o r in sta n c e , Ite m s 27 and 31 showed d iffe re n c e s in d eg ree of o b serv ed c h a ra c te ris tic s , but c le a rly indicated the p re se n c e of th e ir re sp e c tiv e t r a it s in the s p e a k e rs . T abulation of the 23 ite m s found to be held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d sin c e re and not a lso held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s in sin c e re a r e shown in T ab le 4. Ite m s 16 and 29 a re n u m e ric a l in d icatio n s and obviously not id e n tic al. T hey w ere included, how ev er, b ecau se they developed a p a tte rn w hich in both c a s e s w as d iffe re n t fro m s im ila r ite m s o b se rv ed in in sin c e re s p e a k e rs . Of the 23 ite m s found com m on to the s p e a k e rs judged s in c e re , 2 1 ite m s d ea lt with a r e a s of p h y sical and v o cal d e liv e ry , w hile two ite m s d ea lt w ith a r e a s of speech content. In o r d e r to te s t the re a s o n a b le n e s s and co n siste n cy of the lis t of ite m s a s a p o ssib le in d icatio n to an audience of s in c e rity in the 123 TA BLE 4 O BSERV ED CH A RA C TER ISTIC S COMMON TO A LL SPEA K ER S M OST O FT E N RA TED BY AUDIENCES TO BE SINCERE AND D IFFER IN G FROM IN SIN C ERE SPEA K ER S Item N um ber S p eak er #13 S p eak e r #69 S p e a k e r #77 S p e a k e r #63 S p ea k e r #61 S p e a k e r #58 5 relax ed re lax ed re la x e d rela x e d re la x e d re la x e d 9 often often often often often often 1 1 good good good good good good 14 p leasan t p leasan t p le a sa n t p le asa n t p le a sa n t pleasant 16a 49% 1 0 0 % 82% 38% 70% 47% 19 no no no no no no 2 0 no no no no no no 24 none none none none none none 26 stro n g stro n g stro n g stro n g stro n g stro n g 27 som e often som e som e som e som e 28 often often often often often often 29b 156 144 126 150 162 162 31 often som e some som e som e som e 33 often often often often often often 34 som e som e som e som e som e som e 35 m uch m uch m uch m uch m uch m uch 36 none none none none none none 37 down down down down down down 39 ex c ell. ex c ell. ex c ell. e x c e ll. e x c e ll. e x c e ll. 41 ex cell. e x c e ll. e x c e ll. ex c ell. e x c e ll. e x c e ll. 44 none none none none none none 51 y es y es y es y es y es y e s 107 n e v e r n e v e r n e v e r n e v e r n e v e r n e v e r P ro p o rtio n s S in c e re Ju d g m e n ts .90 .93 .92 .95 .93 .93 aA verage = 63.4%, R ange = 38% - 100%. ^A verage = 150, R ange = 126 - 162. 124 s p e a k e r, the Item s of c h a ra c te ris tic s w ere su b jected to e m p iric a l a n a ly s is . Seven of the c h a ra c te ris tic s w ere found to be re la tiv e to p h y sical a c tiv ity . The s p e a k e rs w ere found to be re la x e d in stan ce and to re fle c t a p le a sa n t m ood. M ost rh e to ric a l thought h a s in te rp re te d th e se c h a ra c te ris tic s to in d icate a high d eg ree of ad ju stm e n t by the s p e a k e r to the speaking situ atio n . The s p e a k e rs w ere also found to u se conventional g e s tu re s often and with good tim in g . T h ese c h a r a c te r is tic s have been u su ally a s so c ia te d e ith e r w ith a d e s ire to com m unicate o r a p sy c h o -p h y sica l in te g ra tio n w ithin the com m unicative p ro c e s s , o r both. T h re e ite m s of c h a r a c te r is tic s d ea lt with s p e a k e rs ’ d ire c tn e s s . A11 sp e a k e rs m ain tain ed a high p ercen tag e of d ir e c t eye co n tact with the c a m e ra , which in the fra m e w o rk of the ex p e rim en t b ecam e d ire c t eye co n tact with the judging audience. Range of the p erce n tag e of to ta l speaking tim e spent looking at the c a m e ra w as 38% to 100%. The a v e ra g e of the six s p e a k e rs w as 63.3%. F u rth e r ex am in atio n of s p e a k e rs No. 13 and No. 63, who re c o rd e d the lo w est p erce n ta g e of d ire c t audience co n tact, re v e a le d th at they did m a in ta in su b sta n tia l v isu a l co n tact w ith the studio audience du rin g the film in g and r e f e r r e d to n o te s seld o m . None of the s p e a k e rs re a d th e ir sp eech es o r th e ir fin a l se n te n c e s. Some re a d th e ir f ir s t se n te n c e s, but th is could have b een a r e s u lt of the e x p e rim e n ta l d esig n w hich dem anded u n ifo rm e x a c tn e ss in the f i r s t se n ten c e. D ire c tn e s s and ex tem p o ran eo u s 129 m a n n e r seem ed Indicated a s a com m on t r a it to the sp e a k e rs in the group. F o u r ite m s w ere found to re la te to voice q u ality and fo rc e . None of the sp e a k e rs show ed te n sio n s in the v o ice, w hich again h a s been u su ally taken to in d icate ad ju stm en t to the speaking situ a tio n . A ll v o ic e s m ain tain ed a stro n g fo rc e le v e l w hich w as again p o ssib le in d ic a tion of ad ju stm en t. A ll s p e a k e rs w ere found to have v ary in g am ounts of v a rie ty in volum e and som e c o n tra s ts in volum e lev el betw een s e c tio n s of th e ir sp eech . Such c h a ra c te ris tic s have n o rm a lly been a s so c ia te d with adequate co m m u n ic ativ e n ess and d isc rim in a tio n betw een thought v a lu e s. In a ll six c a s e s the use of v a rie ty of volum e w as co n s is te n t with the thought being e x p re s s e d . F iv e ite m s w ere found to re la te to ra te of u tte ra n c e and fluency. The av e ra g e w o rd s -p e r-m in u te of the six s p e a k e rs w as 150, with the range fo r the group being 126-162. If the av erag e speed of ex tem p o ran eo u s speaking is accep ted to be 120-140 w o rd s -p e r- 2 m in u te, the av erag e of the s p e a k e rs m o st judged sin c e re is h ig h e r, and a ll s p e a k e rs but one w ere above the av erag e ran g e . A ll s p e a k e rs u sed pause a s a m e a n s of e m p h a sis o r effect in th e ir sp e e c h e s, and a ll m ade use of v a rie ty of ra te and c o n tra s ts in ra te betw een se c tio n s of th e ir sp e e c h e s. A gain th e se c h a r a c te r is tic s w ere c o n siste n t w ith 2 G ra n t F a irb a n k s , P r a c tic a l V oice P ra c tic e (New Y ork: H a rp e r and B ro th e rs , 1944), p. 60. 126 accep ted rh e to ric a l th e o ry re la tiv e to s p e a k e rs ' thought d isc rim in a tio n . Of p a rtic u la r im p o rta n ce w as the fa c t th a t a ll six speakers m ain tain ed e x c e lle n t fluency d esp ite the rig id c r ite r ia u sed in th is study. F lu en cy h as b een u su a lly a sso c ia te d w ith e ith e r adequate thought p ro c e s s e s o r c a re fu l p re p a ra tio n . It w as noted th a t a d istin c tio n w as ev id en t betw een fluency a s defined a s sm ooth flow of language and thought, and fluency a s defined a s speed of u tte ra n c e . The six s p e a k e rs , w hile speaking with above av e rag e speed fo r ex te m p o riz in g , did not sp eak a s ra p id ly a s o th e r s p e a k e rs not so c la s s ifie d . A ll six s p e a k e rs w ere found to u se a g re a t d eal of v a rie ty in pitch, to have no pitch p a tte rn , and to lo w er the pitch of th e ir v o ic e s at the end of se n te n c e s. V a rie ty of pitch h a s been a s so c ia te d w ith co m m u n ic a tiv e n e ss, and the d rop of pitch at the end of se n te n c e s h a s been often included in d e s c rip tio n s of p o sitiv e tone. A ll sp e a k e rs showed ex c e llen t en th u sia sm in the opening of th e ir sp e ech e s. No d id actic tone w as u sed by the sp e a k e rs. Two ite m s w ere re la tiv e to speech co n ten t. A ll s p e a k e rs had c le a r tra n s itio n s in the sp e e ch e s and could be follow ed e a s ily . A ll of the s p e a k e rs showed e x c e lle n t v a rie ty of w ording. It w as evident fro m o b se rv a tio n th a t th e re w ere c h a r a c te r is tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d by au d ien ces a s being s in c e re w hich w ere d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m th o se held by s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s in s in c e re . M ost of th e se c h a r a c te r is tic s 127 can be re la te d by tra d itio n a l rh e to ric a l th e o rie s to c h a ra c te ris tic s of s p e a k e r ad ju stm e n t, c le a r thinking, and co n tro l of the com m unicative situ atio n . Q u estio n 5 . — A re th e re o b se rv ab le c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs (both sin c e re and in sin c e re ) m o s t often ra te d a s In sin c e re by au d ien ce s, w hich a re d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m those held by s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s sin c e re ? In choosing sp e a k e rs fo r a n a ly sis in re la tio n to th is q u estio n , it w as n e c e s s a ry to elim in a te th re e s p e a k e rs who had been included in o b se rv a tio n s in T able 2 in o rd e r to m ake p o ssib le fu rth e r co m p ariso n s. E a r lie r a n a ly s is of the eig h t s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re had included th re e s p e a k e rs who had been judged in sin c e re by p ro p o rtio n s of au d ien ces fro m .50 to .54, Since such s p e a k e rs w ere also n e c e s s a rily included in stu d ie s of sp e a k e rs about whom au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e re g a rd in g the s in c e rity o r in sin c e rity , it w as d ecided to elim in a te them fro m the lis t. F iv e sp e a k e rs w ere chosen, th e re fo re , a ll having b een ra te d in sin c e re by p ro p o rtio n s of au d ien ces of .60 and ab o v e. In th is group only one sp e a k e r had actu ally d e liv e re d an in sin c e re sp eech . The speech m o st often judged a s in sin c e re w as ac tu a lly a s in c e re sp eech . O b serv ed c h a ra c te ris tic s of the five s p e a k e rs w ere tab u lated 128 and co m p ared w ith th o se of the six s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s sin c e re . Ite m s found to be held in com m on by the in s in c e re s p e a k e rs w ere co m p ared d ire c tly to the re s p o n s e s on th a t ite m am ong s p e a k e rs judged s in c e re . If the re s p o n s e s w ere the sam e o r s im ila r enough to m ake stro n g d istin c tio n s im p o ssib le , th en the ite m w as dropped fro m c o n sid e ra tio n . H ow ever, if th e re w as a c o n siste n t p a tte rn of d iffe r en ce, the item w as included f o r study. W hile the o b se rv a tio n s u n d er som e ite m s m ig h t have d iffered in d e g re e , they w ere included f o r study if th ey in d icated the p re se n c e of a speaking c h a ra c te ris tic r a th e r than its ab sen ce, and if the ab sen ce of th is c h a ra c te ris tic w as noticed am ong s in c e re s p e a k e rs . F o r in sta n c e , Ite m 5 show ed d iffe re n c e s in d eg ree and kind of c h a ra c te ris tic s , but c le a rly in d icated the com m on la ck of re la x e d poise am ong the s p e a k e rs . Some s p e a k e rs p re se n te d ex cep tio n s to the com m on c h a ra c te ris tic s , but w ere found to be sp e c ia l c a s e s and w ere fully explained in the p ro c e s s of e m p iric a l a n a ly s is . T ab u latio n of the 18 ite m s found to be held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d as in sin c e re and not also held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s sin c e re a re shown in T ab le 5. Ite m s 16 and 29 a re n u m e ric a l in d ic atio n s and obviously not id e n tic a l. T hey w ere included, how ev er, b ec au se they developed a p a tte rn w hich in both c a s e s w as d iffe re n t fro m the s im ila r ite m s o b se rv e d in s p e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re . Of the 18 ite m s of c h a r a c te r is tic s found to be com m on to TA BLE 5 O BSERV ED CH A RA CTERISTICS COMMON TO A L L SPEA K ER S M O ST O FT E N RATED BY AUDIENCES TO BE IN SIN C ER E AND D IFFER IN G FROM SIN CERE SPEA K ER S Item N um ber S p e ak e r #31 S p eak e r #23 S p eak e r #84 S p eak er # 1 S p e a k e r #7 5 slouch m edium m edium stiff stiff 1 0 none none none none none 1 2 -------- m ixed p oor m ixed m ixed 13 none none none none som e 14 s e rio u s s e rio u s pained s e rio u s s e rio u s 16a 13% 16% 2 1 % 2 % 52% 2 1 y ea y e s yea y e s y es 24 som e som e som e none som e 25 none none none none none 28 som e som e som e som e som e 29b 1 2 0 114 132 126 132 33 som e som e som e som e som e 34 som e none none none none 35 som e som e som e som e som e 39 m edium poor m edium e x c e ll. poor 41 m edium m edium poor poor m edium 42 p oor poor poor poor m edium 107 som e som e som e som e som e P ro p o rtio n * In sin c e re Ju d g m en ts .60 .60 .63 .60 .78 aA v erag e = 20.8%, Range = 2 % - 52%. ^A v erag e * 124.8, Range = 1 1 4 -1 3 2 . 130 sp e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s in s in c e re , 17 ite m s d e a lt w ith a r e a s of p h y sical and v o cal d e liv e ry , w hile one item d e a lt w ith the a r e a of speech content. ! In o r d e r to te s t the re a s o n a b le n e ss and co n siste n cy of the lis t of c h a ra c te ris tic s a s a p o ssib le in d icatio n to an audience of in s in c e rity in a sp e a k e r, the ite m s w ere su b jected to e m p iric a l a n a ly s is . S even of the ite m s w ere found to be re la tiv e to p h y sical a c tiv ity . The sp e a k e rs w ere found to have a v a rie ty of speaking sta n c e , but a ll d ev iated fro m accep tab le sta n d a rd s of re la x a tio n and p o ise . One w as slouched and ill at e a s e . The o th e rs p o sse sse d v ary in g d e g re e s of te n sio n and stiffn e ss. M ost rh e to ric a l thought h a s in te rp re te d th e se c h a ra c te ris tic s to in d icate a lack of ad ju stm en t to the speaking s itu a tio n . None of the s p e a k e rs u sed d e sc rip tiv e g e s tu re s , and the fo rc e of such conventional g e s tu re s a s w ere u sed w as p o o r o r in c o n siste n t. Such b eh a v io r h a s been rh e to ric a lly often a s so c ia te d w ith a lack of sen se of com m unication. In g e n e ra l the s p e a k e rs u sed no fa c ia l e x p re s s io n s fo r the pu rp o se of com m unication and e m p h a sis . S p e a k e r No. 7 w as an e x c e p tio n , having used a few . H ow ever, it w as found th a t the film in g of h is speech w as in c o rre c t in e x p o s u re , and the re s u lt w as a v ery d a rk p ic tu r e w hich m ade it alm o st im p o ssib le fo r the audience to d e te c t the fa c ia l e x p re s s io n s u se d . F o r th is re a s o n , p lu s the fa c t th at o th e r b e h a v io rs of the sp e a k e r w ere p o ssib ly d is tra c tin g , it w as c o n sid e re d 131 not to be an ex cep tio n w hich would d e stro y the co n siste n cy of the ite m . A ll of the s p e a k e rs re fle c te d a v e ry s e rio u s and a lm o st s te rn m ood and feelin g . One s p e a k e r’s ap p e aran c e c le a rly in d icated a feelin g of d isc o m fo rt and w as c la s s ifie d a s having a “ p ain ed ” a p p e aran c e. None of the s p e a k e rs re fle c te d w arm th o r p le a s a n tn e s s to th e au d ien ce, and in th is re s p e c t d iffe re d g re a tly fro m s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s s in c e re . The am ount of d ire c t v isu a l co n tact u sed by the s p e a k e rs av e ra g ed m uch low er than am ong s p e a k e rs m o st ra te d a s s in c e re , and, th e re fo re , th is item w as c o n sid ered sig n ifican t. O nly one sp e a k e r. N u m b er 7, m ain tain ed v is u a l co n tact su fficien t to be included in the ran g e of s p e a k e rs m o st judged s in c e re , and h is to ta l w as s till b en eath the av era g e of the fo rm e r gro u p . In addition, s p e a k e r No. 7, a s d e s c rib e d p re v io u sly , w as film ed in c o rre c tly and the film ed speech w as d a rk , a fa c t w hich m ay have affected the sen se of v is u a l co n tact on the p a rt of the au d ien ce. S peaker No. 1 looked a t h is audience only 2% of h is speaking tim e . T h is sp e a k e r re a d h is speech fro m m a n u s c rip t, a fa c t w hich conceivably could have influenced h is b eh a v io r on o th e r ite m s c o n sid e re d . A ll of the s p e a k e rs b ro k e the m ood of th e ir speech a t the co n clu sio n o r im m ed ia tely a fte r. T h is w as done by e ith e r looking aw ay q u estio n in g ly a s if fo r fu rth e r in s tru c tio n s in the studio situ atio n , o r by a m a rk e d change of a ttitu d e . In e v e ry c a se the feelin g and m ood of 132 the s p e a k e r underw ent an obvious change fro m w h atev er p e rsu a siv e fo rc e had b een e sta b lish e d . A ll sp e a k e rs but one had te n sio n s p re s e n t in the u se of the v o ca l m e ch an ism . U sually th is h as been co n sid ered an in d icatio n of a lack of ad ju stm en t to the speaking situ atio n . S peaker No. 1 had no in d icatio n of ten sio n in the v o ice. It w as fe lt, how ever, th at he p r e sen ted an ex cep tio n w hich did not b re a k the co n siste n cy of the ite m , fo r he re a d h is speech and w as fo r the m o st p a rt aloof fro m the au d ien ce. H is read in g w as v e ry acad em ic and d id a ctic, and hence em o tio n ally he had little involvem ent with the speech o r the situ atio n . None of the s p e a k e rs used in te n sity fo r e m p h asis o r to a s s is t in com m unication. T ra d itio n a lly , in ten sity h as been thought to be a m ean s fo r tr a n s fe rrin g stro n g feelin g in sp eech o r building em pathy. A ll sp e a k e rs showed som e v a rie ty in volum e, but a ll of them show ed le s s such v a rie ty than had been shown by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re . The av erag e w ords p e r m inute fo r the s p e a k e rs o b se rv e d w as f a r below the av erag e of sp e a k e rs m o st judged s in c e re . The la tte r group had a v erag ed 150 w o rd s -p e r-m in u te , while the s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d in s in c e re av erag ed 124.8 w ords - p e r-m in u te . The range of the five s p e a k e rs ra te d in sin c e re w as e ith e r below o r in the lo w er p a rt of the range of sp e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re . A ll sp e a k e rs had som e v a rie ty in r a te , but none of them 133 exhibited a s m uch such v a rie ty a s sp e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re . With one ex cep tio n , a ll sp e a k e rs showed no c o n tra s t in ra te betw een se c tio n s of th e ir sp eech . S p eak e r No. 31 showed som e such c o n tra s t, but it w as a change obviously due to d ifficulty in fluency. S ince th is m u st have been obvious also to the au d ien ce, it could not be c la ssifie d a s being a change fo r e m p h a sis o r com m unication, and th e re fo re could not be co n sid e re d an exception. A ll s p e a k e rs showed som e v a rie ty in pitch, but to a le s s e r d eg ree than w as shown by sp e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re . A ll s p e a k e rs , w ith one exception, showed m uch le s s fluency than s p e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re . S p eak er No. 1, acco rd in g to the c r ite r ia fo r th is study, showed e x cellen t fluency. T h is sp e a k e r w as u n u su al, how ever, in th a t he obviously read h is e n tire sp eech . F o r th is re a s o n , and since even in read in g the sp e a k e r m ade a m istak e and w as fo rc ed to re p e a t a p h rase in o rd e r to c o r r e c t it, it w as fe lt th at he did not p re s e n t a le g itim ate exception to b re a k the co n siste n cy of the ite m . None of the s p e a k e rs showed e x c e lle n t opening e n th u sia sm , and none of them showed ex c ellen t closing en th u sia sm . In c o n tra s t to the s p e a k e rs judged s in c e re , a ll s p e a k e rs in th is group show ed a d e c re a s e in the v a rie ty of w ording. T h is w as the only co n siste n t ite m re la tiv e to speech content. It w as ev id en t fro m o b se rv a tio n th at th e re w ere c h a r a c te r is tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often rate d by au d ien ces to be 134 in sin c e re which w ere d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m those held by sp e a k e r s m o st often ra te d as s in c e re . M ost of th ese c h a ra c te ris tic s can be re la te d by tra d itio n a l rh e to ric a l th e o rie s to c h a ra c te ris tic s of sp e a k e r ad ju stm e n t, c le a r thinking, and co n tro l of the com m unicative situ atio n . A few seem in g ex cep tio n s w ere noted, but upon clo se ex am in atio n it w as fe lt th a t c irc u m s ta n c e s p rev en ted th em fro m being leg itim ate re a s o n s f o r d estro y in g the co n sisten cy of the re sp e c tiv e ite m s. Q uestion 6 . — A re th e re o b serv ab le c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs (both sin c e re and in sin c e re ) co n cern in g whose sin c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e , which a re d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m th o se held by e ith e r s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d by au d ien ces a s sin c e re o r sp e a k e rs m o st often rated by au d ien ces a s in sin c e re ? In o rd e r to c o n siste n tly follow the in v e stig a tio n s conducted u n d er p rev io u s q u estio n s re la tiv e to the th re e g ro u p s d elin eated in th is study, it w as co n sid ered n e c e s s a ry to o b se rv e s p e a k e rs con cern in g w hose sin c e rity o r in sin c e rity a u d ien ce s could le a s t a g ree in an e ffo rt to iso la te c h a ra c te ris tic s which m ight be held in com m on. In th is study the sam e group of eight s p e a k e rs which had b een u sed p rev io u sly w as co n sid ered su ita b le . A ll sp e a k e rs in the group had had d iv isio n s in audience opinion re g a rd in g th e ir sin c e rity o r in s in c e rity ran g in g fro m p ro p o rtio n s of .45 to .55. T able 6 show s ta b u latio n s of a ll c h a r a c te r is tic s held in TABLE 6 OBSERVED CHARACTERISTICS COMMON TO ALL SPEAKERS CONCERNING WHOSE SINCERITY OR INSINCERITY AUDIENCES COULD LEAST AGREE WHICH WERE DISTINCTIVELY DIFFERENT FROM SPEAKERS JUDGED MOST SINCERE OR MOST INSINCERE Item Num ber Speaker #4 Speaker #28 Speaker #5 Speaker #16 Speaker # 1 1 Speaker #80 Speaker #78 Speaker #55 1 2 a ------- ------- mixed mixed mixed poor poor mixed d 16a 2 1 % 1 2 % 1 0 % 13% 56% 3% 34% 38% 2 0 b no no no no no no no no 25a none none none none none none none none e 29c 114 126 156 162 126 132 114 2 0 1 P ro p o rtio n s of Sincere and Insincere Judgm ents .54-.46 .54- .46 .50-.50 .54-.46 .51-.49 .46-.54 .53-.47 .49-.51 aThese item s are also held in common with speakers judged in sin c e re . bT his item also held in common with speakers judged sin c e re . cThis item is different from both other groups. ^A verage = 23.3%, Range = 56%- 3%. eA verage = 141.3, Range = 114- 2 0 1 . 136 com m on by s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity au d ien ce s could le a s t a g re e , and w hich w ere not a lso held in com m on by both s p e a k e rs m o s t often judged sin c e re and s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re . O nly five ite m s w ere found to be th u s held in com m on o r in d icativ e of com m on t r a i t s . Of th is n u m b er, two w ere m e re ly n u m e r ic a l to ta ls to in d icate c o m p a riso n s. O nly th re e ite m s w ere ac tu ally held id e n tic a lly by a ll s p e a k e rs . In two c a s e s (ItemrS 12 and 25) the tr a i t s w ere a lso held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re . In one c a se (Item 20) the t r a i t s w ere a lso held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re . The av erag e p erce n tag e of tim e spent looking at the c a m e ra (and hence in d ire c t co n tact with the view ing audience) fo r th is group w as 23.3% .^ T h is w as a lm o st the sam e a s the tim e of s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re , who av e ra g ed 20.8%. The ran g e in p erce n tag e of tim e w as 3% to 56%, w hich w as a lm o st id e n tic a l to s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re , w hose ran g e w as 2% to 52%. The av erag e w o rd s -p e r-m in u te of the eig h t s p e a k e rs w as 141.3. T h is av e rag e w as not n e a r the 150 w o rd s -p e r-m in u te av e ra g e of s p e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re , n o r the 124.8 w o rd s -p e r- m inute av e ra g e of s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re . H ow ever, the ran g e of the w o rd s -p e r-m in u te of 114-201 o v erlap p ed co m p letely the ra n g e s of both the o th e r g ro u p s of s p e a k e rs . It w as ev id en t, th e re fo re , th a t th e re w ere v e ry few o b se rv e d 137 c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e , and th a t th e se com m on c h a ra c te ris tic s w ere not d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m both sp e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re and s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re . Q uestion 7 . — Do individual s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e hold o b se rv e d c h a ra c te ris tic s id e n tic a l w ith c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re o r m o st often judged in sin c e re ? W hile the o b se rv a tio n s u n d er Q u estio n 6 indicated th a t o b s e rv able t r a it s w ere not held in com m on by g ro u p s of s p e a k e rs co n cern in g w hose sin c e rity o r in s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t ag ree and sp e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re and in s in c e re , it w as c o n sid e re d p o ssib le th at one sp e a k e r m ig h t hold t r a i t s in com m on with e ith e r group. O b se rv a tio n s w ere m ad e, th e re fo re , to d e term in e if th is had o c c u rre d . The sig n ifican ce of th is in q u iry w as to d e te rm in e if the tr a its held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re o r in sin c e re w ere c o n siste n t in d isc rim in a tin g betw een such s p e a k e rs and s p e a k e rs about whose s in c e rity au d ien ces could not a g re e . The re v e rs e of th is q u estio n would be to a sk w hat would be the p o ssib le e ffe c t of d ev iatio n fro m the c h a r a c te r is tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs judged sin c e re o r in s in c e r e . Subjects chosen fo r th is a n a ly sis w ere the sam e a s had been 138 Included in o b se rv a tio n s u n d e r Q u estio n s 4, 5, and 6 . T a b le s 7 and 8 show the o b serv e d c h a ra c te ris tic s of sp e a k e rs about whose sin c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t ag ree re la tiv e to ite m s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c ere and s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re . T a b le s 9 and 10 show the in s ta n c e s in w hich s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity au d ien ces w ere le a s t able to a g re e d ev iated in b e h a v io r c h a ra c te ris tic s re la tiv e to ite m s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re and sp e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re . M any s p e a k e rs d iffered w idely fro m the b eh av io r of one group o r the o th e r. Some sp e a k e rs d iffered in only th re e o r fo u r ite m s . A ll s p e a k e rs , how ever, w ere found to d iffe r in som e re s p e c ts . It w as c le a rly in d icated th a t a ll individual s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g ree d iffe re d d istin c tiv e ly in b eh av io r re la tiv e to c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re and c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re . Q uestion 8 . — Do individual sp e a k e rs who have b een judged s in c e re le s s often by au d ien ces hold o b serv ed c h a r a c te r is tic s id e n tic a l with s p e a k e rs who have m o st often been judged sin c e re o r w ith s p e a k e rs who have been m o st often judged in sin c e re ? O b se rv a tio n s u n d er Q uestion 7 in d icated th at no individual TABLE 7 OBSERVED CHARACTERISTICS OF SPEAKERS ABOUT WHOSE SINCERITY OR INSINCERITY AUDIENCES COULD LEAST AGREE— RELATIVE TO ITEMS FOUND TO BE HELD IN COMMON BY SPEAKERS MOST OFTEN JUDGED SINCERE Item N um ber Speaker #4 Speaker #28 Speaker #5 Speaker #16 Speaker # 1 1 Speaker #80 Speaker #78 Speaker #55 5 m edium relaxed relaxed m edium relaxed medium relaxed relaxed 9 none none often often some some often often 1 1 ------- ------- poor good good mixed good mixed 14 serio u s pleasant serious pained pleasant serio u s pained serio u s 16a 2 1 % 1 2 % 1 0 % 13% 56% 3% 34% 38% 19 p artly partly no no no partly no no 2 0 no no no no no no no no 24 none none none some none none some none 26 strong weak strong strong strong weak weak strong 27 none none none none none none none some 28K none none often some some some some often 29 114 126 156 162 126 132 114 2 0 1 31 some none some none some some none none 33 none some some some often some some some 34 none none none none some some none some 35 none some much some some some some much 36 some some none some none some some none 37 same down down down down down down down 39 excell. m edium m edium poor poor excell. poor excell. 41 m edium poor poor poor excell. poor excell. excell. 44 some none some none none some none much 51 no no yes yes yes yes no yes 107 never never never never some never never some aA verage = 23.3%, Range = 3%- 56%. bA verage = 141.3, Range = 126- 201. TABLE 8 OBSERVED CHARACTERISTICS OF SPEAKERS ABOUT WHOSE SINCERITY OR INSINCERITY AUDIENCES COULD LEAST AGREE - — RELATIVE TO ITEMS FOUND TO BE HELD IN COMMON BY SPEAKERS MOST OFTEN JUDGED INSINCERE Item Num ber Speaker #4 Speaker #28 Speaker #5 Speaker #16 Speadcer # 1 1 Speaker #80 Speaker #78 Speadcer #55 5 medium relaxed relaxed medium relaixed medium relaxed relaxed 1 0 none none often none none none none some 1 2 ------- ------- mixed mixed mixed poor poor mixed 13 none some often some often none some often 14 serious pleasant serio u s panned pleasamt serious panned serious 16 2 1 % 1 2 % 1 0 % 13% 56% 3% 34% 38% 2 1 no no yes no no no yes yes 24 none none none some none none some none 25 none none none none none none none none 28 none none often some some some some often 29 114 126 156 162 126 132 114 2 0 1 33 none some some some often some some some 34 none none none none some some none some 35 none some much some some some some much 39 excell. m edium medium poor poor excell. poor excell. 41 m edium poor poor poor excell. poor excell. excell. 42 m edium poor poor medium poor poor poor poor 107 never never never never some never never some TABLE 9 INSTANCES IN WHICH SPEAKERS ABOUT WHOSE SINCERITY AND INSINCERITY AUDIENCES COULD LEAST AGREE DEVIATED FROM BEHAVIORS HELD IN COMMON BY SPEAKERS MOST OFTEN JUDGED SINCERE Item N um ber Speaker #4 Speaker #28 Speaker #5 Speaker #16 Speaker # 1 1 Speaker #80 Speaker #78 Speaker #55 5 X X X 9 X X X X 1 1 X X X X X 14 X X X X 16a X X X X X X 19 X X X 2 0 24 X X 26 X X X 27 X X X X X X X 28k X X 29 X X X 31 X X X X 33 X 34 X X X X X 35 X X X X X X 36 X X X X X 37 X 39 X X X X X 41 X X X X X 44 X X X X 51 X X X 107 X X aBelow average and not within range. u Not within range. 141 TABLE 10 INSTANCES IN WHICH SPEAKERS ABOUT WHOSE SINCERITY AND INSINCERITY AUDIENCES COULD LEAST AGREE DEVIATED FROM BEHAVIORS HELD IN COMMON BY SPEAKERS MOST OFTEN JUDGED INSINCERE Item Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Number #4 #28 #5 #16 # 1 1 #80 #78 #55 5 X X X X X 1 0 X X 1 2 13 X X X X X X 14 X X 16a X X X X 2 1 X X X X X 24 X X X X X X 25 28 X X X X 29b X X X 33 X X 34 X X X 35 X X X 39 X X X X 41 X X X 42 X X 107 X X aBelow A verage. bNot within range. 143 sp e ak e r about whom audiences could le a s t a g re e held c h a ra c te ris tic s id e n tic al w ith those held in com m on by e ith e r sp e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re o r sp e a k e rs m o st often judged in sin c e re . In o rd e r to te s t the p o ssib le co n sisten cy of th ese ite m s of c h a ra c te ris tic s in d is tinguishing betw een sp e a k e rs receiv in g vary in g p ro p o rtio n s of audience ev alu atio n s of sin c e rity , o b se rv atio n s w ere m ade to see if any in d i vidual sp e ak er who had been judged sin c ere by p ro p o rtio n s of .80 to .90 of au d ien ces held id e n tic al c h a ra c te ris tic s with those held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re and held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often judged in sin c e re . The significance of th is in q u iry w as tw o-fold. F ir s t, the con sisten c y and re lia b ility of the ite m s of c h a ra c te ris tic s a s d istinguishing fe a tu re s betw een sp e a k e rs judged sin c ere and in sin c e re could be fu rth e r v e rifie d . Second, d eterm in atio n could be m ade a s to w hether the d eg ree of identity with the c h a ra c te ris tic s of sp e a k e rs m o st judged sin c e re o r in sin c e re would v a ry co n sisten tly with the p ro p o rtio n s of audience evalu atio n of sin c e rity o r in sin c e rity . If it w ere found th at such c o -v a ria n c e did e x is t, then the estab lish m e n t of the d istinguishing ite m s a s a p red ic tiv e in stru m e n t m ight be ex p lo red . While s im ila r o b se rv a tio n s of in sin cere sp e a k e rs le s s often judged in sin c e re would have been p ro p e r, it w as found im p o ssib le in th is study due to the sm all num b er of sp e a k e rs judged in sin c e re . To have attem p ted to e sta b lish such a group of sp e a k e rs fo r o b serv atio n 144 would have o v erlap p ed with th e e sta b lish e d group of s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e . Nine s p e a k e rs w ere found who had re c e iv e d p ro p o rtio n s of .80 to .90 of audience ju d g m en ts a s being s in c e re . T a b le s 11 and 12 show the o b se rv ed c h a ra c te ris tic s of th ese sp e a k e rs re la tiv e to ite m s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re and m o st often judged in s in c e re . T a b le s 13 and 14 show the in sta n c e s in w hich the s p e a k e rs d ev iated in b eh a v io r c h a ra c te ris tic s re la tiv e to th ese sam e ite m s . A ll of the nine sp e a k e rs o b se rv e d u n d er th is q u estio n w ere found to d iffe r in v ary in g d e g re e s fro m c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re and those held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re . It w as found by in sp ectio n , h ow ever, th a t the d eg ree of v a ria n c e did not follow the sam e p a tte rn a s did audience jud g m en ts. F o r ex am p le, in T able 13, S peaker #79 w as judged sin c e re by a p ro p o rtio n of .87 of the au d ien ce, y et he d iffere d fro m the m o s t sin c e re group on 17 ite m s . S peaker #32 w as judged s in c e re by a p ro p o rtio n of .80 of the au d ien ce, y et he d iffe re d fro m the m o st s in c e re group on only 7 ite m s . S im ilar lack of re la tio n sh ip s b etw een p ro p o rtio n s of au d ien ces ev alu atio n and d eg ree of id en tity in b eh a v io r w as seen in T able 14. It w as c le a rly in d icated th a t a ll s p e a k e rs who had been judged s in c e re by p ro p o rtio n s of .80 to .90 of the au d ien ces d iffe re d in TABLE 11 OBSERVED CHARACTERISTICS OF SPEAKERS JUDGED SINCERE BY PROPORTIONS OF .80 TO .90 OF AUDIENCES RELATIVE TO ITEMS FOUND TO BE HELD IN COMMON BY SPEAKERS MOST OFTEN JUDGED SINCERE Item N um ber Speaker #29 Speaker #32 Speaker # 2 2 Speaker # 6 Speaker #81 Speaker #79 Speaker #82 Speaker #57 Speaker # 6 6 5 medium relax medium relax slouch medium relax stiff m edium 9 some none some some some some none some often 1 1 good good good good good good good mixed good 14 serious serious serio u s serious serious serious serious pained serio u s 16a 1 0 % 38% 71% 1 1 % 18% 13% 36% 75% 1 1 % 19 no no no no no no no no no 2 0 no no no no no no no no no 24 some none none some none some some some some 26 strong strong strong strong strong strong strong strong strong 27 none some none some some none some none some 28 some some some often some some some some some 29b 174 162 180 144 126 174 180 115 174 31 none some none some some none some some some aA verage = 31.4%, Range = 10%-75%. ^Average = 158.7, Range = 115- 180. TABLE 11 — Continued Item N um ber Speaker #29 Speaker #32 Speaker # 2 2 Speaker # 6 Speaker #81 Speaker #79 Speaker #82 Speaker #57 Speaker # 6 6 33 none some some often som e none some some some 34 none some none some none none some none none 35 some some some much some some some none some 36 some some none none some some some none some 37 sam e down sam e down down same down same down 39 m edium excell. excell. excell. medium medium medium poor m edium 41 excell. excell. excell. excell. medium excell. excell. poor poor 44 some none none none some some none none none 51 yes yes yes yes no yes yes yes yes 107 never never never never some some some never never P ro p o rtio n s Sincere Judgm ents .80 .80 .82 .85 .87 .87 .86 .85 • 0 0 -a TABLE 12 OBSERVED CHARACTERISTICS OF SPEAKERS JUDGED SINCERE BY PROPORTIONS OF .80 TO .90 OF AUDIENCES RELATIVE TO ITEMS FOUND TO BE HELD IN COMMON BY SPEAKERS MOST OFTEN JUDGED INSINCERE Item N um ber Speaker #29 Speaker #32 Speaker # 2 2 Speaker # 6 Speaker #81 Speaker #79 Speaker #82 Speaker #57 Speaker # 6 6 5 medium relax m edium relax slouch medium relax stiff m edium 1 0 none none none none none none none none none 1 2 good good mixed mixed good mixed mixed poor mixed 13 none some none some none none some some some 14 serio u s serio u s serious serious serio u s serious serio u s pained serious 16a 1 0 % 38% 71% 1 1 % 18% 13% 36% 75% 1 1 % 2 1 no no no no no no no no no 24 some none none some none some some some some 25 none none none some none none none none none 28 some some some often some some some some some 29b 174 162 180 144 126 174 180 115 179 33 none some some often some none some some some 34 none some none some none none some none none 35 some some some much some some some none some 39 medium excell. excell. excell. medium medium medium poor m edium 41 excell. excell. excell. excell. m edium excell. excell. poor poor 42 m edium poor excell. excell. poor medium medium medium poor 107 never never never never some some some never never P ro p o rtio n s Sincere Judgm ents .80 .80 .82 .85 .87 .87 . 8 6 .85 .87 aA verage = 31.4%, Range = 10%- 75% ^ A v e r a g e = 158.7, Range = 115- 180. TABLE 13 INSTANCES IN WHICH SPEAKERS JUDGED SINCERE BY PROPORTIONS OP .80 TO .90 OF AUDIENCES DEVIATED FROM BEHAVIORS HELD IN COMMON BY SPEAKERS MOST OFTEN JUDGED SINCERE Item Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Speaker Num ber #29 #32 # 2 2 # 6 #81 #79 #82 #57 # 6 6 5 X X X X X X 9 X X X X X X X X 1 1 X 14 X X X X X X X X X 16a X X X X X X X 19 2 0 24 X X X X X X 26 27 X X X X 28k X X X X X X X 29b X X X X X X 31 X X X 33 X X X X X X X X 34 X X X X X X 35 X X X X X X X X 36 X X X X X X 37 X X X X 39 X X X X X X 41 X X 44 X X X 51 107 X X X P ro p o rtio n s Sincere Judgm ents .80 .80 .82 .85 .87 .87 . 8 6 .85 .87 aBelow average and not in range. bNot within range. TABLE 14 INSTANCES IN WHICH SPEAKERS JUDGED SINCERE BY PROPORTIONS OF .80 TO .90 OF AUDIENCES DEVIATED FROM BEHAVIORS HELD IN COMMON BY SPEAKERS MOST OFTEN JUDGED INSINCERE Item N um ber Speaker #29 Speaker #32 Speaker # 2 2 Speaker # 6 Speaker #81 Speaker #79 Speaker #82 Speaker #57 Speaker # 6 6 5 X X X 1 0 1 2 X X X 13 X X X X X 14 16a X X X X 2 1 X X X X X X X X X 24 X X X X 25 X 28 X 29b X X X X X X X 33 X X X 34 X X X 35 X X 39 X X X 41 X X X X X X 42 X X 107 X X X X X X P ro p o rtio n s Sincere Judgm ents .80 .80 .82 .85 .87 .87 . 8 6 .85 .87 aAbove average o r above range. bAbove average and range. b eh av io r c h a ra c te ris tic s fro m sp e a k e rs who had been judged sin c e re by p ro p o rtio n s of .90 and above of au d ien ces re la tiv e to c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by the group m o st often judged s in c e re . The sam e sp e a k e rs w ere found to d iffe r fro m sp e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re re la tiv e to c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often judged in sin c e re . C H A PTER IV SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IM PLICATIONS Sum m ary The o bjective of th is study w as to in v estig ate the speaking c h a ra c te ris tic s of s in c e re and in sin c e re s p e a k e rs and of s p e a k e rs who w ere m o st often judged sin c e re o r in sin c e re by au d ien ces. The p ro b lem w as p h rase d in the fo rm of eig h t q u e stio n s. 1. When a group of s p e a k e rs give sp eech es supporting a p o si tion in w hich they sin c e re ly believe and then give sp e ec h e s on the opposite p o sitio n in which they supposedly do not b eliev e , a re th e re sig n ifican t d iffe re n c e s in the b eh av io r of s p e a k e rs o b se rv e d in the two s e ts of sp e e c h e s re la tiv e to d e liv e ry and content? 2. When a group of s p e a k e rs give sp eech es supporting a p o s i tio n in w hich they sin c e re ly b eliev e and then give sp eech e s on the o pposite p o sitio n in which they supposedly do not b e liev e , a re th e re sig n ifican t n u m b er of s p e a k e rs in w hich ch an g es re la tiv e to d e liv e ry and content o c c u r betw een the sin c e re and in sin c e re sp eech es? 3. A re th e re d iffe re n c e s in the o b serv ab le c h a ra c te ris tic s of s p e a k e rs whom au d ien ces have m o st often judged to be s in c e re , s p e a k e rs whom au d ien ces have m o st often judged in s in c e re , and 151 Isa s p e a k e rs about w hose s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t ag re e ? 4. A re th e re o b serv ab le c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs (both sin c e re and in sin c e re ) m o st often rate d a s sin c e re by au d ien ces, w hich a re d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m those held by sp eak - e r s m o st often ra te d a s in s in c e re ? 5. A re th e re o b se rv a b le c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs (both sin c e re and in s in c e re ) m o st often ra te d a s in sin c e re by au d ien ces, w hich a re d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m th o se held by sp e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s sin c e re ? 6 . A re th e re o b se rv a b le c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs (both s in c e re and in sin c e re ) co n cern in g w hose s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e , w hich a re d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m th o se held by e ith e r s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d by au d ien ces a s sin c e re o r s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d by au d ien ces a s in sin c e re ? 7. Do individual sp e a k e rs about w hose sin c e rity o r in sin c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e hold o b se rv e d c h a r a c te r is tic s id e n tic a l with c h a r a c te r is tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re o r m o st often judged in s in c e re ? 8 . Do individual s p e a k e rs who have been judged sin c e re le s s often by au d ien ces hold o b se rv e d c h a r a c te r is tic s id e n tic a l with s p e a k e rs who have m o st often b een judged sin c e re o r with s p e a k e rs who have b een m o st often judged in sin c e re ? F o rty -e ig h t film ed sp e e c h e s by tw en ty -fo u r s p e a k e rs u sed in 153 the H ild reth ex p e rim e n t w ere used in th is study. T w en ty -fo u r of the sp e e c h e s w ere sin c e re and tw en ty -fo u r sp e ech e s w ere in s in c e re . O b se rv a tio n s by the w rite r re la tiv e to o n e-h u n d red and tw enty ite m s of sp e a k e r b e h a v io r co n cern in g d e liv e ry and content w ere m ade on each sp eech . The study w as divided into two p a r ts . The f ir s t p a rt c o n c e rn e d the co m p ariso n of the c h a ra c te ris tic s of the ac tu ally sin c e re and in sin c e re s p e a k e rs . The second p a rt d e a lt with co m p a riso n s of s p e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re by au d ien ce s, sp e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re by au d ien ce s, and s p e a k e rs about whose s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e . The audience ju d g m en ts u sed w ere those re p o rte d in the H ild re th study. C o n clu sio n s The co n clu sio n s re a c h e d in th is study m u st be accep ted a s v alid only when c o n sid e re d w ithin the fram ew o rk of th is study and of the e x p e rim e n ta l d esig n of the p r io r study upon w hich th is study w as p a rtia lly b ased . C o n clu sio n s re ac h ed by th is study a s a n sw e rs to q u e stio n s p ro p o sed in the p ro b lem w ere: 1. The to talin g of c h a r a c te r is tic s of d e liv e ry and content of s in c e re and in s in c e re s p e a k e rs re v e a le d no sig n ifican t d iffe re n c e s in the o b serv ed b e h a v io r of the two g ro u p s. 2. When s p e a k e rs gave sp e ec h e s on a topic in which they 154i supposedly b eliev ed , and then gave sp eech es on the opposite p o sitio n in w hich they supposedly did not b eliev e, m any changes in b eh a v io r w ere o b se rv e d , but th e se ch an g es did not fa ll into a c o n siste n t p a tte rn and w ere not sig n ifican t enough in n u m b er to in d icate a re la tio n sh ip to the fa c to rs of sin c e rity o r in s in c e rity . 3. When s p e a k e rs w ere c la ssifie d a s sin c e re o r in s in c e re by m ean s of audience ev alu atio n , m o re d iffe re n c e s w ere found in o b serv ed b e h a v io rs than w ere found betw een ac tu ally s in c e re and in sin c e re s p e a k e rs . 4. T h e re w ere c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often ra te d as sin c e re by au d ien ces w hich w ere d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m th o se held by s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s in s in c e re . 5. T h e re w ere c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs m o st often ra te d as in sin c e re by au d ien ces which w ere d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m those held by sp e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s s in c e re . 6 . T h e re w ere no c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by sp e a k e rs co n cern in g whose s in c e rity o r in sin c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t ag ree w hich w ere d istin c tiv e ly d iffe re n t fro m both s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d sin c e re and s p e a k e rs m o st often ra te d a s in s in c e re . 7. A ll individual s p e a k e rs about whose s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity au d ien ces could le a s t a g re e d iffered d istin c tiv e ly in b eh av io r re la tiv e to c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re and c h a r a c te ris tic s held in com m on by s p e a k e rs m o st 155 often judged in s in c e re . 8 . A ll individual s p e a k e rs who w ere judged s in c e re by s m a lle r p ro p o rtio n s of au d ien ces than th o se m o st often judged s in c e re d iffe re d d istin c tiv e ly fro m s p e a k e rs m o st often judged s in c e re and s p e a k e rs m o st often judged in s in c e re re la tiv e to c h a ra c te ris tic s held in com m on by th o se two g ro u p s re sp e c tiv e ly . Im p licatio n s 1. Since th e re w ere no d istin ctiv e d iffe re n c e s betw een s in c e re and in sin c e re s p e a k e rs , but r a th e r d iffe re n c e s betw een s p e a k e rs whom au d ien ces judged a s being s in c e re and in s in c e re , it would se e m th at audience im p re s s io n of s in c e rity and in s in c e rity w as a re s u lt of audience ev alu atio n of s p e a k e r b e h a v io r and not of the a c tu a l s in c e rity o r in s in c e rity of the sp e a k e r. 2. Since sp e a k e rs m o st often judged by au d ien ces a s s in c e re and those m o st often judged a s in sin c e re w ere found to p o s s e s s b eh av io r a l c h a ra c te ris tic s com m on to th e ir group but not held in com m on by the opposite group, and sin ce th ese c h a ra c te ris tic s w ere not held by in d iv id u al s p e a k e rs o th e rw ise ev alu ated , it would se em th at audience ev alu atio n of s in c e rity w as b ased upon o b se rv a tio n of sp e cific c h a ra c te r is tic s of d e liv e ry and content. 3. Since ite m s of b e h a v io r o b se rv e d in the su b je c ts of th is study w ere ite m s tra d itio n a lly o b se rv ed re la tiv e to sp e a k e r 156 e ffe c tiv e n e ss, it would seem th a t c h a ra c te ris tic s used by au d ien ces to ev alu ate s in c e rity o r in sin c e rity a re those which w ere also m o st clo se ly a s so c ia te d w ith s p e a k e r ad ju stm en t and effectiv e co m m u n ica tio n . 4. Since th e re w as no ev id en t co n sisten cy betw een the p ro p o rtio n of audience jud g m en ts of sin c e rity and in s in c e rity re la tiv e to sp e a k e rs not included in the two e x tre m e g ro u p s of s p e a k e rs and the d ev iatio n of the s p e a k e rs ' b eh av io r fro m the d istin ctiv e com m on b eh a v io r of the two e x tre m e g ro u p s, it would seem th a t c e rta in c h a ra c te r is tic s of b eh av io r w ere m o re im p o rta n t than o th e rs in the fo rm a tio n of audience jud g m en ts of sin c e rity o r in s in c e rity . 5. Since v e ry few ite m s of b eh av io r re la tiv e to speech co n ten t, o rg an iz atio n , o r w ording w ere found to be held in com m on by e ith e r s p e a k e rs m o st often judged sin c e re o r m o st often judged in s in c e re , it would seem th a t b e h a v io rs re la tiv e to d e liv e ry w ere m o re im p o rta n t in the c re a tio n of audience ju dgm ents of sin c e rity o r in s in c e rity th an w ere c h a ra c te ris tic s of content and language. 6 . Since c h a ra c te ris tic s of speaking b eh av io r tra d itio n a lly a s so c ia te d w ith sp e a k e r ad ju stm en t and co m m u n icativ en ess w ere seem in g ly im p o rta n t in the c re a tio n of audience im p re s sio n of s in c e r ity , it se e m s th a t sin c e rity in the d e s ire to speak w as m o re im p o rta n t in c re a tio n of audience im p re s sio n of s in c e rity than w as s in c e rity of b elief on the p a rt of the sp e a k e r. 157 7. Some im p licatio n s of th is study have v ery specific ap p lic a tion to th e teaching of speech: a. S p eak er techniques fo r the c re a tio n of the im p re s sio n of sin c e rity in the audience can be taught and le a rn e d . The tim e -w o rn advice to a student sp e ak er to “ be s in c e re ” is not in its e lf su fficien t in stru c tio n . b. M ore tim e should be spent in developing tech n iq u es of crea tin g a d e s ire to speak on the p a rt of the student sp e ak er in an attem p t to develop the tech n iq u es of effectiv en ess and co m m u n icativ en ess which in tu rn w ill c re a te the im p re s sio n s of sp e ak er sin c e rity in the au d ien ce. c. A udiences m u st le a rn th at th e ir im p re s sio n of the sin c e rity of the sp e ak er is p rim a rily based on sp e a k e r b eh av io r, and hence m ay at tim e s be in a c c u ra te . O th e r a re a s of evaluation and c ritic is m m u st be used by in te l ligent au d ien ces in judgm ent of a sp e a k e r’s p e rsu a sio n r a th e r than the blanket im p re s sio n of sp e ak er sin c e rity . S uggestions fo r F u rth e r R e sea rc h In v estig atio n s in the p re se n t study suggested a r e a s which m ight w ell be ex p lo red in fu tu re re s e a rc h . Some of th e se a r e a s include: 158 1. E x p erim e n ta l re s e a rc h in esta b lish in g the s ta tis tic a l re lia b ility of c e rta in b eh av io ral c h a ra c te ris tic s of sp e a k e rs in d eterm in in g audience im p re s sio n s of sin c e rity o r in sin c e rity . 2. E x p lo ratio n of the re la tiv e weight which the individual b e h a v io ra l c h a ra c te ris tic s of sp e a k e rs m ight have in the crea tio n of audience judgm ents of sin c e rity o r in sin c e rity . 3. The e m p iric a l te stin g of a sp e c ts of sp e ak er b eh av io r and its effect on audience evaluation of sin c e rity o r in sin c e rity in sp eech es of g re a te r length than those used in th is study and the o rig in al ex p erim en t upon which th is study w as b ased. B IB L I O G R A P H Y BIBLIOGRAPHY A n d erso n , V irg il A . T ra in in g the Speaking V o ice. New Y ork: O xford U n iv ersity P r e s s , 1942. 387 pp. A ris to tle . R h eto ric a . W. D. R o ss, e d ito r, The W orks of A r is to tle . Vol. XI. O xford: The C laren d o n P r e s s , 1924. 318 pp. A u stin , G ilb e rt. C h iro n o m ia . London: T . C odell and W. D av ies, 1806. 583 pp. B la ir, Hugh. L e c tu re s on R h eto ric and B e lle s L e ttr e s . P h ilad elp h ia: J a m e s Kay, Ju n . and B ro th e r, 1846. 557 pp. B rem b e ck , W inston L ., and W illiam S. H ow ell. P e rs u a s io n , A M eans of S ocial C o n tro l. New Y ork: P re n tic e -H a ll, In c., 1952. 488 pp. B rig a n ce, W illiam N orw ood. Speech, Its T ech n iq u es and D isc ip lin e s in a F re e S o ciety . New Y ork: A ppleton, C en tu ry , C ro fts , In c., 1952. 582 pp. B ry an t, D onald C ., and K a rl R. W allace. O ra l C o m m u n icatio n . New Y ork: A ppleton, C en tu ry , and C ro fts, In c., 1954. 310 pp. ________ . F u n d am en tals of P u b lic Speaking. New Y ork: A ppleton, C en tu ry , and C ro fts, In c ., 1960. 587 pp. C am p b ell, G eo rg e. The P h ilo so p h y of R h e to ric . New edition; New Y ork: H a rp e r and B ro th e rs , 1859. 435 pp. C ic e ro , M a rcu s T u llu s. De O ra to r e . J . S. W atson, tr a n s la to r . New Y ork: A rth u r H inds and C om pany, 1890. 261 pp. ________. R h e to ric a ad H eren n iu m . H a rry C apian, tr a n s la to r . C am b rid g e: H arv ard U n iv ersity P r e s s , 1954. 433 pp. C la rk , M. L . R h e to ric at R o m e. London: Cohen and W est, L td ., 1953. 203 pp. 160 161 C o o p er, L an e. The R h eto ric of A ris to tle . New Y ork: A ppleton- C en tu ry C om pany, 1932. 259 pp. C ro c k e r, L io n el. P u b lic Speaking fo r C ollege S tu d en ts. New Y ork: A m e ric a n Book C om pany, 1950. 508 pp. C ro m w ell, H arv ey , and A lan H. M onroe. W orking fo r M ore E ffectiv e S peech. New Y ork: Scott, F o re sm a n and C om pany, 1955. 110 pp. D ick en s, M ilton. Speech, D ynam ic C o m m u n icatio n . New Y ork: H a rc o u rt, B ra c e and C om pany, 1954. 440 pp. F a irb a n k s , G ra n t. Practiced. V oice P r a c tic e . New Y ork: H a rp e r and B ro th e rs , 1944. 84 pp. F e sse n d e n , Seth A ., and Wayne N. T hom pson. B a sic E x p e rie n c e s in S p eech . New Y ork: P re n tic e -H a ll, In c., 1951. 427 pp. F ie ld s , V ic to r A ., and J a m e s F . B en d er. V oice and D ictio n . New Y ork: The M acm illan C om pany, 1949. 368 pp. F le s c h , Rudolf. How to T e s t R e a d a b ility . New Y ork: H a rp e r and B ro th e rs , 1951. 56 pp. G enung, Jo h n F . The P r a c tic a l E lem en ts of R h e to ric . New Y ork: Ginn and C om pany, 1914. 483 pp. G ra y , G iles W ., and W aldo W. B rad en . P u b lic Speaking, P rin c ip le s and P r a c tic e . New Y ork: H a rp e r and B ro th e rs , 1951. 581 pp. H ahn, E lis e , e t a l. B a sic Voice T ra in in g fo r S peech. New Y ork: M cG raw -H ill Book C om pany, 1957. 253 pp. Ju d so n , L ym an S., and A ndrew T . W eaver. V oice S cie n ce. New Y ork: A p p le to n -C e n tu ry -C ro fts, In c., 1942. 377 pp. M innick, Wayne C. The A rt of P e r s u a s io n . B oston: Houghton, M ifflin C om pany, 1957. 295 pp. M onroe, A lan H. P rin c ip le s and T y p es of S peech. New Y ork: Scott, F o re s m a n and C om pany, 1955. 680 pp. M o ses, P a u l J . The V oice of N e u ro s is . New Y ork: G rune and S tratto n , 1954. 131 pp. 162 M u rray , Elw ood. The Speech P e rs o n a lity . J . B. L ippincott C om pany, 1937. 450 pp. N o rv elle, L ee, Raym ond G. Sm ith, and O rvin L a rso n . Speaking E ffe c tiv e ly . New Y ork: The D ryden P r e s s , In c., 1957. 326 pp. O liv e r, R o b ert R. The P sychology of P e rs u a s iv e S peech. New Y ork: L ongm an’s, G reen and Com pany, 1942. 388 pp. ________, D allas C . D ickey, and H arold P . Z elko. C om m unicative S peech. New Y ork: The D ryden P r e s s , 1955. 386 pp. Q uintilian. In stitu te s of the O r a to r . J . P a ts a ll, tra n s la to r. 2 volum es; London: B. Law and J . W ilkie, 1774. 441 pp. ________. In stitu te s of O ra to ry . John S. W atson, tra n s la to r. 2 v o l um es; London: H enry C . Bohn, 1856. 2v. S a re tt, Lew , and W illiam T . F o s te r. B asic P rin c ip le s of S peech. New Y ork: Houghton M ifflin C om pany, 1946. 604 pp. S heridan, T hom as. A C o u rse of L e c tu re s on E lo cu tio n . London: J . D odsley, 1781. 320 pp. Soper, P a u l L. B asic P ublic Speaking. New Y ork: O xford U n iv ersity P r e s s , 1956. 374 pp. T honssen, L e s te r. S elected R eadings in R h eto ric and P u b lic Speaking.. New Y ork: The H. W. W ilson Com pany, 1942. 324 pp. ________, and A. C raig B a ird . Speech C r itic is m . New Y ork: The Ronald P r e s s , 1948. 542 pp. T honssen, L e s te r, and H ow ard G ilkinson. B a sic T rain in g in S peech. Boston: D. C . H eath and C om pany, 1949. 249 pp. W ard, John. A System of O ra to ry . London: J . W ard, 1759. 2v. W eaver, Andrew T ., and O rd ean G. N ess. The F u n d am en tals and F o rm s of S peech. New Y ork: The O dyssey P r e s s , 1957. 470 pp. W hately, R ich ard . E lem en ts of R h e to ric . New Y ork: Sheldon and C om pany, 1867. 545 pp. 163 W hite, E ugene E . P r a c tic a l Speech F u n d a m e n ta ls. New Y ork: The M acm illan C om pany, 1960. 519 pp. W hite, E ugene E ., and C la ir R . H e n d e rlid e r. P r a c tic a l P u b lic Speaking. New Y ork: The M acm illan C om pany, 1954 . 365 pp. W inans, J a m e s A . Speech M aking. New Y ork: D. A p p leto n -C en tu ry C om pany, 1938. 285 pp. W oolbert, C h a rle s H. F u n d am en tals of S peech. R evised edition; New Y ork: H a rp e r B ro th e rs , 1927. 423 pp. P e rio d ic a l A rtic le s B ra d le y , B e rt E ., J r . “ The Inventio of John W ard ,” Speech M ono g ra p h s , 24:56-63, M arch , 1959. B ra n d e n b erg , E a rn e s t. “ Q u in tilian and the Good O r a to r ,” The Q u a rte rly Jo u rn a l of S peech, 34:23-29, F e b ru a ry , 1948. B ry an , A. I., and W. H. W ilke. “ A T echnique fo r R ating P u b lic S p e a k e rs ,” J o u rn a l of C onsulting P sy ch o lo g y , 5:80-90, 1941. C la rk , W. K. “ A Survey of C e rta in A udience A ttitu d es tow ard C o m m only T aught S tan d ard s of P u b lic Speaking/ * Speech M ono g ra p h s , 18:62-69, M arch , 1951. D u sen b u ry , D elw in, and F ra n k ly n K now er. “ E x p e rim e n ta l S tudies of the S ym bolism of A ction and V o ice— I, A Study of the S pecificity of M eaning in F a c ia l E x p re s s io n ,” The Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of S peech, 24:424-435, O cto b e r, 1938. ________. “ E x p e rim e n ta l Studies of the Sym bolism of A ction and V o ice — I I ,” The Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of S peech, 25:67-75, F e b ru a ry , 1939. E dney, C la re n c e W. “ C am pbell on P u lp it E lo q u en c e,” Speech M ono g ra p h s , 19:1-10, M arch , 1952. H aim an, F ra n k ly n S. “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of the E ffec ts of E th o s in P u b lic S peaking,” Speech M onographs, 16:190-202, S ep tem b er, 1949. 164 H ance, K enneth. “ T he E le m e n ts of the R h e to ric a l T h eo ry of P h illip s B r o o k s /’ Speech M o nographs, 5:16-39, 1938. H olt, M rs . C h a rle s M. “ The S peaker in R elation to H im se lf,” The Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of Speech, 1:276-280, O c to b e r, 1915. K now er, F ra n k ly n . “ A Suggestive Study of P u b lic Speaking R ating Scale V a lu e s,” The Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of S peech, 15:30-41, F e b ru a ry , 1929. L e e , Irv in g J . “ F re e d o m fro m S p eech ,” The S outhern Speech J o u r n a l, 14:26-30, S ep tem b er, 1948. L udlum , T h o m as S. “ E ffec ts of C e rta in T ech n iq u es of C red ib ility Upon A udience A ttitu d e ,” Speech M o nographs, 25:278-284, N o v em b er, 1958. M ills, G len E . “ D aniel W e b ste r’s P rin c ip le s of R h e to ric ,” Speech M o nographs, 9:124-140, 1942. M u rra y , Elw ood, “ M ental A d ju stm en ts fo r the R e lea se of C re a tiv e P o w e r in S p eech ,” The Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of Speech, 21:496-506, N o v em b er, 1935. P a u lso n , Stanley F . “ The E ffects of the P re s tig e of the S peaker and A cknow ledgm ent of O pposing A rg u m en ts on A udience R etention and Shift of O p in io n ,” Speech M onographs, 21:267-271, N ovem ber, 1954. S c h rie r, W illiam . “ The E th ic s of P e rs u a s io n ,” The Q u a rte rly Jo u rn a l of S peech, 26:476-486, N ovem ber, 1930. S tevens, W ilm er E . “ A R ating Scale fo r P u b lic S p e a k e rs ,” The Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l of S peech, 24:223-232, A p ril, 1928. W allace, K a rl R. “ An E th ic a l B a sis of C o m m u n icatio n ,” The Speech T e a c h e r, 4:1- 9, J a n u a ry , 1955. ________ . “ B aco n ’s C onception of R h e to ric ,” Speech M o n o g rap h s, 3:21-48, 1936. W agner, R u s se ll H. “ T h o m as W ilson’s A rte of R h eto riq u e, ” Speech M o n o g rap h s, 27:1-32, M arch , 1960. 165 U npublished M a te ria ls B en ed ict, T ed W. ‘ ‘An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of Social S tatu s a s a D im ension of E th o s .” U npublished D o c to r’s d is s e rta tio n , U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , L o s A n g eles, 1958. 178 pp. C la rk , W illiam K. 1 *A S urvey of C e rta in A udience A ttitu d es tow ard C om m only T aught S tan d ard s of P u b lic S peaking.” U npublished M a s te r’s th e s is , U n iv ersity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia , L os A n g eles, 1950. 96 pp. H ild reth , R ich ard A . “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of A u d ien ce’s A bility to D istin g u ish betw een S in cere and In s in c e re S p e ec h es.” U npub lish ed D o c to r’s d is s e rta tio n , U n iv ersity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia , L os A n g eles, 1953. 112 pp. M cEvoy, J . E d w ard . “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of the F a c to rs of Eye C o n tact in F ilm e d S p e e c h e s.” U npublished D o cto r’s d is s e rta tio n , U n iv e rsity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , L os A n g eles, 1953. 132 pp. R u ech elle, R andall C . “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of A udience R eco g nition of E m o tio n al and In te lle c tu a l A p p eals in P e r s u a s io n .” U npublished D o cto r’s d is s e rta tio n , U n iv ersity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , L os A n g eles, 1953. 119 pp. S te in e r, G eorge E . “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of the Influence of Sub lim in al Cue W ords on A udience R esp o n se s to a F ilm e d S p ea k e r’s S in ce rity , E ffe c tiv e n e ss and Subject M a tte r.” U npublished D o c to r’s d is s e rta tio n , U n iv ersity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia, L os A n g eles, 1959. 126 pp. U tzin g er, V ernon A. “ An E x p e rim e n ta l Study of the E ffec ts of V erb al F lu en cy upon the L is te n e r .” U npublished D o c to r’s d is s e rta tio n , U n iv ersity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia , L os A n g eles, 1952. 112 pp. A P P E N D I X E S A PPE N D IX A INSTRUCTIONS FO R F I RST SPEEC H A PP E N D IX A INSTRUCTIONS FO R F IR S T SPEECH You a re p a rtic ip a tin g in an ex p e rim en t in v e stig atin g c e rta in a s p e c ts of p e rsu a siv e speaking. D etailed in stru c tio n s w ill be given to you as the e x p e rim e n t p ro g re s s e s . 1. R ead the follow ing lis t of “ sp eech to p ic s .” a. Sex education should be taught in high sch o o ls. b. The C om m unist P a rty should be outlaw ed in the U nited S ta te s. c. The U nited S tates should have a sy ste m of u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g . d. T he fe d e ra l go v ern m en t should su b sid ize college ed u catio n . e. The U nited S tates should have a sy ste m of co m p u lso ry h ealth in su ra n c e . f. A college education should be fo r g e n e ra l c u ltu re r a th e r than fo r v o catio n al tra in in g . g. L arg e co lleg es a re s u p e rio r to s m a ll c o lle g e s. h. E x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s a re good fo r the av erag e stu d en t. i. G am bling should be leg alized in C a lifo rn ia . j. Som e type of re lig io u s tra in in g should be included in the public sch o o l c u rric u lu m . k. The U nited S tate s should have a new m a jo r p o litica l p arty . 1. S ubsidization of college a th le te s should be ab o lish ed . 2. S elect fro m the above lis t th at topic upon w hich you have the s tro n g e s t and m o st s in c e re b e lie f s — e ith e r fo r o r ag a in st the 168 169 s ta te m e n t. If you do not find a topic on the lis t about w hich you have stro n g and s in c e re b e lie fs, then p ro p o se one of y o u r own. 3. C o n stru c t a two (2) m inute sp eech on th a t to p ic. The p u rp o se of y o u r sp e ech is to ap p eal to an audience f o r accep tan ce of y o u r b e lie f. C o n sid e r y o u r audience to be a m e d iu m -siz e d ad u lt, ed u cated group in L o s A n g eles, such a s a s e rio u s b u sin e ss m eetin g of a com m unity o r s e rv ic e club. Do not c o n s id e r y o u r audience to be a sp eech c la s s o r o th e r c la s s ro o m situ a tio n . 4. You w ill have o n e-h alf h o u r to p re p a re the sp e ech . On the sh e e t which w ill be provided fo r you, m ake a copy of the outline of y o u r sp eech . 5. Be s u re to begin y o u r sp eech with the follow ing p h ra se : “ 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t (sta te y o u r p o sitio n on the to p ic ) b ec au se ___ 6 . At the end of the h a lf-h o u r of p re p a ra tio n , you w ill be ca lle d upon to d e liv e r the sp eech b efo re so u n d -m o tio n -p ic tu re c a m e ra s . T h ese p ic tu re s of you speaking w ill la te r be show n to au d ien ces of the n a tu re d e sc rib e d above. 7. T he tim e lim it (2 m in u tes) m u st be s tr ic tly o b se rv e d . When you have fin ish ed d e liv e rin g y o u r sp eech , m ove im m ed iately , and w ith out sp eak in g , to the d o o r m ark e d “ E x it,” w here you w ill be given f u rth e r in s tru c tio n s . [Note: On the in stru c tio n s given to the s p e a k e rs , leg al length p a p e r w as used and a ll in stru c tio n s ap p eared on one page.] A PPEN D IX B INSTRUCTIONS FO R SECOND SPEECH A PPEN D IX B INSTRUCTIONS FO R SECOND SPEECH In th is second sp eech , fo r p u rp o ses of the e x p e rim e n t, we w ish to study a sp e c ts of p e rsu a sio n som ew hat d iffe re n t fro m th o se in v e s ti gated in y o u r f ir s t sp eech . 1. U se the sa m e topic on w hich you ju s t spoke. C o n stru c t a second sp eech two ( 2 ) m in u tes in length, in w hich you take ex actly the opposite point of view fro m th a t tak en in the f i r s t sp e ech . T hus y o u r second sp eech w ill be on the sid e of the topic in w hich you d efin itely do not b eliev e. 2 . P re fa c e y o u r second sp eech , a s in the f ir s t, w ith the p h ra s e , “ I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at (sta te y o u r p o sitio n on the to p ic ) b e c a u s e ___________________________.** (F o r p u rp o ses of th is ex p e rim e n t we a re ask in g you to do th is even though it is not tru e .) 3. F o r p u rp o ses of th is ex p e rim e n t we ask th a t you attem p t to p e r suade the sam e s o r t of audience to th is opposite point of view . Do not re v e a l by any co n scio u s o r d ire c t sta te m e n t th at you do not b eliev e in the p ro p o sal you a re ad v o catin g . 4. Follow , in y o u r second sp e ech , the sam e g e n e ra l outline of the f ir s t sp eech , ex cep t th at you take the opposite sid e . 5. You w ill have o n e-h alf h our to p re p a re the second sp e e c h . A t the end of th a t h a lf-h o u r you w ill again d e liv e r y o u r sp e ech b efo re the so u nd-m otion p ic tu re c a m e ra s . 6 . When you have com pleted the second sp eech b efo re the c a m e ra s , m ove im m ed ia tely and w ithout sp eak in g , to the d o o r m a rk e d ex it. 171 APPENDIX C INSTRUCTIONS AND BALLOTS FOR RATING SPEAKERS 1 A PPEN DIX C INSTRUCTIONS AND BALLOTS FO R RATING SPEAKERS In stru c tio n s fo r Ju d g es 1. In the m otion p ic tu re s you a re about to se e , ea ch s p e a k e r begins h is sp eech with the p h ra se , “ I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t (s p e a k e r’s opinion of h is to p ic ) b e c a u s e __________ ." In som e c a s e s , due to re c o rd in g d iffic u ltie s, the p h ra s e is not c le a rly a u d i b le . A ssum e th at in each case the p h rase does p reced e the speech. 2. You have been handed a booklet of ev alu atio n b a llo ts. F ill out co m p letely one ( 1 ) b allo t fo r each of the tw en ty -fo u r s p e a k e rs you w ill see in the film . 3. Some sp e a k e rs w ill ap p e ar tw ice. When th is happens you w ill m a rk y o u r b allo t as if he w ere a s e p a ra te sp e a k e r. 4. T u rn to the f ir s t ev alu atio n b allo t in y o u r b o o k le t. It is a sam p le b allo t. a. P la c e y o u r nam e in the space provided on the f ir s t b allo t follow ing the sam p le b allo t. A lso , on the sam e b a llo t, c irc le M o r F to denote your own sex. b. U se a s e p a ra te b allo t fo r each s p e a k e r. c. E x tra b allo t a t end is to be u sed in c a se you sp o il a b allo t. If you need to u se the e x tra b allo t be s u re you fill in the n u m b er of the s p e a k e r fo r whom the b allo t is intended. 5. T u rn to the ra tin g s c a le s on the sam p le b a llo t. a. SCALE NUMBER I . (1) T h is sc a le is to be u sed to ev alu ate the s p e a k e r's s in c e rity . (S in c erity is to be co n sid ered as the im p re s s io n of h o n est 173 174 b e lief in h is position, given by the sp e ak er.) (2) P la c e a check m a rk (J), as is done in the sam ple b allo t, b efo re the w ords which m o st c le a rly ag ree w ith your e s ti m ate of the s p e a k e r’s sin c e rity . b. SCALE NUMBER II. (1) U se th is sc ale to evaluate the sp e a k e r’s effectiv en e ss. (E ffectiv en ess should be co n sid ered as the sp e a k e r’s ab ility in p ersu ad in g you.) ( 2 ) P la c e a check m a rk (J), a s is done on the sam ple ballo t, above the n u m b er which m o st clo sely a g re e s w ith your e s tim a te of the s p e a k e r’s g e n e ra l effectiv en e ss. (3) Low ratin g s ( l ’s and 2’s) and high ra tin g s (4’s and 5’s) a re of eq u al value to the ex p erim en t and do not h a rm o r benefit the sp e a k e r p erso n a lly in any way. 6 . You have two (2) check m a rk s (J) to m ake on each b allo t. A se p a ra te b allo t should be used fo r each sp e a k e r. Be su re you co m plete each b a llo t. 7. You w ill have fifteen (15) seconds of light film im m ed iately follow ing each sp eech in which to com plete your b allo t. 8 . B e su re you com plete each b allo t im m ed iately a fte r seein g and h earin g each speech. 175 JU D G E’S BALLOT Ju d g e ’s n a m e ____________________________ S p eak er No. Sex of Judge M F (c irc le one) SCALE NUMBER 1: (S incerity) ( ) S peaker was sin c e re . ( ) S p eak er w as not s in c e re . ( ) I am undecided. SCALE NUMBER II: (E ffectiv en ess) ( )__________(J________< J ________ L > ( ) 1 2 3 4 5 A lm o st no Below A verage Above A lm o st e ffe ctiv e n e ss av erag e e ffectiv en e ss av e rag e p e rfe c t effectiv en ess effectiv en e ss e ffe c tiv e n e ss I A PPEN D IX D SUMMARY O F CO RRECT AND INCORRECT IDENTIFICATIONS O F SINCERITY AND INSINCERITY BY AUDIENCES FREQUENCIES AND PROPORTIONS OF CORRECT AND INCORRECT IDENTIFICATIONS, AND t-RATIOS FOR SIGNIFICANCE OF DEPARTURE FROM EQUALITY, OF IDENTIFICATIONS ON SINCERE AND INSINCERE SPEECHES BY BOTH MALE AND FEMALE JUDGES REELS I AND H Since re Ins i n c e r e [S p eak er’s Order N u m b er 1 (Reel I) S p e a k e r’s E x p e rim e n ta l N um b er F re q u e n cy C o rre c t F re q u e n c y In c o rre c t P ro p o rtio n C o rre c t P ro p o rtio n In c o rre c t t-R a tio S p eak e r’s E x p e rim e n ta l N u m b er F re q u e n cy C o rre c t F re q u e n cy In c o rre c t P ro p o rtio n C o rre c t P ro p o rtio n In c o rre c t t-R a tio 1 34 49 38 .56 .44 1.19 84 55 32 .63 .37 2.56 2 31 35 52 .40 .60 1 . 8 6 81 1 1 76 .13 .87 10.49 3 17 40 47 .46 .54 0.75 67 17 70 . 2 0 .80 7.17 4 19 58 29 .67 .33 3.30 69 6 81 .07 .93 15.84 5 29 70 17 .80 . 2 0 9.37 79 1 1 76 .13 .87 10.49 6 30 63 24 .72 .28 1 1 . 6 8 80 40 47 .46 .54 0.75 7 14 50 37 .57 .43 1.41 64 23 64 .26 .74 8.91 8 32 70 17 .80 . 2 0 9.37 82 1 2 75 .14 . 8 6 9.78 9 23 35 52 .40 .60 1 . 8 6 73 28 59 .32 . 6 8 3.56 1 0 2 2 71 16 .82 .18 10.03 72 16 71 .18 .82 10.03 1 1 27 53 34 .61 .39 2.58 77 7 80 .08 .92 14.36 1 2 13 78 9 .90 . 1 0 12.17 63 4 83 .05 .95 20.17 T otals M eans 672 56 372 31 .64 .36 2.80 230 19.17 814 67.8 . 2 2 .80 6.92 FREQUENCIES AND PROPORTIONS OF CORRECT AND INCORRECT IDENTIFICATIONS, AND t-RATIOS FOR SIGNIFICANCE OF DEPARTURE FROM EQUALITY, OF IDENTIFICATIONS ON SINCERE AND INSINCERE SPEECHES BY BOTH MALE AND FEMALE JUDGES REELS HI AND IV S i n c e r e I n s i n c e r e S p e a k e r’b O rder N um ber (Reel IH) S p e a k e r’s E x p e rim e n ta l N um ber F re q u en cy C o rre c t F re q u en c y In c o rre c t P ro p o rtio n C o rre c t P ro p o rtio n In c o rre c t t-R a tio S p e a k e r’s E x p e rim e n ta l N um b er F re q u en cy C o rre c t F re q u en cy In c o rre c t P ro p o rtio n C o rre c t P ro p o rtio n In c o rre c t t-R a tio 1 2 48 24 .67 .33 3.00 52 23 49 .32 . 6 8 3.28 2 1 2 41 31 .57 .43 1.19 62 18 54 .25 .75 4.90 3 1 26 43 .40 .60 1 . 6 8 51 24 48 .33 .67 3.00 4 7 16 56 . 2 2 .78 5.67 57 1 1 61 .15 .85 10.72 5 4 30 33 .54 .46 0.71 54 2 2 50 .31 .69 3.58 6 6 61 1 1 .85 .15 10.72 56 13 59 .18 .82 7.05 7 1 0 48 24 .67 .33 3.00 60 25 47 .35 .65 2.72 8 28 39 33 .54 .46 0.71 78 38 34 .53 .47 0.47 9 5 36 36 .50 .50 . 0 0 55 35 37 .49 .51 0.23 1 0 16 39 33 .54 .46 0.71 6 6 9 63 .13 .87 9.62 1 1 1 1 37 35 .51 .49 0.23 61 5 67 .07 .93 14.35 1 2 8 43 2 0 .60 .40 1 . 6 8 58 5 67 .07 .93 14.35 T otals M eans 477 39.67 388 32.33 .55 .45 0 . 8 6 288 19 636 53 .26 .74 4.54 A PPENDIX E FIRST ANALYSIS SHEET APPENDIX E FIRST ANALYSIS SHEET (Body) (Voice) POSTURE (Stance & flexibility) FORCE GROSS MOVEMENT QUALITY FACIAL EXPRESSION (P le a sa n tn e ss) FLUENCY REFLEC TIO N OF MOOD ARTICULATION EYE CONTACT (C am era- A u d ien ce-o th er) VARIETY (F o rc e -p itc h -ra te - intensity) HAND-ARM GESTURES (sp ee d -fo rc e -en th u siasm ) WARMTH AND DIRECTNESS OTHER COMMENT ENTHUSIASM CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS 180 A PPEN D IX F SECOND CHECK LIST ANALYSIS SHEET A PPEN D IX F SECOND CHECK LIST ANALYSIS SHEET P h y s ic a l D eliv ery R E E L NO. ORDER NO.__________ EX PERIM EN TA L NO._ PRO PO R TIO N CO RRECT IDENTIFICATION__________ SHORT T IT L E A PPEA RA N C E: D r e s s ------- C onse rv a tiv e M edium ______ Not C onserv._ A g e -----------C le a rly adult M atu re youth V ery youthful P o s t u r e Stiff__________ M edium ______ R elax ed Slouched_____ N otes: BODILY ACTION: Swaying o r shifting not in te g ra te d into sp eech : None Some G re a t D eal E ffectiv e C ro s s m o v e m ent: None Som e G re a t D eal N otes: B a sic Hand P o sitio n s : C lasp ed in back___ B oth on stan d______ One in pocket______ One on stand_______ C lasp ed in fro n t___ A rm s folded_______ A t sid e s___________ On n o tes___________ P o ise d p o sitio n____ A w kw ard P o s itio n _ N ervous m o v em en t N otes: KINDS OF GESTURES: H ead G e stu re s: None Seldom _______ F re q u e n t________ C onventional G e s tu re s : None______ Seldom _____ F re q u e n t Too m any D e sc rip tiv e g e s tu re s : None______ Seldom _____ F re q u e n t Too m any N otes: 182 183 ANALYSIS SHEET P h y sic a l D eliv ery page 2 R E E L NO. ORDER NO. EXPERIM ENTAL NO. USE O F GESTURES: T im ing: Good M ixed P o o r Strength: Good M ixed P o o r A p p ro p ria ten e ss: N atu ral 4 c in te g ra ted _____ A rtific ia l o r su p e rfic ia l__ Not re la te d to voice u se__ N otes: FACIAL EXPRESSIONS: U sed fo r com m unication: None_______ Some______ F re q u en t_______Too m any R eflection of o v e r-a ll m ood: P le a s a n t S erio u s_____ P a in e d Im p assiv e__ V aried________ N otes: DIRECTNESS: (Eye C ontact) P rim a r ily a t notes____________ P rim a r ily a t left______________ P rim a r ily a t C a m e ra _________ At C a m e ra and L eft___________ O ften a t N otes________________ A t notes on end of sen ten ce___ W andered elsew h ere__________ Seem ed to read m o st of s pee ch______________________ Looked into c a m e ra at open_ _ Looked into c a m e ra at end____ R eaction to o th e r stim u li_____ N o tes: GENERAL POISE: P h y sic a l Indication: SPECIA L SIGNIFICANT BEHAV IORS: SUMMARY OF POSSIBLY SIGNIFICANT TRAITS OF PHYSICAL DELIVERY: 184 V o cal D e liv e ry R E E L NO._________ ORDER NO.__________ EX PERIM EN TA L NO. NAME FO RCE It VOLUME: 1. O v e r -a ll voice le v el w eak stro n g ____ 2. V oice often fa lls to inaudible le v e l a t end of se n te n c e s______ 3. C o n tra s ts in le v e l b etw een s e c tio n s of the sp eech : None Som e G re a t d ea l____ 4. F a ils to p ro je c t at tim e s ______ 5. O v e r-a ll v a rie ty in fo rc e : None Som e G re a t d eal___ NOTES: RA TE: 1. O v e r-a ll sp eed of u tte ra n c e : Rapid M edium Slow___ 2. M ade effectiv e u se of d u ra tio n fo r e m p h a sis________ 3. L ittle u se of d u ra tio n 4. U se of pause f o r e m p h a sis o r effect: None Som e______ F re q u e n t 5. P a u se o r b re a k b etw een s e n te n c e s : Seldom u se d ________ G en e ra lly u sed ______ Too often u sed 6 . V a rie ty of ra te : None Som e G re a t d e a l_ 7. C o n tra s t betw een se c tio n s of sp eech : None Som e_____ G re a t d ea l_________ NOTES: QUALITY: 1. O v e r-a ll quality: p leas ant_ u n p leasan t_ 2. M atu re sounding voice_____ 3. T hin youthful voice_________ 4. U se of in ten sity : None Som e O ften___ 5. A m ount of ev id en t te n sio n : R elaxed Some te n sio n T en se_______ 6 . V oice show ed w arm th to audie nc e NOTES: PIT C H : 1. V a rie ty of P itc h : A lm o st none Som e____ G re a t d ea l Too M uch 2. P itc h p a tte rn : None Som e G re a t d ea l 3. P itc h at end of se n te n c e s: Down a g re a t d eal____ U su ally down som e____ N ot m uch change____ V ery often up____ 4. A v erag e p itch lev el: Low M edium High___ NOTES: FLU EN CY It RHYTHM: 1. V ery flu en t___________ 2. F lu e n t, but had one o r two o c c a sio n s of s e a rc h in g fo r w o rd s o r thoughts_________ REEL NO. 189 ORDER NO. EXPERIMENTAL NO.______ 3. Fluency poor, searching and ■tumbling______ 4. Vocalised pauses: None Few Many 5. General rhythm: Jerky Smooth_______ 8. Serious break or stall in speaking: None_____ Some Great deal NOTES: ARTICULATION AND CLARITY OF PROJECTION: 1. Good projection_____ 2. Muffled projection______ 3. Articulation: Poor Average______ Good______ 4. Articulation characteristics: Some lisp Omissions___ Lacks openness_______ Distortions______ 5. Mechanics of articulation: Noticeable______ NOTES: RECURRING BEHAVIOR PATTERNS: 1. Pattern developed in: Pitch Rate Force___ 2. Voice fe ll in definite tone at end of sentences_____ 3. Voice did not fall with a definite tone at end of sentences: Often_____ Sometime s_______ NOTES: USE OF VOICE AT OPENING AND AT THE CONCLUSION: 1. Definite and forceful opening statement______ 2. No force or enthusiasm in opening statement______ 3. Forced enthusiasm in final statement: None_______ Some Great deal______ 4. H u rtle d conclusion^______ 5. Built to climax at end______ 6. Sustained mood at conclusion and moment after______ NOTES: WARMTH, DIRECTNESS, ENTHUSIASM IN VOICE: 1. G e n e ra l sty le : E x tre m e ly conve rs a tlo n a l G en e ra lly co n v e ra atlo n al O bviously public sp eak in g O ra to ric a l o r pom pous_____ 2. E n th u sia sm : None___ Som e__G re a t d ea l_ _ 3. R eflectio n of em o tio n al feelin g : None___ Som e__G re a t d eal_ _ 4. D ogm atic o r d id actic tone: None Som e__G re a t d eal_ _ 5. Sounded like acad em ic re p o rt_ 6 . H ad p e rsu a siv e q uality________ 7. S u p e rfic ial o r s u p e rio r______ 8 . P le a s a n t to au d ien ce^____ 9. V oice had e n e rg y and a n im a tion: None Som e______ G re a t d e a l_______ NOTES: SPEC IA L SIGNIFICANT BEHAVIORS: SUMMARY: A PPEN D IX G COMPARISON SHEET O F SINCERE AND INSINCERE SPEECH ES A PPEN D IX G COMPARISON SHEET O F SINCERE AND INSINCERE SPEECH ES SPEA K ER 'S E X P . NUMBERS___________________ REELS_____________ NAME T IT L E : SINCERE SPEECH NO. INSINCERE SPEEC H NO. A PPEA RA N CE: BODILY ACTION: KINDS & EFFE C T IV E N E SS O F GESTURE: FA C IA L EXPRESSIONS: DIRECTNESS (Eye co n tact, e tc .) 187 188 SPEA K ER 'S E X P . NO. SINCERE SPEEC H INSINCERE SPEEC H GENERAL IM PRESSIONS O F PHYSICAL DELIVERY: FO R C E A VOLUME: RATE (D u ra tio n -P a u s e -O v e ra ll) QUALITY: PITC H : FLUENCY A RHYTHM: 189 SPEA K ER'S E X P . NO. SINCERE SPEECH INSINCERE SPEECH ARTICULATION fc CLARITY: A VOCAL fc PHYSICAL DELIVERY AT OPENING AND AT CONCLUSION: WARMTH -DIREC TNESS - ENTHUSIASM IN VOICE: CORRELATION O F VOICE- ACTION-LANGUAGE SPECIA L SIGNIFICANT BEHAVIORS: POISE & GENERAL IMPRESSIONS: A PPEN D IX H SPEECH CONTENT ANALYSIS SH EET A PPENDIX H SPEECH CONTENT ANALYSIS SHEET R eel No. O rd e r No. E x p erim e n tal No. N am e T itle ORGANIZATION: O th er Introduction: M a te ria ls p rio r to body: (O ther than opening sentence) Body: No. of M ain points MATERIALS: Supporting m a te ria ls used: D efinitions C o m p ariso n s Illu stra tio n D idactic approach In stan ces Im p licativ e approach T estim ony S ta tistic s Kind of o rganization: E num e ratio n E xplanation D esc rip tio n T im e o rd e r R h e to rica l Q uestions Space o rd e r R estatem en t C lim atic o rd e r O th er: P ro b lem -S o lu tio n C ause A E ffect F a c to rs of In te re s t: M otivated sequence Significance O th er H um or U niqueness C la rity of o rg an izatio n : P re v iew given P o in ts num bered and labeled F a m ilia rity P ro b le m s C o n c re ten e ss A ntagonism V ariatio n P ro x im ity Suspense O th er: T ra n sitio n s c le a r C onclusion: S um m ary A ppeal None 192 E x p e rim e n ta l No._______ M OTIVE A PPEA LS: T o m ake m oney_______ T o be h ealth y _______ T o avoid d a n g e r________ S exual a ttra c tio n _______ M a rria g e ___________ B eg et and r e a r c h ild re n ___ C a re f o r p a re n ts_________ H ave frie n d s_________ E njoy P h y s ic a l c o m fo rts__ G ain s o c ia l ap p ro v al______ C onform to cu sto m s_______ H ave p e rso n a l fre ed o m ___ M ain tain s e lf- r e s p e c t_____ P e a c e of m ind__________ S rtis fy c u rio s ity __________ H ave a d v e n tu res__________ C om pete su c c e ssfu lly w ith o th e rs _______ H elp o th e r people_______ H ave w orthw hile re lig io n_ A chieve id e a ls_________ Se c u rity __________ E x p lo ratio n _________ C r e ating__________ F e a r ____________ L oyalty_________ P a trio tis m _________ E njoym ent of b eau ty______ P o w e r and au th o rity ______ Re putation__________ H ero w o rsh ip __________ Sym pathy_____________ F a i r play__________ Duty_______________ Self p re s e rv a tio n _________ S u b m issio n _____________ Im p ro v e education________ NOTES: ETHICA L A PPE A L S: P ro b ity of C h a ra c te r : 1. A sso c iatio n w ith v irtu o u s and e le v ated _______ 2. P r a is e on se lf o r ca u se_______ 3. L in k s opp o sitio n w ith u n - v irtu o u s_______ 4. P o in ts to p e rso n a l e x p e rie n c e 5. S eeks to c re a te im p re s s io n of s in c e rity in the co n ten t of sp eech __________ S ag acity : 6 . U ses com m on s e n s e _______ 7. U se s ta c t and m o d e ra tio n____ 8 . D isp lay s good ta s te _______ 9. F a m ilia r w ith in te re s ts of the day 10. In te lle c tu a l in te g rity ________ Good W ill: 11. Id en tifies s e lf w ith h e a r e r s and p ro b le m s___ 12. P ro p e r b alan ce of su ita b le p ra is e fo r the au d ien ce______ 13. C andor and s tra ig h tfo rw a rd n e s s__________ 14. T a c t and c o n sid e ra tio n in reb u k e__________ 15. O ffset p e rso n a l re a s o n s f o r sp eech __________ 16. R e v eals p e rso n a b le q u alities_ 17. O th e r NOTES: A PPEN D IX I LANGUAGE AND SYNTAX ANALYSIS SHEET A PPEN DIX I LANGUAGE AND SYNTAX ANALYSIS SHEET R eel No._________O rd e r No._________ E x p erim e n tal No. N am e T itle STATISTICAL INVENTORY: T o tal n u m b er of w ords N um ber p e rso n a l w ords N um ber f i r s t p e rso n pronouns T o tal n u m b er sen ten ces A verag e w ords p e r sentence W ords in s h o rte s t sentence W ords in lo n g est sentence N um ber com pound se n ten ces N um ber com plex sen ten ces N um ber d e c la ra tiv e sen ten ces N um ber ex c lam ato ry sen ten c es N um ber in te rro g a to ry sen ten ces IMAGERY AND MEANING: 1. A m biguous o r p re c ise : 2. C o n c re te n e ss (callin g up p ast ex p e rien ce s): 3. C la rity (a ro u se s sp ecific m eaning) 4. Loaded o r objective: STYLE: 1. E conom y o r w o rd in ess: 194 195 E x p e rim e n ta l No._________ 2. O rig in a l o r tr ite : 3. S im p licity o r o m a te n e sa : 4. Slang o r fo rm a lity : 5. F ig u re s of sp eech : 6 . A llu sio n s: 7. S entence length: 8 . Sentence type: GENERAL: 1. A p p ro p ria te n e ss: 2. V ariety : 3. R ep etitio n o r re s ta te m e n t A PPEN D IX J SAM PLE SPEA K ER D ESCRIPTION A PPEN D IX J SAM PLE SPEAKER DESCRIPTION S peaker No. 34-84 D esc rip tio n of S in cere Speech No. 34 G e n e ra l D e sc rip tio n : The sp e a k e r w as d re s s e d in a d a rk g ray su it and a d ark tie . A cco rd in g to the c r ite r ia fo r th is study he w as c la ssifie d a s having c o n serv ativ e d r e s s . He w as c le a rly adult in a p p e a ra n c e . H is h a ir w as blond, and he w as p a rtia lly b ald . He w as of m edium build and of av e rag e h eig h t (im age height 26 in ch es). H is p o stu re ap p e ared to have m edium ten sio n , being n e ith e r stiff n o r obviously re la x e d . P h y s ic a l D e liv e ry : The sp e a k e r had one o ccasio n of shifting of p o sitio n o r w eight which w as not used fo r e m p h a sis. He did not use any g ro s s m ovem ent of the body in the d e liv e ry of the sp eech . H is han d s w ere fo r the m o st of the speech clasp ed in fro n t of him on the stand. A lthough h is hands w ere hidden by the stand, they seem ed to be re s tin g on h is n o te s. The sp e a k e r used a few head g e s tu re s w hich w ere s a tis fa c to r ily tim ed , but w ere of no g re a t fo rc e . The g e s tu re s w ere of the type in which the sp e a k e r nods slig h tly fo r e m p h a sis. T h e re w ere no conven tio n a l hand o r a rm g e s tu re s and no d e sc rip tiv e g e s tu re s . The sp e a k e r u sed no change of fa c ia l e x p re s sio n to a s s is t in co m m u n icatio n . A t tim e s th e re w as som e su g g estio n of a frow n. T h e re w as n e v e r a suggestion of a sm ile . T hroughout h is sp eech the sp e a k e r looked m o re pained than s e rio u s . T h is fa c ia l c h a ra c te ris tic w as m ade m o re obvious by h is action of p ee rin g at h is audience w ithout 197 198 fully lifting h is face to confront them . The sp e a k e r re a d h is opening statem en t, and throughout the speech re fe rre d co n stan tly to h is n o te s. When he did look up he looked both a t the audience to the left and to the c a m e ra a t the rig h t. M cEvoy’s re c o rd of eye contact fo r the sp e ak er w as: of the to ta l of 1 1 0 seconds In the sp eech , the sp e a k e r looked at the c a m e ra fo r 36 seco n d s, a t the audience fo r 40 seconds, and a t h is n o tes fo r 34 seconds. H is r e f e r ence to n o tes, while co n stan t at the beginning of the speech, becam e le s s ap p aren t in the la tte r p a rt. A t h is conclusion he looked into the c a m e ra and began to pick up h is n o tes a s if in re lie f. V ocal D e liv e ry . The sp e a k e r’s voice w as m a tu re , but with a slig h tly flat unpleasant quality a s if it w ere not rece iv in g fu ll reso n an ce. T h ere w as som e ten sio n p re se n t in the voice. At no tim e did the sp e ak er use in ten sity a s a m ean s of e m p h asis. The o v e r-a ll fo rce lev el of the sp e a k e r’s voice w as w eak. T h ere w as no v a rie ty in fo rce o r volum e, and no c o n tra st in fo rc e le v e l betw een sectio n s of the speech. The speed of u tte ra n c e of the sp e ak e r w as 125 w ords p e r m in u te. T h ere w as little o r no use m ade of d u ratio n a s a m ean s of e m p h a sis. T h ere w as no use of pause a s a m ean s of e m p h a sis. A slight stop w as g en e ra lly used to se p a ra te se n ten c es. T h ere w as som e little v a rie ty of ra te in the s p e a k e r’s o v e r-a ll d eliv ery , but no n o tic e able c o n tra st in ra te betw een se ctio n s of the speech. The sp e ak er had som e v a rie ty of pitch in h is v o ice, but also tended to have som e pitch p a tte rn s in h is sen ten c es. A t the end of h is sen ten ces th e re w as a v e ry little change in pitch, and so m e tim es the pitch seem ed to go up ra th e r than down. The av erag e pitch lev el of the voice w as m edium . The sp e a k e r exhibited poor fluency. T h ere w ere se v e ra l o ccasio n s in which he obviously search ed fo r w ords o r thoughts. The 199 g e n e ra l rh y th m of Bpeech w as je rk y . T h ere w ere a few v o calized p a u se s. A t tim e s the voice slow ed down a s if the sp e a k e r w as u n su re of w hat w as to com e next. The s p e a k e r's a rtic u la tio n w as a v e ra g e . While th e re w ere no diagnosed d e fe c ts, the en u n ciatio n w as not sh a rp o r p o lish ed . The m outh needed m o re o p en n ess. The sp e a k e r exhibited no fo rc e o r en th u sia sm in h is opening sta tem en t. T h e re w as no fo rc e o r en th u sia sm evident in h is co n clu sion. The sty le of the sp e a k e r w as g en e ra lly c o n v e rsa tio n a l. He d e m o n stra te d no en th u siasm fo r the su b ject o r f o r the o cc asio n , and th e re w as no re fle c tio n of feelin g in voice o r m a n n e r. T h ere w as a g re a t d eal of dogm atic o r d id actic tone in the p a tte rn of sp eech , but no en e rg y o r en th u sia sm in voice o r body. Speech C o n ten t: The speech contained one m ain point w hich w as sta ted in the opening se n ten c e, n am ely , th at stu d e n ts (attending sm a ll co lleg es) a re * 'g iv en m o re opportunity fo r c u ltu ra l and so c ia l d e v e lo p m e n t." T h ere follow ed som e ex p an sio n of th is p o sitio n in the fo rm of re fe re n c e to an adage and h u m o r in re fe re n c e to P re u d . No ad d itio n al in tro d u c to ry m a te r ia l w as included. Two p rin c ip a l su b -p o in ts w ere m entioned in the sp eech , f i r s t the stu d e n ts' lo s s of id en tity in a la rg e student body, and second, the g r e a te r opportunity fo r le a d e rsh ip in e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s found a t a sm a ll co lleg e. The o rg an iz atio n of the speech w as d id actic in fo rm . A rra n g e m e n ts of the points in the speech w as th at of sim p le e n u m e ra tio n , and the sp e a k e r num b ered th em . No p rev iew of the o rg an iz atio n w as given, and no su m m ary of points w as given in the co n clu sio n . The s p e a k e r's co nclusion r e f e r re d to h is two su b -p o in ts, but did not nam e th em , and re p e a te d h is p ro p o sitio n . The s p e a k e r's m a te r ia ls included c o m p a riso n s, h y p o th etical 200 in sta n c e s, ex p lan atio n s, som e re s ta te m e n t, and a quoted p ro v e rb . F a c to r s of in te re s t u sed w ere h u m o r and som e c o n c re te n e s s . T he s p e a k e r's a rg u m e n ts w ere p rim a rily loose g e n e ra liz a tio n s. No sp e cific evidence w as o ffered . M otive ap p e a ls u se d by the sp e a k e r w ere a s follow s: (1) to gain so c ia l ap p ro v al, a s shown by sta te m en t th a t sm a ll c o lle g e s give a “ feelin g of b e lo n g in g n e ss"; (2 ) d e s ire to co m p ete, a s shown by the e m p h asis on “ c u ltu ra l and so c ia l d ev elo p m en t" and the o p p o rtu n itie s fo r p o sitio n s of le a d e rsh ip in o rg a n iz a tio n s. The sp e a k e r used one exam ple of e th ic a l ap p eal when he a s s o ciate d h im se lf with the v irtu o u s and elev ated a s ex em p lified by the adage “ I t 's b e tte r to be a big fro g in a little pond, than a little fro g in a big p o n d ." The sp e a k e r did not r e f e r to h im self often throughout the sp eech , u sin g only five f i r s t p e rso n a l pronouns. L anguage and Syntax. Of the to ta l of 229 w ords in the speech, the sp e a k e r u sed only 20 p e rso n a l w o rd s a s defined by F le s c h . O nly five f ir s t p e rso n a l p ronouns w ere u sed . T h e re w ere elev en se n ten c es with an av e ra g e of 20.8 w ords p e r sen ten ce. Sentence length ran g ed fro m five w o rd s to fo rty -fo u r w o rd s. The s p e a k e r's language w as alw ays p re c is e and contained no am biguity. The speech so m e tim es included c o n c re te co n cep ts, such a s re fe re n c e s to “ d ra m a tic c lu b s " and to “ 20,000 s tu d e n ts ." The la n guage w as g e n e ra lly c le a r, containing som e w o rd s u n d ersto o d only through sp e cia lize d tra in in g , such a s the re fe re n c e to “ M r. F re u d " and sp e c ia liz e d acad em ic te rm s such a s “ e x t r a c u r r ic u la r ." No loaded o r n o n -o b jectiv e language w as u sed . The s p e a k e r's sty le w as v e ry eco n o m ical. It w as g e n e ra lly o rig in a l, although the adage quoted m ig h t be c o n sid e re d t r ite . The language w as sim p le , not o rn a te . The language w as g e n e ra lly fo rm a l, containing no slang, but containing som e use of f i r s t p e rso n pronouns. 201 No fig u re s of sp eech w ere u se d . A llu sio n s w ere m ade to the old adage and to the p e rso n of F re u d . The s p e a k e r u sed a v a rie ty of sen ten ce s tru c tu re , including five sim p le se n te n c e s, th re e com pound se n te n c e s and th re e com plex se n te n c e s. A ll 11 se n te n c es w ere d e c la ra tiv e . The language u sed w as alw ay s a p p ro p ria te to the su b je ct and the o cc asio n . The ire w as a f a ir v a rie ty of w ord ch o ice, w ith the sp e a k e r o v erw o rk in g the w ord “ in stitu tio n ” and p e rh a p s “ stu d e n ts.” A PPEN D IX K TRANSCRIPTIONS O F SPEECH ES A PPEN D IX K TRANSCRIPTIONS O F SPEECH ES EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 34 R E E L I ORDER NO. 1 _______ I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t s m a ll co lleg e s a re s u p e rio r to la rg e co lleg es b ec au se stu d e n ts a re given m o re opportunity fo r c u ltu r a l and s o c ia l dev elo p m en t. I b eliev e in th a t old adage w hich sa y s, “ I t ’s b e tte r to be a big fro g in a little pond than a little fro g in a big pond.” No doubt M r. F re u d would d is a g re e w ith m e on th is point, but M r. F re u d and I have d isa g re e d b e fo re . A stu d en t g ra d u a te s fro m high sch o o l and goes to a la rg e in stitu tio n , sa y an in stitu tio n of tw enty thousand stu d e n ts, he b eco m es a lm o s t a n u m b er; w h e re a s, if he had gone to a s m a ll co lleg e, of sa y eig h t hundred stu d e n ts, im m e d — im m ed ia tely a feelin g of b elo n g in g n ess d ev elo p s. T h is is an im p o rta n t fa c to r. I t 's quite obviously, th a t a stu d en t in a c la s s of th irty stu d e n ts w ill get m o re in d iv id u al atten tio n than if he w ere a stu d en t in a c la s s of one hundred and th irty stu d e n ts. Secondly, e v e ry college m u st have — u h — its e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s ; d ra m a tic club, m u sic o rg a n iz atio n , fo o tb all te a m . T h ese o rg a n iz a tio n s m u st have o ffic e rs . If a stu d en t is in a s m a ll co lleg e, he w ill have m o re o p p o rtu n ity to p a rtic ip a te in th e se v a rio u s o rg a n iz a tio n s than if he w ere in a la rg e in stitu tio n . T ru e , the la rg e in stitu tio n s have th e se o rg a n iz a tio n s , but th e re a re m any m o re stu d e n ts to fill th e m . F o r th e se two re a s o n s I fe e l th a t the s m a ll in s ti tu tio n is b e tte r fo r the stu d en t than the la rg e in stitu tio n . EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 81 R E E L I ORDER NO. 2______ I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at som e type of re lig io u s tra in in g 203 should be included in the public school c u rric u lu m , b ecau se ed u catio n m u st m e e t the e n tire need s of m o d ern so c iety . Society re q u ire s th at each individual have a to ta l philosophy f o r d aily liv in g . S ociety today is c a rry in g a g re a t b u rd en of in stitu tio n a liz a tio n . M en today a r e being in c a rc e ra te d in p e n ite n tia rie s , a re being put aw ay into h o m es f o r the m ild ly in sa n e . M en a r e being put out of so c ie ty b ecau se th ey a r e not adequate to m e e t the n eed s of so c ie ty . A so c iety w hich continues in su ch a fash io n w ill be w eak, w ill be an em ic , and w ill soon fa ll. A to ta l ed u catio n is needed fo r the to ta l m an . T h is philosophy fo r the individual m u st re la te him to the w orld around h im . It m u st m ake him at hom e in h is own neighborhood. It m u st m ake him at hom e w ith the ch u rch and give h im th a t w ith w hich he can build a C h ris tia n hom e. The public sch o o l, th en , m u st in tro d u ce re lig io u s tra in in g . It m u st be c a rrie d th ro u g h on a ll le v e ls, to re a c h the child a s he f ir s t c o m es, and to show him th a t w hich h is p a re n ts have not b een able to b rin g to h im . To help him to re a liz e th at he can p a rtic ip a te in the ch u rch as the s o c ia l o rg a n iz a tio n — as a re lig io u s com m unity. T h is so c ie ty m u st have individuals equipped to live c o -o p e ra tiv e ly w ith th e ir fe llo w s— re sp e c tin g them and living by a m o ra l la w — th u s no lo n g e r n e c e s s a ry to m a in ta in the in stitu tio n a liz a tio n of so m any. T h is philosophy m u st re la te the in d i vidual to h is individual n ee d s. We m u st end the day of h alf-w ay c itiz e n sh ip . E X PER IM EN TA L NO. 67 R E E L I ORDER NO. 3 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t the college ed u catio n should im p a rt v o catio n al tra in in g r a th e r than g e n e ra l c u ltu re fo r m any re a s o n s . I'd like to lis t s e v e ra l of them fo r you. F i r s t , it s e e m s to m e th a t we have no g u aran tee th a t the college can im p a rt g e n e ra l c u ltu ra l Influence anyw ay. The g re a t c u ltu ra l ach iev em en ts of the p a s t, a s I lis t th em , in lite r a tu r e and in the a r ts have com e fro m the g a r r e t and the studio and 203 not fro m the c la s s ro o m . I b eliev e th a t— u h — the college should im p a rt v o catio n al tra in in g , fu rth e rm o re , b ec au se new conditions have given the college new fu n ctio n s. We need, above a ll o th e r th in g s, rig h t now, m a te r ia l p ro s p e rity . We need m a te ria l p ro s p e rity m o re than d u sty c u ltu re , and the college m u st s e rv e o u r new need. 1 b eliev e th is b ec au se o u r new le a d e rs in m o d e rn c iv iliz a tio n a r e the s c ie n tis t and te c h n ic ian , not the p h ilo so p h ers and the lite r a r y m en . The m o d ern w orld w as given to us by the w orking s c ie n tis t. And we need to tra in h im . A lso we should ex p ect the college to give u s th is kind of tra in in g b ecau se m an m u st be p ro sp e ro u s to be happy. T hose who b eliev e th at we can be happy w hile hungry a re m e re ly ratio n a liz in g . F u rth e rm o re , A m e ric a m u st produce in o rd e r to su rv iv e ag a in st h e r e n e m ie s. We do not need volum es of books a s m uch a s we need to n s of s te e l and fle e ts of a irp la n e s , au to m o b iles and o th e r p ro d u cts of v o catio n al tra in in g . A m e ric a n s, m ay 1 su g g e st, w ill be f a r b e tte r off if they can count the ato m s in a th im b le fu ll of heavy hydrogen, than if they can count the an g els on the head of a p h ilo so p h ical pin. EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 69 R E E L I ORDER N O ._ 4 _______ I m o st s in c e re ly b eliev e th a t the U nited S tate s should not adopt a u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g sy ste m , b ecau se it is ag a in st the p rin c i p les of d e m o cracy , and b ecau se th e re is no need. P le a s e , if you w ill, look at the h is to ry of the U nited S ta te s. Look at the w ars we have e n gaged in. We have had no u n iv e rsa l m ilita ry tra in in g , and y e t in e v e ry m a jo r engagem ent ag a in st o u r e n e m ie s, we have com e out v ic to rio u s . Now take fo r exam ple the p rin c ip le s of d e m o c ra c y . O u r young people a re allow ed the freed o m of o p p o rtu n ity . T hey a re taught th is . The fre ed o m to do as they w ill w ithout h u rtin g anyone e ls e . And now u n d e r th is u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g they a r e plunged headlong into a r e g i m e n tatio n , a m ilita ry life . T aught how to h a te , how to k ill, how to 206 o p e ra te a gun. And th en , a fte r th is tra in in g , they a re to ld to go out and becom e good c itiz e n s and to love th e ir n eig h b o r. F rie n d s , u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g is not the a n sw e r. We have d ra ft law s. And next of c o u rs e , uh — reg im e n tatio n would not extend ju s t to m en, but to in d u s tr y . W here would it stop? We have d ra ft law s th a t allow su fficien t tra in in g fo r o u r m en, as h is to ry w ill re p e a t its e lf. No, le t’s le t o u r young m en go out into the w orld and get an education; do as they w ill, follow the b u sin e ss c a r e e r they w ant, and then when an e m e rg e n c y does com e up, as they have show n in the p a st, they w ill fig h t, not with ju st guns, not w ith ju s t am m unition, not w ith ju st ta n k s, but they w ill fight w ith th e ir h e a rts to p ro te c t the fre ed o m of d em o crac y , sp e ech , and living, and of God. EXPERIM ENTAL, NO. 29 R EEL I ORDER NO. 5 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at the fe d e ra l g o v ern m en t should su b sid ize college ed u catio n , b ecau se th is is the only m ethod th at w ill in s u re such an ed u catio n fo r th o se who w ill b en efit m o st fro m it, and who w ill in tu rn provide the g re a te s t b en efit fo r so c ie ty . I sa y th is b ecau se I think a b rie f rev iew of the p re s e n t type of ed u catio n we have in the co lleg es w ill show th a t th o se who could b en efit the m o st fro m the education a re not being provided it today. You have today e s s e n tia lly th re e c a te g o rie s of people attending c o lle g e s. You have th o se who can afford it o r w hose p a re n ts can afford it. And w hile th e se people m ay be ric h ly endow ed fin an c ially , they a re not n e c e s s a rily w ell endowed with in te lle c tu a l c a p ac ity . Then you have th o se who a re attending c o l lege on s c h o la rs h ip s , w hich is fin e, but you w ill find th a t a good n u m b er of th e se sc h o la rsh ip — uh — people c a r r y — a re c a rr ie d w ith the p ro v isio n th a t they put in a c e rta in n u m b er o f— u h — h o u rs of w ork e v e ry s e m e s te r , w hich d e tra c ts fro m th e ir tim e of study and p re v e n ts them fro m taking fu lle s t advantage of th e ir o p p o rtu n ity . And th is sam e 207 ap p lies to the th ird c a te g o ry , th o se who w ork th e ir way through co lleg e. T h e re fo re , the n ation is not taking advantage of the fu lle s t in te lle c tu a l p o te n tia l of its youth, it is not ex p lo itin g it to its fu lle s t. 1 sa y th at only fe d e ra l s u b sid isa tio n — su b sid iza tio n can do th is . The fe d e ra l g o v ern m en t could provide sc h o la rs h ip s fo r th o se who have show n both a p ro m ise of ab ility and a t the sam e tim e a w illin g n ess to w ork. The re a s o n I sa y th at only the fe d e ra l go v ern m en t can do it is b ecau se we have found th at th e re a r e too m any s ta te s th a t lack the funds, the n e c e s s a ry rev en u e to provide adequate sc h o la rsh ip s fo r h ig h e r le a r n ing. And a lso p riv a te e n te r p ris e , w hile it does provide m any s c h o la r sh ip s , tends to provide th e se sc h o la rs h ip s only in the sp e c ia liz e d fie ld s of p h y sic al s c ie n c e s , w hich a re p robably not the g re a te s t dem ands fo r ed u catio n in the w orld today. T h a t’s why I c a ll upon the fe d e ra l g o v ern m en t to su b sid ize college education. EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 30 R E E L I ORDER NO. 6 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t la rg e co lleg es a re in fe rio r to s m a ll c o lle g e s, b ecau se of five re a s o n s . F ir s t, le t m e explain th a t 1 am speaking m e re ly on an u n d erg rad u ate lev el. 1 — I don’t include the g rad u ate le v el w ith th is . F i r s t , in y o u r s m a ll college th e re is an in d i v id u ality w hich is not found in the la rg e co lleg e. T h e re i s — uh — an a tm o sp h e re and su rro u n d in g of frie n d lin e ss w hich is n e c e s s a ry in any field of life to ach iev e y o u r h ig h est ab ility , to m ake it com e to u se . Y our individual atten tio n is — is an in tric a te p a rt of college life . A s an u n d erg rad u ate I — u h — attended a college of 350 stu d e n ts. My p ro fe s s o r s had as m any h o u rs in th e ir office fo r in d iv id u al co n su ltatio n w ith the stu d en ts as he had c la s s h o u rs. T h is w as v e ry h elpful. We had sm o k e rs w ith o u r p ro fe s s o rs . T h at is n ’t found on the la rg e college ca m p u s. T h e re is a ten d en cy — uh — in the la rg e co lleg e fo r g ro u p s to m a te ria liz e . T h at is n ’t found in the s m a ll co lleg e. Y our group is the 200 co lleg e body in g e n e ra l. You a re frie n d s w ith ev e ry o n e. You know ev e ry o n e . A ll th is ten d s to give the stu d e n t a feelin g of s a tis fa c tio n . I re a liz e th a t today th e re is a tre n d f o r stu d e n ts to go to the la rg e c o l le g e s . T h is , in m y feelin g , i s — is lo sin g a p a rt of A m e ric a . A m e ric a is b ased on in d iv id u ality — in d iv id u alism a s a w hole, in d iv id u als w o rk ing to g e th e r to achieve one p u rp o se . If we lo se o u r s m a ll co lleg e s we — u h — lo se a g re a t d e a l and a g re a t way of A m e ric a n life . T hank you. EX PER IM EN TA L NO.__________ R E E L ___________ ORDER NO.___________ I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t re lig io u s tra in in g should not be in cluded in the public sch o o l c u rric u lu m , b e c au se o u r h is to ric a l d ev elo p m e n t h as d e m o n stra te d th a t it cannot be done w ithout v io latio n of the b a s ic A m e ric a n p rin c ip le of the s e p a ra tio n of ch u rch and s ta te — a p rin c ip le w hich h as been p u rch a sed at a high c o s t in te rm s of hum an life and hum an su ffe rin g . A m e ric a n d em o cracy is com posed of a ll n atio n ality and c re e d s , and we m u st keep it so . The A m e ric a n sy s te m of fre e public ed u catio n , it is tru e , re c e iv e d its in itia l im p etu s fro m re lig io u sly m o tiv ated — [g arb le]. It cam e fro m the ty ran n y and p r e s s u re of E u ro p e . A fte r the tu rn of the n in eteen th ce n tu ry , h o w ev er, im m ig ra tio n b ro u g h t h o rd e s of people of m any fa ith s and of none. If the genius of A m e ric a n d e m o c ra c y is to be im p lem e n ted , then it is im p e ra tiv e th a t re lig io u s view s be not im posed upon o u r c h ild re n in the public sc h o o ls. A ll should be le a rn e d [g arb le], but a ll should be fre e , and none should be c o e rc e d in te rm s of id e a s o r id e a ls o r re lig io u s fie ld s . T o in tro d u ce any type of re lig io u s tra in in g would tu rn the clock of e d u ca tio n al p ro g re s s b ack w ard . It would be the in tro d u ctio n of the b itte r e s t of a ll hum an d e b a te s . B ecau se m en hold the v alu es th a t a re u n d e r the c a te g o ry of re lig io n to be the h ig h e st, they a re th e re fo re the m o re em o tio n a l about th e s e . And the d eb a tes and the c o n tro v e rs ie s h is to ric a lly have b een proved to be b itte r . We do not w ant th e se 200 In tro d u ced into the public sch o o ls. P e rh a p s the m o st s e rio u s o b jectio n to the in tro d u ctio n of public sch o o l r e lio u — o r — u h — of tra in in g of re lig io n in th e public s c h o o ls — u h — is th a t we have n o t y et d ev ised a m e a n s. T h e re is the p ro b lem of p erso n n e l. T h ere is the p ro b lem of c u rric u lu m . If we le t the m an who is not a proponent sp eak , he sp e ak s w ithout e x p e rie n c e . EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 32 R E E L I ORDER NO . _ 8 _______ 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at the U nited S tate s should not have a sy ste m of co m p u lso ry h ealth in su ra n c e , b ecau se fre e e n te rp ris e can fu lfill the need w ithout the in h e re n t e v ils of co m p u lso ry h ealth in s u r an ce. F i r s t of a ll, we m u st take into co n sid e ra tio n th a t the U nited S tates at the p re se n t tim e does not need a new m e d ic a l p ro g ra m . The m ain group we a re co n sid e rin g today is the low incom e group whom we fe e l in the U nited S tates a re not being tak en c a re of when it co m es to h ealth and m e d ic a l s e rv ic e . Y et looking a t th o se low incom e g ro u p s we find th a t th ey can get the am ount of m e d ic a l c a re they need by the plan th a t m any d o c to rs u se , the p a y -a c c o rd in g -to -in c o m e plan. The people not being m e t by th a t plan a re co v ered m ain ly by p riv ate h ealth in s u r ance p ro g ra m s th a t now e x ist at the p re s e n t tim e throughout the e n tire co u n try . And th ird , th at if we actu ally exam ine the fa c ts and go into the background of the low incom e groups we find one thing th a t is tru e , and th at is th at they a r e spending m o re m oney on je w e lry and c o s m e t ic s and su ch things as — such things as th at, th a t th ey could be spending on a sound p ro g ra m of h ealth in su ra n c e . But even if the low Incom e groups w ere su ffe rin g , I b eliev e th at the co m p u lso ry h ealth in su ra n c e p ro g ra m would not m e et the need of the U nited S ta te s. In the f i r s t p lace, it b rin g s about m o re e v ils than ad v an tag es. We find th at d o c to rs in the U nited S tate s a r e v e ry d efin itely a g a in st. T he A m e ric a n M ed ical A sso c iatio n h as sta te d tim e and tim e again th at the d o c to rs w ill not 210 c o -o p e ra te with a plan of co m p u lso ry h ealth in su ran c e, and a fte r all, th is is w hat m ak es the plan w o rk — the d o c to r’s co -o p eratio n . M aybe th e re is a re a s o n behind the d o cto rs not w anting to c o -o p e ra te , and th at re a s o n com ing fro m ex p e rien ce in o th e r c o u n trie s. T hat of being o v e r crow ded in h o sp ita ls, overcrow ded in tim e , and in actu ality , the good m e d ic a l c a re co sts m o re u n d er a co m p u lso ry h ealth in su ran c e b ecau se they have to go outside the plan. So all in a ll, com pulsory h ealth in s u r ance is not needed. Thank you. EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 73 R EEL I ORDER NO. 9 I believe m o st sin c e re ly th at the U nited S tates should not have a sy stem of u n iv e rsa l m ilita ry tra in in g , b ecau se the p re se n t sy ste m can not be im p ro v ed upon. B a sic m ilita ry train in g is an im p o rta n t p a rt of m ilita ry life . B ecom ing accu sto m ed to the b asic m ilita ry tra in in g routine is to becom e accu sto m ed to a m ilita ry life. It is im p o rta n t to a m ilita ry m a n — a m an w hose whole ex isten ce is fo r th at of fighting, of com bat. If we teach b a sic m ilita ry tra in in g to our young boys of high school age o r even a little o ld e r, it is with — it w ill be an absolute w aste of tim e fo r them — som ething which they w ill not be able to use u n til th at day we hope n ev e r a rriv e s when they w ill have to becom e m ilita ry m en. I ’m su re th at a ll of you w ill ag ree w ith me th at m ilita ry tra in in g is fo r m ilita ry u se . We c iv ilia n s have no need fo r it. So why should we tra in o u r boys in th is way? Of c o u rse , som e people would say th at m ilita ry tra in in g given e a rly w ill be th e re when a p erso n is read y to use it, and th e re fo re he won’t have to spend th at tim e learn in g som ething th at he should have a lre a d y . T h is is not alw ays tru e . We know th at anything le arn ed should be u sed im m ed iately in o rd e r to m ake it stic k . If th is country is to adopt a sy ste m of u n iv e rsa l m ilita ry train in g , th is country is on its way to to ta lita ria n is m . 211' EXPERIM EN TAL NO. 22 R E E L I ORDER NO. 10 I believe m o st s in c e re ly th at the U nited S tates should have a new m a jo r p o litical p a rty . Some have re fe rre d to o u r p o litica l p a rtie s as two b o ttles sittin g on a sh elf w ith d ifferen t lab els and both of them em pty. T h e re is too little — too m uch tru th in th is. We have a p ic tu re in a lib e ra l p arty , like the D em o cratic p arty , of lib e ra ls like B yrd, M cC arran , C havez, and K e rr, and on the o th e r hand lib e ra ls in the con se rv a tiv e R epublican p a rty like M o rris , W arren , A ken, and M a rg a re t C hase Sm ith. T h is m ean s th at the v o te r who is voting fo r one o r the o th e r p a rtie s does not re a lly know how m uch of a p ro g ra m he is voting fo r can be put into effect, even if the p a rty does com e into pow er. And p re se n t a lte rn a tiv e s to th is a re re a lly not a lte rn a tiv e s at a ll. T h ird p a rtie s have n ev e r been stro n g in A m erican p o litics. We have seen ex am p les of the IP P and the S tates R ig h ters, who, although polling a g re a t n u m b er of v o tes, u n d er o u r e le c to ra l sy stem cannot hope to e le c t a p re sid e n t o r even a su b stan tia l m a jo rity in c o n g re s s. And individual m ov em en ts, like the M o rris m ovem ent in th is electio n and the L aF o lle tte m ovem ent, have proven equally ineffective in try in g to get a su b sta n tia l portion of su p p o rt fro m the A m erican v o te r. We have had m any new so c ia l fo rc e s grow up since the p a rtie s w ere fo rm ed , and the p a rtie s have in v ariab ly been behind the developm ent of th ese so c ia l fo rc e s . I think it tim e they caught up. I think the advent of in d u stria l so ciety and of in te rn a tio n a l p re s s u re s m eans that we should have a new m a jo r p o litical p a rty fo rm ed to re p re s e n t the new so c ia l v alu es of la b o r and the lib e ra ls , m in o rity groups and the sm a ll f a r m e r on one hand, and which would in tu rn fo rce an o th er p arty , th at is the co n serv ativ e p a rty of b u sin e ss and of the m iddle c la s s in te re s ts , to be fo rm ed on the o th e r, so th at the v o te r h as a r e a l chance to choose w hich way h is co u n try should go. I believe fo r th ese re a s o n s, b ecau se of th e se new so c ial fo rc e s , th at we should have a new m a jo r p o litic a l p a rty in the 212 U nited S tate s. EXPERIM ENTAL, NO. 77 REEL, I ORDER NO. 11 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at sex education should be taught in high sch o o ls b ec a u se p a re n ts , g e n e ra lly speaking, have fa ile d in th e ir re sp o n sib ility . Now fo rtu n a te ly today I can sa y th at fo r the m o st p a rt p ra c tic a lly a ll of u s have had the opportunity of attending high sch o o l. I ’m told in som e s ta te s it is m a n d ato ry th at a stu d en t com plete h is s e n io r y e a r. And p robably the s ta tis tic s in the fu tu re w ill be indeed co m p lim e n tary to the ed u catio n al s y s te m . So w hat we a re say in g in e s se n c e is th a t p ra c tic a lly everybody goes through th is sch o o l o r m ill o r w h atev er you w ish to c a ll it. And h e re in th ese high sch o o ls throughout the fo rty -eig h t s ta te s we have e x p e rts — people w ithin a com m unity th a t a re capable of se p a ra tin g the fa c tu a l d ata about sex ed u catio n fro m the im m o ra l connotations th at so fre q u e n tly th e se w ords have in o u r so c iety . And w hat is m o st im p o rta n t, thousands upon th o u san d s of p a re n ts throughout o u r land flo u t— u tte rly flo u t— the re sp o n sib ility of te llin g th e ir c h ild re n the fa c ts of life , as we say . P e rs o n a lly speaking, I can re m e m b e r a s a boy when I w as in K ansas C ity, M is so u ri, out of a group of about te n of u s who g rew up to g e th e r, about h alf of us le a rn e d the fa c ts of life on se x education fro m o u r fellow p la y m a te s. Is th is the way we should le a rn of se x education? If p a re n ts flo u t th is re sp o n sib ility , how e ls e can we sy s te m a tic a lly ap p ro ach sex p ro b le m s if it is not done p ro p e rly in o u r high sch o o ls? T h e re fo re in co n sid erin g o u r p ro b lem today, le t it su p p lem en t the teach in g and help th a t p a re n ts give th e ir c h ild re n on the su b je c t of se x ed u catio n . EXPERIM ENTAL, NO. 13 R E E L I ORDER NO. 12 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t som e type of re lig io u s tra in in g should be included in the public sch o o l c u rric u lu m , b ec a u se re lig io u s 213 fa ith g iv es life its g re a te s t p u rp o se. In d efen se of th is I su b m it to you fo u r p ro p o sitio n s th is aftern o o n . P ro p o sitio n n u m b e r one: it s e e m s to m e th a t life m u st have a p u rp o se f o r s e c u re liv in g . I w as re a d in g in T im e M agazine s e v e ra l m onths ago, and I noted th a t in one p a rtic u la r c ity th e re w ere five h u n d red su ic id e s off of one b rid g e . In m y a n a ly sis of life I d isc o v e re d in m y own thinking th a t fo r s e c u rity of living life m u st have a p u rp o se . T he second p ro p o sitio n : th a t m an and h is p u r pose cannot be one and the sa m e th in g . We a ll know the f ra ilty of h u m an ity , and I co n fess fre e ly m y own w eak n esses th is aftern o o n . And psychology points out th a t life m u st have an in te r e s t o u tsid e of its e lf. T h e re fo re m an cannot have as h is so le p u rp o se h im s e lf. The th ird p ro p o sitio n : m an cannot have as h is p u rp o se anything c re a te d by m an. It c e rta in ly would not tak e v e ry m uch logic fo r us to re a liz e th at if m a n — the c r e a to r — c a n ’t depend on h im se lf, how can m an the c r e a to r depend on th in g s c re a te d by h im se lf? The la te s e n a to r V andenburg had on h is d esk the follow ing quotation: “ It m u st be sa id of a ll th in g s, th is too sh a ll p a s s aw ay .” When I look to hum anity, and when I look to th at w hich is c re a te d by hum anity, I m u st face the follow ing d ec isio n : I cannot tr u s t m y se lf, and I cannot tr u s t th a t w hich is c re a te d by m y self. T h e re fo re we a r r iv e a t the fin al p ro p o sitio n : life ’s g re a te s t p u rp o se co m es w ith a re lig io u s fa ith , f i r s t of a ll b ec au se he m oves outside the hum an into th e D ivine, and the s p iritu a l, and secondly b e cau se he b eco m es tru ly a ltru is tic . To g et a re lig io u s faith we m u s t be taught th a t re lig io u s fa ith . 214 EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 80 RE E L H ORDER NO. 1 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t la rg e co lleg es a re s u p e rio r to s m a ll co lleg es b ec a u se of th e o v e r - a ll advantages of th e la r g e r g roups w ith w hich one is a s so c ia te d . The g r e a te r n u m b er of d iffe re n t ty p es of people one co m es in co n tact w ith. T he chance of s h a rin g o n e 's id e a s . So m any o th e rs . L a rg e co lleg es give u s a g r e a te r o p p o rtu n ity to live and w ork w ith people who a re reco g n ized in th e ir p ro fe ssio n . The field of a r t is a good exam ple of th is . Some of the g re a t a r tis ts of o u r tim e a re to be found a s in s tru c to rs on co lleg e c a m p u se s. U su ally y o u r la r g e r college ca m p u se s. The field of d ra m a the sa m e w ay. M u sic, and 1 could go on e n d le ssly . In th is day and age w ith a ll the w orld so c lo se to g e th e r, it is n e c e s s a ry fo r one to know and to a p p re c ia te the fa s t, nonstopping, ev e rw o rk in g attitu d e w hich is to be found in o u r la rg e c o lle g e s. In o r d e r to keep up w ith thiB f a s t pace of tim e , we m u st groom o u rse lv e s with th e m o st m o d ern eq u ip m en t, and th e m o st le a rn e d m en , and the f ra te r n a l s p ir it of a ll people around u s . T h is can only be done in o u r la rg e c o lle g e s. C e rta in ly not in o u r s m a ll, ex c lu siv e , p riv a te sc h o o ls, w here only the in d iv id u al 1 b s tr e s s e d , w h ere group is le ft out, w here “ I " is the a ll-im p o rta n t thing. O u r la rg e college is today the c e n te r of A m e ric a n c u ltu re . It m u st be m ain tain ed ; it m u st be kept aliv e. EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 19 R E E L II ORDER NO. 2 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at the U nited S ta te s should adopt som e sy ste m of u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g , b e c a u se it w ill stre n g th e n o u r U nited S ta te s d efen se and a lso give o u r boys an o p p o rtu n ity f o r s u r v iv al in fu tu re w a rs. Now, tak e fo r ex am p le today. How m uch tim e have we got in c a se of a w ar? T h e re is n 't v e ry m uch tim e . Who w ill be o u r enem y? R u ssia , of c o u rs e . And how do th ey tr a in th e ir boys? F ro m th e ir in cep tio n , a lm o st, to the age of tw en ty -o n e, the m en a r e 216 le a rn in g w a r, and the im p lem e n ts of w a r. So how can we attem p t in th is age of o u rs to p re p a re o u r boys fo r the v e ry s h o rt p erio d of tim e ? T ak e, fo r ex am p le, th e tim e th a t is given o u r m en rig h t now f o r tr a in in g — ap p ro x im a tely six w eeks — and th en th ey a r e throw n into b a ttle . I'v e spoken to m any b a ttle -tra in e d and e x p e rie n ce d m en a t the p re s e n t tim e fro m K o re a, and th e y 'v e to ld m e, and I know it to be tr u e , th a t m any of the d ra fte e s th a t we have today fighting in K o re a have been in ju re d , and of c o u rse a re not com ing b ack , m any of them b e c a u se of d eath , b ecau se th ey have not b een given su ffic ie n t tra in in g . G en tlem en , tr y to re a liz e the im p o rta n c e of th is fa c t. T ry to re a liz e th a t it is n 't m uch to ask of an eig h teen y e a r old to give one y e a r of h i s — u h — life f o r tra in in g fo r the U nited S ta te s ' d e fe n se s, so th a t he m ig h t tr a in fo r one so lid y e a r, in ste a d of six w eeks u n d er the p re s e n t d ra ft law , so th a t he m ight be ex p e rie n c e d to give o u r U nited S tates a b e tte r defen se ag a in st o u r e n e m ie s, and give them a b e tte r chance of s u rv iv a l. So fo r a ll th e se re a s o n s , p le a se p ro m o te u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g . EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 17 R E E L II ORDER N O ._ 3 _______ I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t it should be the aim of the college to im p a rt a g e n e ra l c u ltu ra l ed u catio n in stead of try in g to im p a rt the v o catio n al tra in in g . Now m o st of u s, I su p p o se, fe e l, when th is kind of p ro p o sitio n i s — uh — sta te d to u s , th a t we m u st tak e o u r choice betw een a — uh — g e n e ra l c u ltu ra l tra in in g and v o catio n al tra in in g . D o n 't be fooled, we can have both. A ctu ally , w e've got to have both. Now d o n 't be a fra id th a t we a r e not going to give v o ca tio n al tra in in g . It pays off w ell enough in th is civ iliz ed w orld of o u rs so th at we can b e su re its going to be c a r r ie d on. B ut m y p ro p o sitio n is th is: th a t it is the unique function of th e co lleg e to provide the g e n e ra l c u ltu ra l tra in in g . I t 's the only in stitu tio n we can count on to do th is . Now, why should it be done at a ll? B ecau se th e re a re s e v e ra l unique things th a t a re given to a 216 p e rso n by a g e n e ra l c u ltu ra l tra in in g th a t he m u st h av e. He is taught to liv e , not m e re ly with h is m a te ria l en v iro n m en t, but to live w ith h im s e lf. T h is can be done In no o th e r way e ffectiv ely . He is taught to judge v a lu e s. I t ’s e a s y enough fo r us to le a rn how to — u h — throw o b je cts th ro u g h the a i r th e se d a y s. T h at can be tau g h t u s th ro u g h v o c a tio n a l tra in in g . B ut only through a g e n e ra l c u ltu ra l tra in in g can we be taught w h eth er o r not th ey should be throw n at a ll, o r if th ro w n , at w hom . O nly th is kind of education can provide fo r continuity w ith the g re a t id eas of the p a s t. And th is is c e rta in ly an e s s e n tia l re q u ire m e n t If A m e ric a Is going to live up to its g re a t opportunity as a le a d e r of civ iliz atio n . EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 14 R E E L H ORDER NO. 4 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t som e type of re lig io u s tra in in g should be included in the public sch o o l c u rric u lu m b ec au se the s e c u la r tre n d in public education is in im ic a l to the optim um functioning of fre e in stitu tio n s, to a p ro p e r u n d ersta n d in g of people who live in o th e r lands and a re of o th e r c u ltu re s . The A m e ric a n sy ste m of fre e public e d u c a tio n re c e iv e d its in itia l im p etu s fro m re lig io u sly m o tiv ated people. The E u ro p ean re fo rm a tio n m ovem ent a s it w as e x p re s s e d on th is con tin e n t put e m p h a sis upon the freed o m of co n scie n ce, upon the a n s w e r ab ility of m an to G od, upon the sa n c tity of individual hum an re s p o n s i b ility . And b ecau se a m an w as to be m ade an sw erab le to God, he w as th e re fo re re q u ire d to be lite ra te in the C h ris tia n s c r ip tu r e s . And so lite ra c y f o r a ll b ecam e the c ry of those who f i r s t cam e to th is continent and s e t up th e ir sch o o l. O u r p re s e n t s y s te m of public ed u catio n is good and b e tte r than any o th e r by m o st sta n d a rd s of ev a lu atio n . B ut it is d efectiv e a t the point of th a t a r e a of know ledge and e x p e rie n c e we c a ll re lig io n . We c o v e r a ll o th e r a r e a s of hum an know ledge and ex p e rien ce and in v e stig a tio n , but we d e to u r around th is w hich is a d e te rm in a te in 217 the conduct of th e m a jo rity of m en and w om en. How a re we to do th is? T h is Is the d ifficu lt p ro b lem . We do not advocate In d o ctrin atio n . B ut th e re should be an u n d erstan d in g of o u r own re lig io u s h e rita g e . T h ere should be a co m p arativ e ev alu atio n of the sy ste m of o th e rs . T h ere should be given to o u r young people a chance to fo rm u la te a sound p e rs o n a l philosophy w ithout w hich a ll sp e c ia liz a tio n is m e a n in g le ss. EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 84 R E E L H ORDER NO. 5 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t the la rg e co lleg e s a re s u p e rio r to the s m a ll c o lle g e s. The la rg e co lleg es o ffe r m o re oppo rtu n ity to the stu d en t fro m the point of view of su b je ct m a tte r tau g h t by e x p e rts in th e ir fie ld . In the s m a ll co lleg es th e re a re few e r p ro fe s s o rs who a re re q u ire d to teach o fttim es in fie ld s in w hich they a re not too w ell acq u ain ted . F o r th is re a so n the stu d en t is re c e iv in g in fo rm atio n w hich he h im se lf is not too s u re of, and th e re fo re the stu d en t is not g ettin g the m o st e x p e rt advice in the p a rtic u la r su b je c ts . T h is situ a tio n a r is e s b ecau se of an econom ic situ atio n in the s m a ll co lleg e. The la rg e in stitu tio n , th e re fo re , can o ffe r a m o re sp e c ia liz e d tra in in g to the s tu dent. Secondly, in th is age of g re a t co m p etitio n , the stu d en t who g ra d u a te s fro m a la rg e in stitu tio n h a s had m o re p ra c tic e fro m — b ec au se he h as been placed u n d er m o re acad em ic p r e s s u re than the stu d en t who g ra d u a te s fro m a s m a ll in stitu tio n . The stu d en t in the — uh — s m a ll sch o o l, w h en ev er he h as a p ro b lem , can v e ry e a s ily go to the p ro fe s s o r and have it so lv ed . W h ereas in a la rg e school he is placed m o re on h is own. T h e re fo re , a g rad u ate fro m a la rg e sch o o l is b e tte r equipped to m e et the b a sic p ro b lem s th at e x is t today than the stu d en t who g ra d u a te s fro m a s m a ll co lleg e. T he s m a ll co lleg e o fttim es o p e ra te s on a v e ry id e a lis tic b a s is , w hile the la rg e school o p e ra te s on a m o re r e a lis tic b a s is . T h e re fo re , 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at a stu d en t can gain m o re by attending a la rg e in stitu tio n than by atten d in g a s m a ll 218 in stitu tio n . EXPERIM ENTAL, NO. 79 R E E L II ORDER NO. 6 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t the fe d e ra l g o v ern m en t should not su b sid ize college ed u catio n , b ecau se the p re s e n t sy ste m is handling the job adequately, and th a t th is in te rv e n tio n on th e p a rt of the fe d e ra l go v ern m en t would b rin g it outside of the re a lm of p ro p e r fe d e ra l a c tio n . Now I sa y th at the p re s e n t sy ste m is ad eq u ate. It p ro v id es f o r a college ed u catio n , quite n atu ra lly fo r those who can afford it. And fo r th o se who cannot b e a r the e n tire c o st by th e m se lv e s, we have m any m ethods of supplem enting th e ir incom e o r th e ir ab ility to go to co lleg e so th a t they can g et the education if they re a lly d e s ire it. You have y o u r sta te c o lleg e s. In ev e ry state in the Union th e re is a s ta te college w hich is r e la tiv e — u h — inexpensive co m p ared with som e o f— uh — y o u r w ell known p riv a te c o lleg e s. We have co lleg e s c h o la rs h ip s . P ro b a b ly m any m o re stu d en ts attend college on a sc h o la rsh ip than m o st people re a liz e . We have b u sin e ss g ro u p s, b u sin e ss f ir m s , u h — civic o rg a n iz a tio n s, com m unity groups of v a rio u s kinds and n a tu re th a t provide s c h o la rsh ip s fo r the d e se rv in g college stu d en t. And then, of c o u rs e , th e re is the GI B ill of R ig h ts. And if th in g s go at th e ir p re s e n t r a te , it a p p e a rs th a t anyone who w ants to get an ed u catio n bad enough is going to be able to get it u n d er the GI B ill of R ig h ts. 1 also sa y th at th is in terv en tio n on the p a rt of the fe d e ra l g o v ern m en t is beyond the p ro p e r re a lm of action of the fe d e ra l g o v ern m en t. In the f i r s t p lace, the co n stitu tio n of the U nited S tates gives ju ris d ic tio n of ed u catio n to the s e v e ra l s ta te s . And we have found through e x p e rie n c e th a t a d m in is tra tio n is m uch b e tte r on a lo c al le v e l. And I m a in ta in th a t the old say in g “ he who holds the p u rse w ill pull the s tr in g s ” is p a rtic u la rly ap p licab le to the fe d e ra l g overnm ent. Allow them to fin an ce th is thing, and you a r e going to have to allow th em to c o n tro l it. And I think th a t 219 fe d e ra l co n tro l of ed u catio n ia not w hat Is being sought by people of th is co u n try o r even by the people who m isa d v ise d ly advocate fe d e ra l su b sid iza tio n of college ed u catio n . EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 23 R E E L II ORDER NO. 7 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t the U nited S tates should have a sy ste m of u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g , b ecau se the p r e s e n t— p re s e n t sy s te m r e q u ir e s too m uch tim e f o r the tra in in g of a m ilita ry m an . B a sic tra in in g , as now conducted by a ll b ra n c h e s of o u r m ilita ry fo rc e s , should be com pleted b efo re a m an is ac tu ally inducted into any b ra n c h of the a rm e d fo rc e s . T h is could be h andled, 1 am quite s u re , m uch m o re efficie n tly and pro b ab ly to a m uch h ig h e r d eg ree o f— uh — w ell s h a ll we sa y can be c a rr ie d to co m p letio n m uch b e tte r by a s y s te m m o re like o u r p re s e n t ed u catio n al sy ste m than by the one u sed — by the sy ste m now u se d by the m ilita ry f o r c e s . It h as been a g re e d by a ll the outstan d in g m ilita ry le a d e rs of the p ast m any y e a rs , even those le a d e rs of the F i r s t W orld W ar, th at the e a r l i e r a m an is given b a s ic tra in in g , the b e tte r it is . The b e tte r m ilita ry m an he is . I b eliev e th a t a ll m en w ith a background of m ilita ry s e rv ic e w ill a lso a g re e w ith m e th a t b a sic tra in in g h elp s a p e rso n not only to be a b e tte r — a b e tte r m ilita ry m an, but a lso h elp s him be a b e tte r civ ilia n a s w ell. It te a c h e s him to d isc ip lin e h is own life in m any w ays. W ith a sy ste m of u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g , m ilita ry sp e c ia liz e d tra in in g can be begun e a r l ie r and c a rr ie d to b e tte r co m p letio n . EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 31 R E E L U ORDER NO. 8 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t som e type of re lig io u s tra in in g should not be included in the public school c u rric u lu m , b e c au se th is is a re sp o n sib ility of the ch u rch and the h o m e. We in o u r tim e m u st face the situ atio n of a hom e w hich is no lo n g e r a hom e, a ch u rch w hich h a s 220 renounced m uch of its duty. We m u st face the situ a tio n th at we have p a re n ts who have tu rn ed th e ir c h ild re n o v e r to s tr a n g e rs fo r tra in in g . We m u st face the situ atio n th a t the ch u rch do es not re a c h a to ta l p ro g ra m . The n eed , and I am p o sitiv e in m y fe e lin g — m y dem and fo r th is n e e d — is th e re . B ut the need m u st be m e t in the hom e and in the ch u rch . T o ta l c o -o p e ra tio n is re q u ire d o r the e ffo rt is w o rth le s s . The g e n e ra tio n we a re p assin g th ro u g h , when p a re n ts drop p ed th e ir ch ild re n off a t the Sunday School and h asten ed hom e to w ork in the g ard en o r to go back to bed, o r to re a d the com ic s tr ip s , m ean t the c h ild re n w ere being Bent to so m eth in g the p a re n ts d id n 't re s p e c t. T he c h ild re n knew it soon, and soon they too have b een a t Sunday sch o o l and no lo n g er re tu rn e d . The hom e m u st assu m e th is re sp o n sib ility , the hom e m u st u n d ertak e the re sp o n sib ility . The re sp o n sib ility , if renounced by the hom e, w ill not be u n d ertak en by the ch u rch . The re s p o n s ib ilitie s w hich have been s u rre n d e re d by the hom e, by the c h u rch , have not been assu m ed . M ay we accep t the G od-given duty of th is re sp o n sib ility — tra in in g the c h ild re n in the adm onition of the L o rd , EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 82 R E E L II ORDER NO. 9 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t the U nited S tates should have a sy ste m of co m p u lso ry h ealth in su ra n c e , b ecau se of the e x tre m e need of the low incom e g ro u p s and the fa ilu re of the U nited S tates to supply the needed c a re to th o se incom e g ro u p s. In the f ir s t p la c e , we find throughout the e n tire co u n try th a t the U nited S ta te s n eed s som e p ro g ra m of h ealth in su ra n c e to b rin g about the lo w er incom e g ro u p s to the eq u a lity of a ll the g ro u p s in the U nited S ta te s. We can exam ine the p o o re r s ta te s in — in the co u n try and find th a t the h o sp ita l c a re is p o o r, th at we find not enough d o c to rs to m e et the m e d ic a l r e q u ir e m e n ts, and th a t the p o o re r s ta te s c a n 't afford th e — th e ex p en siv e eq u ip m en t and the m a te ria l and th e d o c to rs needed to provide th e se people w ith m e d ic a l c a re . We find c a se a f te r c a se w here th is p o o re r m e d ic a l c a re is being show n to the co u n try as a n atio n al a v e ra g e . We can take the n u m b e r of a rm y d e fe rm e n ts a s an ex am p le, show ing the v e ry d ire need of th is co u n try to e s ta b lis h som e p ro g ra m of m e d ic a l c a re f o r the p o o re r se c tio n s of o u r co u n try . We can fin d also th a t at the p re s e n t tim e the U nited S tate s is n ’t m eetin g the p ro b lem s a s it should. We find th a t the U nited S tates is not giving m uch aid to those p o o re r se c tio n s of the co u n try , and th e re fo re the p o o re r people and the p o o re r se ctio n s a re not getting th is m e d ic a l c a re . We a lso find th a t the g o v ern m en t is e sta b lish in g no in cen tiv e fo r d o c to rs and people of high c a lib e r to m ove into the lo w er incom e se c tio n s . A fte r a ll th ey a re out in the b u sin e ss to m ake the m oney, and if the m oney is found in the h ig h e r paid s ta te s , and in the h ig h e r paid incom e b ra c k e ts , th ey a re n ’t going to have the incentive to give the p o o re r people the m e d ica l c a re . In o th e r w o rd s, when you look at the whole g e n e ra l p ic tu re in the U nited S ta te s, we find one of not a d em o cracy , one w here the people w ith the m oney have th e — uh — ab ility and a re getting the b e tte r m e d i c a l c a re . And I b eliev e th is should be changed v e ry s in c e re ly to a p ro g ra m of m e d ica l c a re and co m p u lso ry h ealth in su ra n c e w here a ll a re equal. EXPERIM ENTAL, NO. 72 R E E L U ORDER NO. 10 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t the U nited S ta te s should not have a new m a jo r p a rty , b ecau se the two p a rtie s a s p re se n tly co n stitu ted re p r e s e n t the tra d itio n a l A m e ric a n id e a of re p re s e n tin g the Individual. You know and I know, th a t m o st people do not have a c o n siste n t p o litic a l philosophy. T hey a re not c o n siste n tly lib e ra l, th ey a re not c o n siste n tly c o n se rv a tiv e . And fu rth e rm o re , in a co u n try as la rg e a s the U nited S ta te s, we m u st tak e into c o n sid e ra tio n reg io n a l fa c to rs w hich te m p e r the attitu d e s of the people in th a t p a rtic u la r a re a . P u b lic pow er is v e ry Im p o rtan t in the w est, but in the e a s t it is alm o st n eg lig ib le. High ta riff m ean s a lo t to the in d u stria l n o rth e a st, low ta riffs to the a g ri c u ltu ra l south, and yet they m ay ag ree on m any o th e r Is s u e s . C o n se quently, two p a rtie s also re p re s e n t th is in co n siste n cy . The p re se n t alignm ent allow s fo r adequate p ro te st if such p ro te s t is needed. M ost of the p ro g ra m s advocated by th ird p a rtie s in the p a st have been g rad u ally a s sim ila te d into the p ro g ra m s of the m a jo r p a rtie s . And in dividual p ro te s ts have been effective on a lo cal lev el, a s we see in W isconsin w ith — u h — S en ato r L a F o lle tte . New so c ia l fo rc e s th at have a ris e n should be allow ed, w ithin th is fram ew o rk of p ro te s t and the two p a rty sy stem th at we have today, to g rad u ally a s s im ila te th e m se lv e s into the A m erican so c iety . A ra d ic a l change w as liab le to u p set the econom y and the p o litical s tru c tu re of the nation, and actu ally w reck the e n tire s tru c tu re , when they only m ean to change it grad u ally o r to change one o r two asp e c ts of the so ciety . The g re a t m iddle way w hich we have p ractice d in A m eric a e v e r sin ce o u r in s titu — inception in — u h — the late eighteenth cen tu ry , should be follow ed in th is cen tu ry and in the cen tu ry to com e. We m u st continue to step slow ly with one foot and then with the o th e r, so th at the m ills of d em o cracy , like the m ills of the gods, m ay grin d slow ly, but they sh a ll g rin d exceeding fine. EXPERIMENTAL, NO. 27 REEL. II ORDER NO. 11 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at sex education should not be taught in high sch o o ls, fo r the v e ry sim p le re a s o n th at it can be b e tte r taught in the hom e. L et us exam ine fo r a m om ent the v e ry n atu re of th is w ord se x . In fa c t, le t us take the av erag e connotation fo r the av erag e high Bchool stu d e n t— what he thinks of sex . F i r s t of a ll, I fe e l he thinks th at It Is a s in is te r thing, w hile he also m ay think it a r a th e r in te re stin g thing. But in actu ality the r e a l e ssen c e of sex is a v e ry im p o rta n t 223 thing to o u r av e ra g e life . In fa c t, its a lm o st a holy th in g . It is the m ean s by w hich m a rrie d people a r e able to p ro c re a te the hum an r a c e . F o r m e as an individual, to say th a t 1 would e n tru s t such a p e rs o n a l re s p o n s ib ility on a high sch o o l te a c h e r is not w ithin scope of m y re a s o n at th is tim e . I have th a t re sp o n sib ility a s a p a re n t— to a d e q u ately th in k through and help ed u cate m y child. T h e re fo re , b ecau se of the v e ry p e rso n a l n a tu re of the su b je c t m a tte r of sex ed u catio n , i t ’s e ith e r going to be m y fa u lt and no one e ls e ’s th a t th e child liv e s a d ecen t and good life . Now you a re thinking p o ssib ly th a t— le t’s tak e an o rp h an , a child th at h as no p a re n ts . W ell, n e c e s s a rily h e ’ll have to be se x ed u cated by som eone e ls e . B ut 1 sa y v e ry s in c e re ly , th a t th is is a se co n d ary and indeed a v e ry in fe rio r m ean s of se x ed u catio n . And 1 a lso hope th at in the m inds of you people liste n in g h e re today th a t it w ill be se x ed u catio n by p a re n ts alone. EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 63 R E E L II ORDER NO. 12 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t re lig io u s tra in in g should not be taught in the public sch o o ls b ec au se the p ro b lem s in h e re n t w ith su ch a p ro g ra m a re too g re a t. T h ese p ro b le m s a re two fold. P ro b le m n u m b e r one: w hat would be the accep ted re lig io u s faith ? I think we a ll re a liz e th a t when re lig io u s faith is not confined to s tr ic t d en o m in atio n a l lim its , it b eco m es a r a th e r in tan g ib le and c e rta in ly a v e ry p e rso n a l th in g . My q u estio n would be: W hat would be the re lig io u s fa ith th a t would be taught? If it would be confined to a textbook, we would c e r ta in ly open the p ro p o sitio n to c o n tro v e rsy . I think we a ll w ell re a liz e w hat happened in D ayton, T en n ., som e few y e a rs ago when the s ta te le g is la tu re d ecid ed th a t it w as a g a in st re lig io u s fa ith to te a c h evolution. We know the r e s u lt— c o n tro v e rsy , and plenty of it. Now the q u estio n would be: deciding th a t we should have re lig io u s fa ith , who would d e te rm in e what th at faith should be? P ro b le m n u m b e r two: who would te a c h th is re lig io u s faith ? The q u estio n m ig h t be an sw e re d by the te a c h e r h e rs e lf o r h im se lf. I would su b m it f i r s t of a ll th a t a te a c h e r is h a rd ly a theologian. B eing a te a c h e r m y se lf, I fe e l th a t 1 ca n sa fe ly say th a t a te a c h e r is not alw ays the la s t w ord a s f a r a s theology o r the p ra c tic e th e re o f is co n cern ed . T h e re fo re , the second m a jo r p ro b lem , and one th a t 1 c o n sid e r to be in su rm o u n ta b le , is: who would te ac h theology o r re lig io u s faith in a public school? B ecau se of th e se two re a s o n s , th e re fo re , the fa c t th a t we w ouldn't know w hat should be co n sid e re d the n o rm in re lig io u s faith and b ec au se we do not know who should be the te a c h e r, 1 would th e re fo re su b m it to you a so lu tio n to th is p ro b lem . L e t's le t the ch u rch , the in stitu tio n its e lf th a t w as o rig in a ted fo r th is p u rp o se , continue to p ro p ag ate re lig io u s faith , and k eep the ed u catio n al sy ste m fre e fro m the c o n tro v e rs ie s ju s t m entioned. 225 EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 2 R E E L HI ORDER NO. 1 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s a re good f o r the av era g e stu d en t, b ec au se su ch a c tiv itie s provide fo r a m o re w ell rounded and com plete ed u catio n al e x p e rie n c e . We m ight s ta r t w ith a d efinition of e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s . W hat a r e they? I would lik e to c o n sid e r th a t e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s a re a ll o rg an ized and w ell fo rm u late d a c tiv itie s o u tsid e of the re g u la r c la s s ro o m schedule of c o u rs e s . F o r b rie f d isc u ssio n th is aftern o o n I ’d like to c o n s id e r chiefly m u sic , a th le tic s , and fo re n s ic s . We m ight w ell a sk o u rse lv e s the q u estio n : b e n e fic ia l to the av e ra g e stu d en t in w hat re s p e c t? W ell, f i r s t of a ll, I believe th a t e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s provide o p p o rtu n i tie s f o r th e developm ent of c e rta in s k ills and a b ilitie s . And m any of th em w ill have c a rr y o v e r value in o u r fu tu re lifetim e a c tiv itie s . In the f i r s t p la ce, m u sic . Now when we te ac h a stu d en t to play the piano, o r an o rg an , o r to sin g , o r to play so m e o th e r m u sic a l in stru m e n t, c e r ta in ly they a r e developing c re a tiv e a b ilitie s . B ut m o re than th a t they a re developing a love of m u s ic — an u n d erstan d in g and a p p re c ia tio n of m u sic th at w ill c a r r y w ith them throughout th e ir life. In the c a se of a th le tic s , we le a rn to c o -o rd in a te o u r body m o v em en ts. We le a rn the value of team play. We le a rn the value of c o -o p e ra tio n and of c o m p eti tive e n te r p ris e , and th o se fa c to rs w hich c a r r y fo rw a rd th roughout o u r life a c tiv itie s . And in the c a se of fo re n s ic s , we le a rn to think on o u r feet; we le a rn to com m unicate o u r id eas to o th e r people. EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 12 R E E L III ORDER NO. 2 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at the C o m m u n ist p a rty should be outlaw ed in the U nited S ta te s, b ecau se it te a c h e s d o c trin e s th a t a re c o n tra ry to o u r b a s ic b e lie fs and in stitu tio n s. R u ssia is attem p tin g to d o m in ate the w orld w ith h e r type of fo re ig n pow er and a g g re s s io n and w hat th ey te rm com m u n ism , w hich we a ll know is not re a lly co m m u n ist a t a ll. She h as in filtra te d a lm o st half of the globe now. She has pow er in A sia, E u ro p e , and even in A fric a and the M oslem w o rld . The U nited S tates m u st co u n ter th is trem en d o u s a g g re ssiv e fo rc e by pow er w hich se e k s to dom inate the whole w o rld . How can we s ta r t to c o u n te r th is fo rc e ? We can begin rig h t a t hom e by outlaw ing the p a rty h e re in the U nited S tates; by m aking it ille g a l, by rooting it out if it goes u n d e r- ground, by m aking a firm stand th at the C o m m u n ist p a rty w ill not be to le ra te d , th at it is ag a in st o u r co n stitu tio n , a g a in st o u r id e als of f r e e dom and d em o cracy . We fought a w ar with E ngland in 1776 to gain o u r fre e d o m — the fre ed o m th at we now enjoy. A re we to g iv e — to allow a p a rty to e s ta b lis h its e lf, to en tre n c h its e lf into o u r p o litic a l life w hich ad v o cates o v erth ro w of th is g o v ern m en t, ad v o cates o v erth ro w of the co n stitu tio n w hich w as s e t up then? No, I think not! To outlaw the C o m m u n ist p a rty c le a rly and d efin itely — and it should be a policy of o u r s ta te to do th is . And in outlaw ing the C o m m u n ist p a rty we w ouldn’t, of c o u rs e , lim it fre e thought; but if the p arty w as le g a l, the thought would be m o re than f re e , and people would think that governm ent had given its ta c it co n sen t to th is p arty . T h e re fo re , I b eliev e fo r o u r own good and to fight w orld com m unism , we should s ta r t a t hom e by o u t law ing the p arty . E X P E R I M E N T A L NO. 51 R E E L HI ORDER NO. 3 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at se x education should be taught in high schools sim p ly b ec au se it is m o st p ra c tic a l to do so . T h e re is little doubt in the m inds of e d u c a to rs and p a re n ts th at th e re is a p ro b lem of se x ed u catio n in o u r so c ie ty . In fa c t, it is alm o st u n iv e rsa lly accep ted by p a re n ts and e d u c a to rs th a t th e re is a p ro b lem of se x — se x ed u catio n in o u r so c ie ty . The im p o rta n t d ec isio n , h o w ev er, a p p e a rs in how to cope with th is acknow ledged p ro b lem . F o r the m o st p a rt, p a re n ts at the p re s e n t tim e e x p re s s ly sta te th a t they a re u n p re p a re d to 227 te ach sex to th e ir c h ild re n . T hey don’t know w hat to sa y , th ey don’t know how to sa y it. W hich would se e m to take It out of th e ir re a lm . W here e ls e then but in the lap of the e d u c a to rs? The o th e r p ro b lem is when to te a ch it. It se e m s r a th e r obvious th a t infants and c h ild re n c a n not u n d ersta n d the so called fa c ts of life. And in th is way the e le m e n ta ry sch o o ls a re e lim in a ted . B ut th e re is a p erio d im m ed ia tely follow ing the p u b ical p erio d , the a d o lesc en t y e a rs , so c a lle d , w hich is ac cep ted a s the grow ing up p erio d and th e re fo re v e ry fo rm id ab le fo r the young m en and w om en. At th is tim e th e se young m en and wom en a re in high sch o o l. T hey can u n d erstan d and th e re fo re take advantage of w hat should be an in te g ra l p a rt of th e ir education. In th is way it se e m s not only obvious but p ra c tic a l, ed u catio n ally speaking, to te a c h — to te a c h sex education in the high sch o o l. EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 57 R E E L III ORDER NO. 4 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t the U nited S tate s should not adopt a sy ste m of co m p u lso ry h ealth s e rv ic e . I w ant to give you som e c o n c re te re a s o n s fo r th is b elief. F i r s t, A m e ric a has the h ig h e st s ta n d a rd of h ea lth se rv ic e in the w o rld . We have the b e s t d o c to rs; we have m o re and b e tte r h o sp ital fa c ilitie s ; we have b e tte r m ed ical equ ip m en t. Secondly, th e re a re m any v o lu n tary s e rv ic e s , such as — . We have the Blue C ro s s , we have the W hite C ro s s , we have m any s ta te v o lu n tary h ealth p lan s, we have m any com pany sp o n so red h ealth p lan s. A ll of th e se a re w ithin reaso n ab le co st to the individual and can take c a re of o u r m ed ical p ro b le m s. Secondly, the AMA, the A m e ric a n M edical A sso c iatio n , is d efin itely a g a in st such a plan, and I c i te — uh — D r. S ilv e rs te in on t h i s — uh — who is o netim e head of the A m eric a n M edical A sso c iatio n . The fo u rth thing, I am s e rio u s ly a g a in st the w ord c o m p u lso ry . T h is sm a c k s of d ic ta to rsh ip . I su g g est th at we o b ject and o b ject stre n u o u sly to th is w ord co m p u lso ry . We have v o lu n tary plans 228 which w ill fu lfill o u r n eed s and p u rp o ses as f a r as h ea lth in su ra n c e is co n cern ed . So le t us re ta in som e m e a su re of fre e d o m of ch o ice. Uh — le t us o b ject and object stre n u o u sly to th is w ord co m p u lso ry . EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 4 R E E L III ORDER NO. 5 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t o u r A m e ric an sch o o ls should enable o u r A m e ric a n stu d e n ts to study the v a rio u s re lig io u s fa ith s . F o r to m e, life is incom plete w ithout p u rp o se. A s a p a s to r and m in is te r callin g in p e o p le 's hom es and m e etin g them face to face in life situ a tio n s, I have found th a t m any of them lack a r e a l definite p u rp o se in lif e — a r e a l goal in living. I'v e found th a t m any of th em lack the guiding p rin c ip le , a r e a l w orth w h ilen ess in being. In fa c t, in o u r o rd i n a ry w o rd s, a som ething to live fo r. How a re we going to get th is p u r pose? To m e , purpose can only com e with d efin ite g o als. A d o c to r, a la w y e r, an e n g in e e r, a r e s e a r c h s c ie n tis t, a te ch n ic ian , a ll of th e se m en function on the b a s is of sh o rt tim e and long tim e g o als. T h ese g o als, to be ab so lu tely what they should b e, m u st b e, f ir s t of a ll, p ro d u ctiv e. T h e re m u st be a se n se of ap p re c iatio n , a se n se of getting so m eth in g out of w hat w e 're doing. T hey m u st be sa tisfy in g . T hey m u st g ra tify the p e rso n on the in sid e, w here he liv es h im s e lf, and give him a sen se of w hat he is doing is co n trib u tin g to the w ell being of o th e rs . F in a lly , they m u st be la stin g . They m u st be m o re than ju st a tra n s ito ry s ta te m en t o r e x p re s sio n of w hat we take to be re a lity . And to m e , the only go als w hich has th e se , as a u n it, is a rig h t re la tio n sh ip to re a lity , o r to m e as God. I th e re fo re firm ly advocate th a t stu d e n ts be o b je ctiv ely acquainted w ith what — w ith what o th e rs have tak en to be re a lity as found in re lig io u s faith . O nly by doing th is can we s in c e re ly fe e l th at we have done ju stic e to o u r A m eric a n youth as f a r as giving th em a w holeness and a r e a l m eaning to life its e lf. T hank you. 229 EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 6 R E E L HI ORDER NO. 6 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t the co m m u n ist p a rty in the U nited S tate s should not be outlaw ed, b ec au se I b eliev e th at it would tend to w eaken o u r m o st b asic p o litic a l co n cep ts. About two c e n tu rie s ago o u r d e m o c ra c y w as founded on a b a sic assu m p tio n th at a fre e people w ere capable of s e lf g o v ern m en t. T h o m as J e ffe rs o n in h is seco n d in a u g u ra l su m m ed it up when he ask ed , “ If m an is not capable of governing h im se lf, who then is? O r have we found an g els in the fo rm of kings to g o v ern u s ? ” We have not found an g els in the fo rm of k in g s. We have found m en whom we b eliev e th at if we m ade fre e could govern th e m se lv e s. F o r a hundred and sev en ty -fiv e y e a rs and m o re th e se fre e m en have g o v ern ed , have b u ilt o u r n atio n ’s g re a tn e s s . B ecau se they have lived up to the assu m p tio n th at if m an is fre e he can get the fa c ts , if he can get the fa c ts he can m ake d e c isio n s , if he can m ake d e c isio n s he can govern h im se lf. B ut he m u st be fre e , fre e to think and m ove, fre e to w rite , and fre e to sp eak . T h e re a re th o se who would deny th is today, who b eliev e th at we can lim it th is . B ut I w onder. Can we? C an we b eliev e today th at o u r d em o c ra cy is le s s stro n g than it w as two hundred y e a rs ago? C an we b eliev e th at it is le s s cap ab le of w ithstanding the b lan d ish m en ts of com m unism ? C an we b eliev e that m an today is no b e tte r in m aking a judgm ent, o r le s s good in fa c t, than he w as then? I h a rd ly think so . We have grow n to g re a t pow er on tr u s t — tr u s t in fre e m en. L et us not now deny th is tr u s t w hich h as b ro u g h t o u r g re a tn e s s to its fu ll fru itio n . EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 10 R E E L ID ORDER NO. 7 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at se x ed u catio n should be taught in high sc h o o ls, b ecau se boys and g irls at th a t age a re at a sta g e of developm ent in w hich th e ir c u rio s ity dem ands know ledge, w h eth e r rig h t o r w rong, on the re la tio n s betw een the s e x e s . Boys and g ir ls begin 23d th e ir developm ent and m a tu ra tio n at late — in th e ir late y e a rs in g ra m m a r school. Im m ed iately they becom e cu rio u s and in q u isitiv e. They h e a r — in the eighth g ra d e — th ey begin h e arin g d irty jokes fro m o ld er stu d e n ts. And — and a t th at age th e se boys and g irls a re v e ry gullible and they believe a ll that is told to them . In high sch o o ls, boys and g irls develop rap id ly in the fo u r y e a rs . Jo k e s, s to rie s , explanation of te rm s a re p assed fre q u en tly fro m one to an o th er. T hese ta le s and explanations a re v e ry m islead in g and e rro n e o u s. F ro m boys, e s p e c i ally , the s to rie s of b o a s te rs m ay have h arm fu l effects on gullible youth. T h ese boys and g irls seek to a s c e rta in a ll they can about both se x es. But yet in m any high sch o o ls they a re n e g le c te d — th is education is n eg lected . Now you m ay arg u e th at the place fo r sex education is in the hom e and in the ch u rch . H ow ever, the hom e and the ch u rch has failed . Many boys and g irls don’t know anything about sex education u n til they get m a rrie d o r u n til they re a c h college. In conclusion, I ’d like to sta te th a t at high sch o o l age, boys and g irls a re developing and m a tu rin g sex u ally . T hey seek to d isc o v e r the facts behind th is c a se . If the tru th is w ithheld, they w ill find out fro m o th e rs of th e ir age who know as little o r le ss than they do. T h e s e — they w ill be m isle d , so m e tim es th e ir p e rso n a litie s w ill be h arm ed . EXPERIM EN TAL NO. 78 R EEL HI ORDER NO. 8 I believe m o st sin c e re ly th at sm a ll colleges a re s u p e rio r to larg e co lleg es fo r the follow ing re a s o n s . The g lam o u r and g litte r of id eal fa c ilitie s a re s e t asid e fo r the m o st im p o rtan t th in g s. The e m p h asis is upon c h a ra c te r, r a th e r than upon sp e cia liza tio n . A g re a te r opportunity to co v er the field in e x tra c u rric u la r a c tiv itie s is p o ssib le — uh — so we don’t becom e lim ited to a — to a — d ictatin g m in o rity group. The student on th e — uh — sm a ll college cam pus i s — is m o re clo sely in contact w ith th ese m any people, so that his fin al v o catio n al 231 choice m ay be m o re firm ly grounded on a — u h — m o re su b stan tia l judgm ent. He m u s t— the student, th a t is , in a s m a ll cam p u s, is m o re apt to se ek out th ese valu es fo r h im self, w hich a re hidden beneath the m any d e ta ils which seem so v e ry often non-developtive a n d — u h — not im p o rta n t. He is then able to fashion som e of those d e ta ils into a m o re sc ien tific and sy ste m a tic a rra n g e m e n t so he m ay em erg e with a m o re m eaningful and a m o re valuable co n trib u tio n to m an ’s indom itable se a rc h fo r tru th . EX PERIM EN TAL NO. 5 R EEL HI ORDER NO. 9 I believe m o st sin c e re ly that e x tra c u rric u la r a c tiv itie s are good fo r the av erag e stu d en t, b ecau se they tend to m ake the individual’s academ ic p u rsu it m o re effective and m eaningful. Now ju st a b rie f rundown. You m ay ask w hat do 1 m ean by student? W ell, fo r o u r p u r po ses le t’s co n sid er anyone en ro lled in an educational in stitu tio n . Who is an av erag e student? W ell, le t’s ju s t say som eone who h asn ’t sp e cia liz e d p a rtic u la rly , such as a grad u ate student in a u n iv e rsity . And e x tra c u rric u la r a c tiv itie s? W ell, those can be a lot of things. F i r s t of a ll, e x tra c u rric u la r a c tiv itie s a re those which a re not n o rm ally included in the co u rse outline of the school. They m ay be in fo rm al. T hey a re u su ally p u rsu its in which th e re is no p a rtic u la r ra tin g , o r at le a s t th a t which is not included in your g ra d e s. They a re u s u a lly ,— uh — excuse m e — the s p a re tim e of the individual and they can be co m p etitiv e. Now h e re is som ething, fo r exam ple, s p o rts , so c ia l fu n ctio n s, such as d an c es, and school — uh cam p aig n s, rece p tio n s and lab w ork such as th a t— uh — of d ra m a tic w orkshop, m u sic groups and so fo rth . T hey a re v ery v a rie d in content. Now why a r e they e s se n tia l? In the f ir s t place e x tra c u rric u la r ac tiv ities a re fun. P sy ch o lo g ists te ll us w e’ve got to have fun and play, and you know that y o u rself. And play is m o re effectiv e, m o re relax in g w h atev er its purpose is supposed to be, 232 w hen it is planned. T he second re a so n why e x tra c u r ric u la r a c tiv itie s a r e im p o rta n t is that b ecau se they can be su p p lem en tal to the c o u rs e w ork of the individual, and he who finds th is re la tio n sh ip g ets the m o st out of h is le a rn in g , and the c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s and the e x tra ones he p u rs u e s . T h ird ly , th ey b rin g people to g eth er; they give us tra in in g in s o c ia l tech n iq u e. And b ecau se of th e se th re e p o in ts, b ec au se e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s a re fun, and they a re ex cellen t and n e c e s s a ry su p p le m e n ta l— uh — p u rs u its , and v o catio n al tra in in g , and b e c au se they b rin g people to g e th e r, I b eliev e they should be an in te g ra l p a rt of ev ery b o d y ’s tra in in g as a stu d en t. EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 66 R E E L III ORDER NO. 10 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at the U nited S tates should have a p ro g ra m of u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g b ecau se the s ta te of w orld a ffa irs today dem ands th at we a s a n atio n be read y . R eady to com e out fighting when we h e a r the sound of the b e ll, o r the sound of the bom b. O u r p rin c ip a l opponent in the w orld today, the Soviet Union and its s a te llite s , h as a — w ell not only a huge standing a rm y , but an en o rm o u s supply of r e s e r v e s — tra in e d m en, and m en th at a re tra in e d in the R u ssian way of fighting. We also m u st be p re p a re d . When we h e a r of w a rs going on today in K o rea, in M alaya, in B u rm a , and a half dozen o th e r p la ces w ith s tra n g e sounding n a m e s, we also m u st fe e l the re a s o n fo r being p re p a re d is obvious. W ith cold w ars going on in B e rlin , in F ra n c e , and in Ita ly , I ag ain sa y th at the re a s o n is o b v io u s— we m u st be p re p a re d to com e up fighting. Now o u r p re p a re d n e s s p ro g ra m today is c e rta in ly not the a n sw e r. The only thing, the only b a sic p ro g ra m we have is the d ra ft. And the d ra ft is not adequate b ecau se it h its people — the m en at le a s t — who a re the only ones who a re d ra fte d , rig h t in the w o rst point it can h it th e m , when they a re rig h t in the m iddle of th e ir college c a r e e r , w hen p erh ap s m any of them a re m a rrie d , and 233 so m e have c h ild re n . I think th a t o u r m ilita ry p re p a re d n e ss p ro g ra m today is not quite the a n sw e r. B ut u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g , w hich would take e v e ry A m e ric a n boy when he g ra d u a te s fro m high sch o o l and give him a c e rta in p erio d of tra in in g , tra in in g in the m ethod of m ilita ry p re p a re d n e s s fo r w a r — uh — a t about the ap p ro x im ate age of eig h teen o r n in eteen , would be the a n s w e r to o u r p ro b lem , the p ro b lem of being p re p a re d to com e out fighting. We would have a la rg e pool of tra in e d m an p o w er. And th e se m en would be tra in e d in o u r m ethod of fighting w ar, the w eapons we u s e , and the ta c tic s we Im plem ent them w ith. And not only th at, but it would do one v e ry im p o rta n t thing. It would h it th em a ll at the sam e tim e . F o r th e se re a s o n s I fe e l the U nited S tates should have a definite p ro g ra m of UMT. EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 61 R E E L III ORDER NO. 11 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t sex education should not be taught in the public sch o o ls b ec au se o u r public sch o o ls a re not adequate fo r the p u rp o se. Sex ed u catio n can not be taught as an acad em ic su b je c t. T ake a c a se in point, fo r in sta n c e . M ary co m es running hom e a fte r a h ard day in high school and s a y s , “ M om , I got n in e ty -e ig h t on a se x te s t today, and I got a date with Johnny tonight, t o o / ’ W ell, m aybe Johnny didn’t get n in e ty -e ig h t on h is sex te s t, m aybe he failed it. It is conceivable to m e th at both m ig h t fa il the te s t th at night. So as a f i r s t point, it is not an acad em ic su b je ct and th e re fo re it cannot be taught as an acad em ic su b ject u n d er w hich sy ste m o u r sch o o ls a re s e t up. Secondly, we know, i t ’s a touchy su b je c t, but we know th a t a g re a t m any te a c h e rs in o u r public sc h o o ls a re not living n o rm a l sex liv es th e m s e lv e s . Now, don’t le t m e a la rm you, I don’t m ean to sa y th a t y o u r ch ild re n a re being taught by se x p e rv e rts o r anything like th a t, but fo r som e re a s o n o r o th e r, w hich I won’t go into now, a g re a t m any e le m e n ta ry te a c h e rs do not get m a rrie d . I t ’s ju st a sim p le p lain fa c t. Now 234' the re a so n we w ant to te ach se x a t a ll, w h eth er in the sch o o ls o r in the hom e, is fo r h a p p ie r, m o re su c c e s sfu l m a rria g e s . I think th a t’s p ro b ab ly the fo re m o s t re a s o n . Now how can we ex p ect te a c h e rs who a re not m a rrie d — as a g re a t m any of them a re not, to im p a rt a w holesom e s e x a tm o sp h ere to o u r ch ild re n ? B ecau se of th e se two re a s o n s , I m ain tain th a t th e re is only one place w here c h ild re n can le a rn s e x at a ll, and th a t’s in the hom e, u n d er the guidance of p ro p e rly in stru c te d p a r e n ts . EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 58 R E E L III ORDER NO. 12 I b e liev e m o st s in c e re ly th at the C o m m u n ist p a rty should be outlaw ed in the U nited S ta te s, b e c au se it c o n stitu te s a c le a r and p re se n t d an g e r to the e s s e n tia l te n e t of the A m e ric a n way of life. T h at e s s e n tia l te n et to w hich I m ake re fe re n c e is o u r b elief th at the d ec isio n s by w hich we a re governed should be th o se of the m a jo rity and not the m in o rity . If m o st of the people in th is co u n try , say eighty m illio n , w e re in fa v o r of th o se te n ets esp o u sed by the C o m m u n ist p a rty , but b e c au se of som e v e ste d in te re s t w ere unable to re a liz e th o se d e s ire s through the p a rty , b ecau se of th is c o u n try ’s v e ry o rig in we would c e r ta in ly have a v e ry poor arg u in g point fro m w hich to deny them the technique of o v erth ro w w hich they ad v o cate. B ut b ec au se of th e se tech n iq u e s, coupled w ith the fa c t th a t the C o m m u n ist m o v em en t is e s s e n tia lly a m in o rity m o v em en t, w hich e m b ra c e s tech n iq u es which would p e rm it th em to c re a te a m ilita n t m in o rity w hich could o v e r th ro w the w ill of the m a jo rity , it does co n stitu te a c le a r and p re s e n t d a n g e r to th o se te n e ts w hich we in th is co u n try hold m o st d e a r. Now, it is fre q u en tly arg u ed th a t the outlaw of the C o m m u n ist p a rty would co n stitu te a v io latio n of the fu n d am en tal g u a ra n te e s of fre ed o m of sp e e c h , thought, and e x p re s sio n g u aran teed by the f ir s t am endm ent to o u r co n stitu tio n . H ow ever, it m u st be re a liz e d th a t fre ed o m is not 233 lic e n se . And ju st as freed o m of sp eech has been r e s tric te d to exclude sla n d e r and m alicio u s p ro secu tio n , once again m u st th is fre ed o m of speech be re s tric te d so as not to encom pass th o se who would advocate p o licies w hich would u ltim a te ly re s u lt in the d e stru c tio n of those v e ry techniques w hich they a re attem p tin g to exploit today. T h e re fo re , because of the fact th at th is C om m unist p arty is e s se n tia lly a m in o rity m ovem ent, b ecau se it e m b ra c e s techniques w hich would p e rm it it to take o v er and su b v e rt the w ill of the m a jo rity , th e re b y d estro y in g the b asic te n ets fo r which th is co u n try and th at m a jo rity sta n d s, and b e cause of th ese two re a so n s it does m o st c le a rly co n stitu te a c le a r and p re se n t d an g e r to those things fo r w hich th is country w as esta b lish ed and fo r w hich it has fought fo r one hundred and sev en ty -fiv e y e a rs , I firm ly b eliev e, and m o st c e rta in ly and sin c e re ly believe th a t the C om m unist p a rty should be outlaw ed in the U nited S tate s. 236 EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 7 R E E L IV ORDER NO. 1 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at the U nited S tates should have a co m p u lso ry sy ste m of h ealth in su ra n c e . I b ase th is b elie f on the fa c t th a t h ealth is o u r m o st Im p o rtan t a s s e t. You a ll re m e m b e r the s to ry of the g ra ssh o p p e r and the an t. The g ra s s h o p p e r who w orked so in d u s trio u s ly a ll w in te r long and the a n t— u h — did nothing but lo a f— uh — and fin ally the ant sta rv e d to d eath . Now the m o ra l of th at s to r y is fa irly o b v io u s.— u h — You m ig h t sa y why should the g ra s s h o p p e r help the an t, o r why should y o u — u h — help the p e rso n in d is tr e s s . I think the a n sw e r is r a th e r obvious. We a r e n 't an ts and we a r e n 't g r a s s h o p p e rs. I think th at we have a duty to help each o th e r. I once knew a fam ily th at had sev en c h ild re n . T h is m an w orked in a sh ip y a rd . The — u h — fa th e r of the fam ily got sic k . W here did he go fo r help? He had to go to c h a rity . Now 1 think th at we need a co m p u lso ry sy ste m of h ealth in su ra n c e . The — u h — m any people cannot affo rd a m e d ic a l policy of today. U h — f o r ex am p le, if I should b ecom e ill now I would have to depend on c h a rity . You m ight sa y why not tr y out som e s o r t of — uh — h ealth in su ran c e plan such as B lue C ro s s . T h ese plans do not alw ays w ork. T h e — uh — som e people do not have the m oney to in v e st in th at type of in su ran c e plan. I'd like to ask you w hat is y o u r position? W hat is the p o sitio n of you if you should becom e ill, of y o u r fa m ily , of y o u r loved ones? I firm ly b eliev e th a t we should adopt a s y ste m of co m p u lso ry h ealth in su ra n c e . EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 60 R E E L IV ORDER NO. 2 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at se x ed u catio n should not be tau g h t in high sch o o ls b ecau se such tre a tm e n t of the su b je c t would not be effectiv e in so lv in g the p ro b lem of se x ed u catio n . Now w hat a re m y re a s o n s f o r th is stan d ? In the f ir s t p lace, boys and g irls a r e not m a tu re enough at high sch o o l age to acce p t the advice s e rio u s ly and 237 thoughtfully on such a fo rm a l b a s is as the c la s s ro o m . In the second p la ce , co ed u catio n — in co ed u catio n al sch o o ls it would be d ifficu lt to p ro p e rly and thoroughly p re s e n t the p ro b lem in a m ixed c la s s . G irls e s p e c ia lly would becom e e m b a rra s s e d and p erh ap s in su lted . T h ird ly , the c la s s ro o m is too fo rm a l and too stilte d . An individual’s own p e rso n a l p ro b lem cannot be w orked out w ith e a se and co m fo rt in such an en v iro n m en t. F in a lly , at the p re s e n t tim e the p ro b lem is being so lv ed by p a re n ts and by the c h u rch . M ore and m o re p a re n ts re a liz e th e ir re sp o n sib ility and a re d isc u ssin g p ro b lem s with th e ir c h ild re n . M any ch u rch e s have w eekly le c tu re s and d isc u ssio n s on m a rria g e p ro b le m s . I have show n th a t sex ed u catio n in high sch o o ls would be in effectiv e b ec au se boys and g ir ls a re not m a tu re enough, b ec au se it would be d ifficu lt to p re s e n t the p ro b lem in coeducation sc h o o ls, b e c a u se the c la s s ro o m is too fo rm a l to solve p e rso n a l p ro b le m s. B e sid e s, the p ro b lem is being solved today by the ch u rch and the hom e. EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 62 R E E L IV ORDER NO. 3 I believe m o st s in c e re ly th at the C om m unist p a rty should not be outlaw ed in the U nited S ta te s, b ecau se it would lim it the fre e e x change of id eas and sp eech on w hich o u r co u n try is founded. W hat m ak es th is co u n try g re a t? The re lig io u s, p o litic a l, s o c ia l, eco n o m ic, psy ch o lo g ical fre ed o m th a t we enjoy, th at we take f o r g ran te d . B ut a s s u re d ly , people th at com e fro m fo re ig n c o u n trie s — th a t have been ru led by police s ta te , don’t take th e se fre ed o m s fo r g ran te d . T hey com e to o u r co u n try and they a re am azed at the fre e d o m s w hich we have. T hey enjoy th e se fre e d o m s and th ese lib e rtie s m uch m o re than we do. When a co u n try begins to lim it fre e sp eech and id e a s, I think sh e is on the down g rad e . A h ealth y co u n try does not have to r e s o r t to th is tendency. A stro n g co u n try w ill w ithstand any id eas of th is s o r t, any o rg a n iz atio n th at attem p ts to — uh — in filtra te , to o v erth ro w the 238 g o v ern m en t. A stro n g p lan t cannot be w eakened o r d e stro y e d by in s e c ts . W hat would we acco m p lish if we did outlaw the p a rty ? 1 think nothing. B e cau se it would go u n d erg ro u n d . In fa c t, it m ight m ake it w o rs e . W hen people a re told th ey c a n ’t do so m eth in g fo r som e re a s o n o r o th e r, they s e e m to w ant to do it a ll the m o re . B y outlaw ing the p a rty we m ight get th is ex act re s u lt. A s long a s we a r e a d e m o c ra cy , w h ere the m a jo rity ru le s , w here the g o v ern m en t Is in the hands of the m a jo rity of the people, w here the people have the kind of go v ern m en t th ey w ant, not one th a t is fo rc e d down th e ir th ro a t, we do not need to outlaw the C o m m u n ist p a rty . A law is only effectiv e if th e — uh — m a jo rity of the people w ant it, and as long a s the m a jo rity of the people w ant d e m o c ra c y , we do not have to w o rry about th e C o m m u n ists g ettin g in. We m u st s e t an exam p le of p o litic a l fre ed o m to the r e s t of the w orld. EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 28 R E E L IV ORDER N O ._ 4 _______ I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t la rg e co lleg es a re s u p e rio r to s m a ll co lleg e s f o r ten o r elev en re a s o n s w hich I ’ll lis t now. O ne, the c u ltu ra l ad v an tag es of m e tro p o lita n a r e a s in w hich the la rg e co lleg es a re situ a te d . Tw o, the g r e a te r v a rie ty of c u rric u la o ffe re d . T h re e , the in s tru c to rs a re m o re q ualified due to co m p etitio n fo r h ig h e r paying p o sitio n s. F o u r, m o re o ffered in field s of sp e c ia liz a tio n . F iv e , m o re clo se ly re s e m b le s the so c ie ty in w hich we w ill be living upon g ra d u a tio n . Sixth, we becom e u sed to w orking and liv in g w ith la r g e r n u m b ers of people. Seventh, th e re is le s s chance to becom e en tre n c h ed in only cam p u s w ide id eas and p h ilo so p h ies. E ighth, th e re is m o re o p p o rtu n i tie s fo r e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s to be s u c c e s s fu l due to the n u m b er of stu d e n ts and th e ir v a rie d in te r e s ts . U h — n in e, the chance to a s s o c ia te w ith g rad u ate stu d e n ts; so m eth in g w hich is v e ry often o v erlo o k ed . T en , not so clo se to the p ro b lem s of a d m in istra tio n . I think stu d e n ts a re n o t— u h — co n cern ed , should not be co n cern ed , w ith th ese p ro b le m s, w hich th e y often a re on a s m a ll co lleg e cam p u s. I sp eak w ith so m e e x p e rie n c e , having sp en t two y e a rs in a college w ith five hund red s tu d en ts in the n o rth w est, and m y la s t two y e a rs of u n d erg rad u ate w ork w e re sp en t in a college of se v en ty -fiv e hun d red to eight thousand s tu d e n ts. And only upon com pletion and co m p ariso n have 1 co n firm ed — u h — have I com e to th e se co n v ictio n s. Now le t’s go into the m o st im p o rta n t point, w hich is c h a ra c te r v e rs u s sp e c ia liz a tio n . E x cep t to sa y th a t c h a ra c te r is c e rta in ly not em p h asized in the la r g e r u n iv e rsity , but goes around the field of in te re s t. EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 52 R E E L IV ORDER NO. 5 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s a re not good fo r the av era g e stu d en t, b ec a u se they tend to becom e stro n g and le s s e n the value of the re g u la r c u rric u lu m . Now I would like to em p h asize fro m the o u tse t th a t I ’m not talk in g about the ex cep tio n al, the u n u su al, o r the b rillia n t stu d en t. I ’m talk in g about the av e ra g e s tu d en t. And we m ay ask o u rs e lv e s , “ In w hat w ay a r e e x tra c u r ric u la r a c tiv itie s h arm fu l o r not b e n e fic ia l to the av erag e stu d e n t?’’ F i r s t of a ll, I b eliev e th at the tim e and en e rg y w hich should be expended on b a s ic le a rn in g is d issip a te d on the e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s . In som e c a s e s it m ean s th a t the re g u la r c u rric u lu m is su b o rd in ated to the e x tra s and the a c tiv itie s outside of sch o o l. Secondly, I fe e l th a t th e re is too m uch tim e placed in p ra c tic e and p a rtic ip a tio n on the p a rt of the stu d e n ts. You a r e a ll fa m ilia r w ith the c a se of a th le tic s . You know about the fo o tb all te am th a t spends two o r th re e h o u rs on the p ra c tic e fie ld e v e ry afte rn o o n and then re tu rn s in the evening fo r a chalk ta lk o r a b it of s tra te g y . And then the day of the big gam e a r r iv e s , and they a r e gone fo r fro m a day to a w eek in tra v e l tim e . You’re fa m ilia r with the cam pus m u sic o rg a n iz a tio n s, a ll the tim e th at is put into r e h e a r s a l 24 O 1 and p ra c tic e , and then the trip s away fro m school o n — uh — road tr ip s . A ll of th is ta k es tim e away fro m the re g u la r c la s s e s . F u r th e r m o re I b eliev e th a t the em p h asis is on the w rong thing. The em p h asis is on w inning— th at is the a ll im p o rta n t fa c to r. And so long as o u r team w ins, so long a s — w h eth er it is the debate te a m o r w hether it is the ath letic te a m — th at is the a ll im p o rta n t fa c to r. EX PERIM EN TAL NO. 11 R EEL IV ORDER NO. 6 I b eliev e sin c e re ly th at sex education should be taught in pub lic school b ecau se the lack of it is a g re a t contributing fa c to r to one of o u r m a jo r s o c ia l p ro b lem s. F ir s t of all, b rie fly , I would like to te ll you of som e p e r — p e rso n a l e x p e rien ce s I have had which w ere due at le a s t in p a rt to a lack of sex education. In 1946 I w as asso cia ted with an a rm y se x education tra in in g p ro g ra m . We found am ong o u r groups of eighteen and nineteen y e a r olds who w ere ju s t inducted into the a rm y , th at only about ten p e r cent knew enough about sex , ac c u ra te in fo rm atio n , to see th at they d e a lt p ro p e rly with the situ atio n they w ere involved in. When we told som e of them about sex who didn’t know about it, we had them fain t, we had them a sk qu estio n s which w ere rid icu lo u s to anyone who knew anything about it, and a ll s o rts of things which you could h a rd ly b eliev e. In a Los A ngeles school in th is a re a , la s t y e a r, th e re w ere five fifth g ra d e rs p reg n an t at the end of the s e m e s te r. Now th is is an appalling situ atio n to m e. What is the h arm of th is kind of thinking th at c a u ses th e se situ atio n s? I t’s fa irly obvious in th o se two c a s e s . The so ld ie rs w ere not able to m e et the p ro b lem s, I m ean of the cam p fo llo w ers and so fo rth in th a t situ a tio n — u h — with any in te llig en ce. T h e — u h — fifth g ra d e rs , i t ’s obvious to m e — uh — th at they — u h — shouldn’t have been p regnant at th at age. Now— uh — one m o re added thing, the d iv o rce ra te in C a lifo rn ia is an o th er re s u lt of lack of se x education. 241' EX PER IM EN TA L NO. B R E E L IV ORDER NO. 7 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t th e C o m m u n ist p a rty should not be outlaw ed in the U nited S ta te s, b e c a u se it would co n stitu te a v io latio n of the p re fe rre d g u a ra n te e s of the f ir s t am endm ent of the co n stitu tio n of the U nited S ta te s, due to the ab sen ce of the one c ru c ia l b a r r i e r w hich would ju stify su ch a ste p . And th a t b a r r i e r to w hich I m ake re fe re n c e is the ab sen ce of a c le a r and p re s e n t d a n g e r to the g o v ern m en t of th e U nited S ta te s fro m th at p a rty . T h is d o ctrin e of c le a r and p re s e n t d an g e r w as f i r s t s e t fo rth in 1918 by O liv e r W endell H o lm es, ju stic e of the S uprem e C o u rt of the U nited S ta te s, in the c a se of Shanks v e rs u s the U nited S ta te s , and su b seq u en tly r e ite ra te d in the G etlow v e rs u s New Y ork; and it m a in ta in s th a t th o se who advocate any p ro p o sal w hich v e ry c le a rly on its face is p rlm a facie evidence of the fa c t th a t it do es v io late th e se p re fe rre d g u a ra n te e s , m u st c le a rly show th at it does co n stitu te a c le a r and p re s e n t d an g e r to som e e v il th at the g o v ern m en t has a rig h t to p ro te c t. Now m o st a s s u re d ly the fre ed o m of thought and e x p re s sio n g u aran teed by th is f i r s t am endm ent is not co m p lete lic e n se . B ut in attem p tin g to do aw ay w ith fre e d o m of e x p re s sio n fo r c e rta in p e rso n s we a re faced w ith a d ile m m a , f o r we fin d o u rse lv e s faced w ith th o se who would stand upon the g u a ra n te e s of th is co u n try and advocate th e ir ab o litio n . And we can do e ith e r one of two th in g s. E ith e r le t th em go on in th at advocation, and th e re fo re r is k a p o ssib le th r e a t to th o se p o lic ie s of th is co u n try , o r we can ste p in and in the v e rn a c u la r “ b e a t them to the punch” and do aw ay w ith th o se p a rtic u la r fre e d o m s a s f a r as th o se people a re co n cern ed w ith o u rs e lv e s . And th a t d ile m m a can be solved only by the ap p lica tio n of the c le a r and p re s e n t d a n g e r te s t. T h e re fo re , the c ru c ia l q u estio n c o m e s, does the C o m m u n ist p a rty co n stitu te a c le a r and p re s e n t d an g e r to th is cou n try ? W ith, acco rd in g to the F B I, only a hundred thousand co m m u n ists in th is co u n try , and w ith a com plete and abiding faith in the a b ility of th is 242 co u n try to provide so m any th in g s f o r so m any people, 1 do not fe e l th a t th is p a rty does co n stitu te a c le a r and p re s e n t d a n g e r to th is co u n try , and th e re fo re , 1 b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t th e C o m m u n ist p a rty should not be outlaw ed In the U nited S tates . EX PERIM EN TA L NO. 16 R E E L IV ORDER NO. 8 I b eliev e m o s t s in c e re ly th a t the U nited S tates should not have a sy ste m of u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g , b e c a u s e — b e c a u se it would not m e e t the b a s ic re q u ire m e n ts of m o d e rn w a rfa re . T h at b a s ic r e q u ire m e n t is th a t an a rm y m u st be equipped to fig h t th is m o d e rn w a r fa re w ith m o d e rn w eapons and the know -how to u se th e se m o d ern w eapons. E v e ry m onth we se e new w eapons being se n t o v e r to K o re a — b azo o k as, ta n k s, je t a irp la n e s and r a d a r . B ut we m u st re a liz e th is one b a s ic point, th a t th e se m en in K o rea have to be tak en off the fro n t lin e s and taught how to u se th e se w eapons. Some le a r n fa s t, so m e le a rn slow , but no m a tte r how they le a rn , it a ll ta k e s one valuable th in g , and th a t is tim e — tim e th a t cannot re a lly be s p a re d off the fro n t lin e s of b a ttle . T ro o p s tra in e d t h r e e — u h — two o r th re e y e a rs ag o — u h — cannot even know how to use the w eapons th a t a re in o u r m o d e rn w a r fa re today. W itness the fa c t th a t the N ational G uard r e s e rv e u n its, w hen th ey a r e ac tiv a te d , have to be se n t co m p letely through b a s ic tra in in g once again to le a rn how to u se o u r m o d ern day ta c tic s , w eapons, and e th ic a l conduct in w a r fa re . N ow — b ec au se it cannot m ake th is b a sic re q u ire m e n t— u h — th at of m o d ern w a rfa re needing to have m o d e rn w eapons and the tro o p s to — the know -how to u se th e se w eapons, 1 fe e l th a t the U nited S ta te s should not have th is sy ste m of u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g . The b a s ic p u rp o se of u n iv e rs a l m ilita ry tra in in g is to c re a te a pool of tra in e d m an pow er in c a se of a n atio n al em e rg e n c y . The m an pow er is th e re , but the tra in e d pool would not b e, b ec a u se they w ill have to le a r n a ll o v e r ag ain , ju s t as the m en do now . 243 T ry to c o n je c tu re th is p ic tu re in y o u r m ind, a s o ld ie r fro m W orld W ar I o r ev en W orld W ar II, fighting in K o rea w ith te le v isio n , je ts , and b azo o k as. It sim p ly cannot be done. T h e re fo re , I b eliev e th a t b e c a u se UMT could not m e e t th e re q u ire m e n ts o f— u h — m o d e rn w a rfa re , ire should not adopt it. EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 85 R E E L IV ORDER NO. 9 1 b e liev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s a re not good fo r the a v e ra g e stu d e n t b e c a u se they a re la rg e ly a w aste of tim e . Now o u r sch o o ls w ere not s e t up to be co u n try clu b s and k in d e r g a rte n s . If som eone w ants to go out and play golf o r cu t out p ap e r d o lls , w ell th en th e re a r e p la c e s appointed f o r th a t p u rp o se, b u t it d o e s n 't belong in the sc h o o ls. Now you can go to the YMCA, o r the bow ling a lle y , o r any place you w ant, b u t I think th a t th is kind of a c tiv i ty should be kept out of the sch o o ls f o r a v a rie ty of re a s o n s . In the f i r s t place we a ll know th a t ed u catio n is ex p en siv e, and you and I pay, e ith e r a s ta x p a y e rs o r a s people who foot th e b ill f o r in d iv id u als who m ay go to a p riv a te sch o o l. Now, o u r m oney should not be u sed to buy a lo t of junk like p o s te r p ain ts and lig h ts f o r show s and co stu m es and s o -fo rth , and o u r m oney should not be u sed to pay s u p e rv is o rs f o r th e se k in d e rg a rte n a c tiv itie s w hen the m oney is needed e lse w h e re and not f o r th e se p a rty tim e p lay . We need books and teach in g a id s and th in g s like th a t, and th a t’s w here o u r m oney should be u se d . Now, th e re a re a lo t of s e rio u s stu d e n ts, and e s p e c ia lly GI’s and people like th a t who have had to w ork h a rd , e ith e r to gain e n tra n c e to th e se sc h o o ls, o r have had to w ork h a rd to g et the m oney to go to th em , and th e s e people w ant to g et th e m o st out of th e ir tim e sp e n t, fre e fro m th e se d is tra c tio n s . Now I ’m not say in g th a t the stu d en t involved in th e se e x tr a c u r r ic u la r a c tiv itie s a r e e n tire ly to b la m e . T hey a re la rg e ly b ein g tak en advantage of by the people who sp o n so r th e s e . I ’ve 244' s e e n tim e and tim e a g a in — u h — m any m any s c o re s of stu d e n ts spend tim e on th e se u s e le s s a c tiv itie s , and th ey a re o v e r in two h o u rs — m aybe a show o r so m eth in g . W hat do th ey g et out of it? N othing, a s f a r a s 1 can s e e . And it d o esn ’t c o s t the sch o o l a d im e . T he la b o r is f r e e . Now, w e’ve e s ta b lish e d an u n p a ra lle le d sch o o l sy ste m in th is c o u n try and in o th e r n atio n s throughout the w o rld . L e t’s not tu rn it into a p ra c tic a l n atio n al p lay tim e . Now, I ’m not a g a in st re c re a tio n . I t ’s up to you and I to se e th a t th a t d o esn ’t happen any m o re th a n it a lre a d y h a s . E X PER IM EN TA L NO. 1 R E E L IV ORDER NO. 10 I b eliev e m o st s in c e re ly th at se x education should not be tau g h t in high sch o o l, b ecau se the u n d erly in g assu m p tio n in d ic a te s w hat a p p e a rs to m e to be a b a s ic lack of u n d erstan d in g of the n a tu re of se x and its ed u catio n . F ro m the assu m p tio n it would a p p e a r th a t se x is an ed u cab le su b je c t m uch like h is to ry , geo g rap h y , o r m a th e m a tic s. Sex m ay be ed u cab le, but it a lso is an in s tin c t, and th e re fo re not educable in th e sam e m a n n e r, b u t m u st evolve a s p a rt of the d ev elo p m en t of the in d iv id u al. He cannot be tau g h t sex . He m u st live it a s p a rt of h is d ev elo p m en t. The child should be b ro u g h t up in an a tm o sp h ere in w hich se x is an acce p ted p a rt of h is liv in g , m uch a s any o th e r b a s ic d riv e , e a tin g , sle e p in g , on the one hand, o r w hat we m ight te r m the g re g a r- io u sn e ss of people, th e ir in te rp e rs o n a l re la tio n s h ip s , on the o th e r hand. In th is w ay we s e p a ra te w h at— w hat would a p p e a r to be two Im p o rtan t com ponents of se x e d u c a tio n — the ra tio n a l and em o tio n al com ponents of se x on the one h a n d — the ra tio n a l com ponents of se x on the one hand, pardon m e, and the em o tio n al com ponents on the o th e r hand. O u r p rim a ry co n c ern should be w ith the em o tio n al com ponent. In th is p a r tic u la r way p a re n ta l ed u catio n m u st su p e rse d e th a t of the c h ild re n . In th a t w ay, too, the p a re n t m u st le a rn to ac ce p t th e ir own responsibility 240 of se x ed u catio n . W hen they do th a t th ey ta k e c a re of the e m o tio n a l a s p e c ts of th e se x ed u catio n f o r the c h ild re n , and th a t le a v e s v e ry little to be done on the d id a ctic ed u catio n al le v e l. E X PER IM EN TA L NO. 58 R E E L IV O RD ER NO. 11 I b e liev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t the C o m m u n ist p a rty should be outlaw ed in the U nited S ta te s , b e c au se it te n d s to w eaken o u r m o s t b a s ic p o litic a l b e lie f. Som e two c e n tu rie s ago th is n atio n w as founded on the id e a th a t fre e m en a re capable of governing th e m s e lv e s . T hey b eliev ed th e n , a s we b eliev e now , th a t tru th , when given a ch a n ce , w ill p re v a il. B ut th is does not arg u e any ab so lu te, sla v ish a d h e re n c e to th e se p rin c ip le s . T oday we have law s a g a in st s la n d e r, law s a g a in st lib e l. We have law s th a t sa y you cannot shout “ F i r e ! ” in a crow ded th e a te r. Now th e s e do n o t ab rid g e o r d e s tro y o r deny o u r b a s ic p o liti c a l b e lie fs . Sim ply they a re th e ra tio n a l re a liz a tio n th a t if we a r e to su rv iv e , and c e rta in ly s u rv iv a l is as b a s ic a s d e m o c ra c y its e lf , then we m u st reco g n ize th a t w hen any a c t, o r p e rso n , o r g ro u p , show s its e lf to be b a s ic a lly e v il, th en th is a c t, o r p e rso n , o r group m u st be r e s tric te d . T h is is b ec au se we b e liev e th a t tru th m u st p re v a il, but b ecau se we also re a liz e th a t tru th cannot p re v a il in an a tm o sp h e re of lie s , h y p o c risy , and p ro p ag an d a. J e ffe rs o n sa id th a t the w ill of th e people m u st be re a s o n a b le . L e t us th en in th is q u estio n be re a s o n a b le . L e t u s re a so n a b ly re a liz e th a t we cannot allow th is d a n g e r— th is t h r e a t— to d e s tro y o u r d e m o c ra c y . T h at we m u st not th ro u g h an ab so lu te and u n re a lis tic in te rp re ta tio n of o u r b asic b e lie fs , d e s tro y th o se b a s ic b e lie fs . EX PER IM EN TA L NO. 54 R E E L IV ORDER NO. 12 I b e liev e m o st s in c e re ly th a t o u r s e c u la r sc h o o l s y s te m should be s e p a ra te and d istin c t in in s tru c tio n given th an o u r in stitu tio n s 246 w hich a re a e t up to d e liv e r re lig io u s education. 1 b eliev e th is fo r the follow ing re a s o n s . F i r s t of a ll, o u r te a c h e rs a r e not q ualified to handle re lig io u s ed u catio n . T hink of the trem en d o u s am ount of r e o rie n ta tio n it would take to re -e d u c a te o u r te a c h e rs to be in a place w h ere they could handle su ch a touchy su b je c t as th is . T hink of the c o st, tim e and the tro u b le . U h— even a t b e s t, think of the w rong in te rp re ta tio n s th a t could s till be applied to som e of o u r v e ry p recio u s fa ith s by people who a r e not able to get away fro m th e ir own p e rso n a l b ia s . You can se e in a m om ent w hat th is would do to o u r school s y s tem a s we now know it. Secondly, th is would d isru p t th e unity of o u r c la s s ro o m s . Any te a c h e r knows w ell enough th a t it is h a rd enough today to keep an em o tio n al tone in a c la s s ro o m a s f a r as the psycho lo g ical, in te lle c tu a l, em o tio n al, and o th e r p h ases of teaching a re con ce rn e d . In th is c a s e , o u r feelin g s a re too clo se to the su rfa c e to be h id . T h e re is c e rta in to be fric tio n betw een child and child, betw een child and p a re n t, p a re n t and te a c h e r, child and te a c h e r, and even o th e r p a re n ts and p a re n ts . F in a lly , I b eliev e th is would b rin g in c re a se d p r e s s u r e on m in o rity g ro u p s. We had too m any people today a lre a d y to — a ll too often too con scio u s of the fa c t th a t th ey a re one of a few. So in asm u ch as o u r te a c h e rs a re unqualified, o u r c la s s ro o m unity would p erch an ce be d isru p te d , and th e re would be in c re a se d p re s s u re on m in o ritie s , 1 b eliev e th a t they should be se p a ra te and d istin c t. W hile 1 b eliev e in re lig io u s education, 1 fe e l o u r s e c u la r sch o o ls a re not the p lace fo r it. L et the church be the ch u rch , and le t the school be the sch o o l. RAW DATA: A PPEN D IX L TABULATION O F SPEA K ER BEHAVIOR 1 A PPEN D IX L RAW DATA: TABULATION O F SPEAKER BEHAVIOR O b serv ed C h a ra c te ris tic s of S p eak e rs E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 34-84 Subject L arg e C o lleg es A re S u p erio r Item No. Since re Speech E xp. No. 34 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 84 Change O b serv ed Item No. S in cere Speech Exp. No. 34 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 84 Change O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n s e r. 26 weak weak 2 adult adult 27 none none 3 blond blond 28 none none 4 26” 26” 29 125 132 5 m edium m edium 30 none none 6 som e none som e 31 none none 7 none som e som e 32 often often 8 som e som e 33 som e som e 9 none som e som e 34 none none 10 none none 35 som e som e 11 good good 36 so m e som e 12 poor p oor 37 sam e sam e 13 none none 38 m edium m edium 14 pained pained 39 m edium m edium 15 3 4 -3 1 % 7&~69% 40 av erag e av era g e 16 36-32% 24-21% 41 poor poor 17 40-36% 12-10% 42 poor poor 18 y es y es 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 19 p a rtly p a rtly 44 m uch m uch 20 no yes m uch 45 none none 21 no yes som e 46 1 2 22 m a tu re m a tu re 47 d ire c t d ire c t 23 no no 48 en. en . 24 som e som e 49 no no 25 none none 50 yes yes pu b .sp . = public speaking; en . = en u m eratio n ; P -S = p ro b lem -so lu tio n ; M -s. = m o tiv ated seq u en ce. 248 249 E x p e rim e n ta l N oe. 34-84 Subject L a rg e C o lleg es a r e S u p e rio r S in ce re In sin c e re S in ce re In sin c e re Ite m Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 34 E xp. No. 84 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 34 E xp. No. 84 O b serv ed 51 no no 8 6 no no 52 su m . r e s ta te . som e 87 no no 53 none none 8 8 no yes som e 54 som e som e 89 yes no so m e 55 none none 90 no no 56 som e none som e 91 no no 57 none none 92 no no 58 none none 93 no yes som e 59 so m e som e 94 no no . 60 none som e som e 95 no no 61 none none 96 n e v e r som e so m e 62 so m e som e 97 som e n ev e r som e 63 none none 98 som e som e 64 som e none som e 99 n e v e r som e som e 65 none none 1 0 0 y es y es 6 6 none none 1 0 1 som e som e 67 none none 1 0 2 none som e som e 6 8 som e none som e 103 often often 69 none none 104 n e v e r n e v e r 70 none none 105 seld o m n e v e r som e 71 none none 106 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 107 som e som e 73 yes no som e 108 229 257 74 y es yes 109 8 % 8 % 75 no no 1 1 0 2 % • 00 * 76 no no 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 77 no no 1 1 2 2 0 . 8 21.4 78 no no 113 5 1 2 79 no no 114 44 38 80 no no 115 5 6 81 no no 116 3 3 82 no no 117 3 3 83 no no 118 1 1 1 2 84 no no 119 0 0 85 no no 1 2 0 0 0 25d E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 31-81 Subject R eligious T ra in in g in Schools S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 31 E xp. No. 81 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 31 E xp. No. 81 O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n se r. 31 som e som e 2 old .ad. old .ad. 32 often often 3 d a rk d a rk 33 som e som e 4 25” 25” 34 som e none som e 5 slouch slouch 35 som e som e 6 som e often som e 36 som e som e 7 none none 37 down down 8 none som e som e 38 low low 9 none som e som e 39 m edium m edium 1 0 none none 40 av erag e av erag e 1 1 -------- good 41 m edium m edium 1 2 -------- good 42 poor poor 13 none none 43 o ra to ric o ra to ric 14 s e rio u s se rio u s 44 som e som e 15 26-20% 31-25% 45 none none 16 17-13% 23-18% 46 2 2 17 83-67% 69-56% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 y es yes 48 P -S P -S 19 no no 49 no no 2 0 no no .50 no no 2 1 yes no som e 51 no no 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 appeal a ffirm . som e 23 yes yes 53 none none 24 som e none som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e none som e 27 som e som e 57 none none 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 1 2 0 126 59 som e som e 30 som e som e 60 som e som e 251 E x p e rim e n ta l N oe. 31-81 Subject R elig io u s T ra in in g in Schools S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 31 E xp. No. 81 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 31 E xp. No. 81 O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 none none 92 no no 63 none som e som e 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 often often 67 often som e so m e 97 som e n e v e r so m e 6 8 none none 98 yes seldom m uch 69 none none 99 som e n e v e r som e 70 none none 1 0 0 som e yes som e 71 none none 1 0 1 som e n e v e r som e 72 none none 1 0 2 som e som e 73 no no 103 often often 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no y es som e 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no yes som e 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 som e som e 78 no no 108 253 265 79 no no 109 8 % 1 0 % 80 no no 1 1 0 4% .8 % 81 no no 1 1 1 14 18 82 no no 1 1 2 18 14.7 83 no no 113 6 8 84 no no 114 48 28 85 no no 115 8 13 8 6 no no 116 3 5 87 no no 117 3 0 8 8 no no 118 14 18 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 0 0 252 E x p e rim e n ta l N oe. 17-67 Subject C u ltu ra l T ru in in g in C o lleg es S in ce re In sin c e re S in ce re In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Ite m Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 17 E xp. No. 87 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 17 E xp. No. 67 O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n s e r. 31 often som e som e 2 adult ad u lt 32 often often 3 b lack b lack 33 som e som e 4 25” 25” 34 none none 5 slouch slouch 35 som e som e 6 so m e som e 36 none som e som e 7 som e none so m e 37 down down 8 often som e so m e 38 low low 9 som e none som e 39 poor e x c e ll. m uch 1 0 none none 40 good good 1 1 good good 41 poor poor 1 2 good m ixed som e 42 poor m edium som e 13 som e none som e 43 p u b .sp . pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s s e rio u s 44 m uch m uch 15 40-33% 26-20% 45 som e none som e 16 62-50% 24-18% 46 1 4 17 17-14% 79-61% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 no p a rtly som e 48 en . en. 19 no p a rtly so m e 49 no no 2 0 no y es m uch 50 no yes som e 2 1 no no 51 y es y es 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 none r e s ta te . som e 23 yes y es 53 so m e none som e 24 none none 54 none som e som e 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 none none 27 som e none som e 57 none none 28 so m e som e 58 none none 29 138 1 2 0 59 som e som e 30 often som e som e 60 none none 253 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 17-67 Subject C u ltu ra l T ra in in g In C o lleg es S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 17 E xp. No. 67 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 17 E xp. No. 67 O b serv ed 61 som e none som e 91 no no 62 so m e som e 92 no no 63 none som e som e 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none som e som e 96 som e n e v e r som e 67 none none 97 n e v e r n e v e r 6 8 none none 98 som e yes som e 69 none none 99 n e v e r som e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 yes som e som e 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none som e som e 73 no no 103 often often 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no yes som e 107 som e n e v e r so m e 78 no no 108 285 268 79 no yes som e 109 8 % 1 1 % 80 no no 1 1 0 5% 6 % 81 no no 1 1 1 17 15 82 no no 1 1 2 17 18 83 no no 113 6 6 84 no no 114 27 36 85 no no 115 1 0 9 8 6 no no 116 2 1 87 no no 117 5 5 8 8 no no 118 16 15 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 1 0 254' E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 19-69 Subject U n iv e rsa l M ilita ry T ra in in g S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 19 E xp. No. 69 O b serv ed No. Exp. No. 19 E xp. No. 69 O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n s e r. 31 often som e som e 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 b lack b lack 33 som e often som e 4 28” 28” 34 som e som e 5 rela x ed re la x e d 35 m uch m uch 6 som e none som e 36 none none 7 none som e som e 37 down down 8 som e som e 38 m edium m edium 9 none often m uch 39 e x c e ll. ex c e ll. 1 0 none none 40 good good 1 1 good good 41 e x c e ll. e x c e ll. 1 2 good good 42 e x c e ll. e x c e ll. 13 som e often so m e 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 p le asa n t se rio u s som e 44 none none 15 0 - 0 % 0 - 0 % 45 none none 16 117-100% 114— 100% 46 2 2 17 0 - 0 % 0 - 0 % 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 no no 48 en. en . 19 no no 49 y es yes 2 0 no no 50 no no 2 1 no no 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 ap p eal appeal 23 yes ye« 53 none none 24 som e none som e 54 so m e none som e 25 often often 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e none som e 27 often often 57 som e none som e 28 often often 58 none none 29 150 144 59 none som e som e 30 som e som e 60 none som e so m e 255 E x p erim e n tal N os. 19-89 S ubject U n iv e rsa l M ilita ry T rain in g S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 19 Exp. No. 69 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 19 E xp. No. 69 O b serv ed 61 som e none som e 91 no no 62 som e none som e 92 no no 63 som e som e 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n ev er som e som e 67 none none 97 som e som e 6 8 som e none som e 98 yes y es 69 none none 99 som e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 yes yes 71 none none 1 0 1 n ev e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 often often 74 y es no som e 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r seldom som e 76 no no 106 n ev e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n ev er n ev e r 78 no yes som e 108 289 272 79 yes yes 109 1 2 % 1 0 % 80 yes no som e 1 1 0 4% 2 % 81 no no 1 1 1 14 15 82 no no 1 1 2 2 0 . 6 18 83 no no 113 5 4 84 no no 114 70 74 85 no no 115 1 0 1 1 8 6 no no 116 0 2 87 no no 117 4 3 8 8 no no 118 1 0 14 89 no no 119 0 0 90 yes no som e 1 2 0 4 1 256 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 29-79 Subject E d u catio n al Subsidy S in ce re In s in c e re S in ce re In s in c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E x p . No. 29 E xp. No. 79 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 29 E xp. No. 79 O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n s e r. 31 none none 2 youth youth 32 often often 3 d a rk d a rk 33 none none 4 26” 26” 34 none none 5 m edium m edium 35 som e som e 6 often som e som e 36 som e som e 7 none none 37 sam e sam e 8 none som e som e 38 m edium m edium 9 som e som e 39 m edium m edium 1 0 none none 40 poor poor 1 1 good good 41 e x c e ll. e x c e ll. 1 2 good m ixed so m e 42 m edium m edium 13 none none 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s s e rio u s 44 som e so m e 15 31-26% 35-29% 45 none none 16 1 2 - 1 0 % 16-13% 46 2 2 17 76-63% 70-58% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 p a rtly p a rtly 48 P -S e n . som e 19 no no 49 yes y es 2 0 no no 50 no no 2 1 no no 51 yes y es 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 ap p eal none som e 23 y es y es 53 none none 24 som e som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e som e 27 none none 57 none none 28 so m e som e 58 none none 29 174 174 59 som e som e 30 none none 60 som e none som e 257 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 29-79 Subject E d u catio n al Subsidy S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech C hange No. E xp. No. 29 E xp. No. 79 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 29 E xp. No. 79 O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 none som e som e 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n e v e r som e som e 67 som e none som e 97 som e som e 6 8 none som e som e 98 y es yes 69 none none 99 n e v e r som e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 yes som e som e 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 som e som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n ev e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r seld o m som e 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r som e som e 78 no y es som e 108 341 348 79 y es no som e 109 7% 7% 80 no no 1 1 0 2 % 2 % 81 no no 1 1 1 14 16 82 no no 1 1 2 24.3 2 1 . 8 83 no no 113 9 5 84 no no 114 60 44 85 no no 115 7 1 1 8 6 no no 116 2 3 87 no no 117 5 2 8 8 no no 118 14 16 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 0 0 254 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 30-80 Subject L a rg e C ollege S u p e rio r S in c e re In sin c e re S in ce re In sin c e re Ite m Speech Speech C hange Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 30 E xp. No. 80 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 30 E xp. No. 80 O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n s e r. 31 none som e som e 2 youth youth 32 often often 3 d a rk d ark 33 som e som e 4 27 3/4” 27 3/4” 34 none som e som e 5 m edium m edium 35 som e som e 6 often som e som e 36 m uch som e som e 7 none none 37 down down 8 som e som e 38 m edium m edium 9 som e som e 39 p o o r e x c e ll. m uch 1 0 none none 40 av e ra g e av erag e 1 1 good m ixed som e 41 p o o r poor 1 2 p o o r p oor 42 m edium p o o r som e 13 none none 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s s e rio u s 44 som e som e 15 7-6% 56-51% 45 som e none som e 16 3-2% 3-3% 46 4 1 17 109-91% 50— 46% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 no y es m uch 48 en . en. 19 no p a rtly som e 49 no no 2 0 no no 50 y es no som e 2 1 no no 51 no yes som e 2 2 youthful youthful 52 a ffirm . a ffirm . 23 y es yes 53 som e none som e 24 none none 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 w eak w eak 56 som e som e 27 none none 57 none none 28 none som e so m e 58 none none 29 126 132 59 som e som e 30 none som e som e 60 som e none som e 259 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 30-80 Subject L a rg e C ollege S u p e rio r S in cere In sin c e re S in ce re In sin c e re Item Speech Speech C hange Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 30 E xp. No. 80 O b serv ed N o . E xp. No. 30 E xp. No. 80 O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 som e som e 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 som e som e 67 none none 97 som e n e v e r som e 6 8 som e none som e 98 yes y es 69 none none 99 n e v e r so m e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 y es som e som e 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r som e so m e 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 som e som e 74 no yes som e 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n e v e r 78 no no 108 249 236 79 yes no som e 109 1 1 % 8 % 80 no no 1 1 0 3% 1 % 81 no no 1 1 1 2 1 15 82 no no 1 1 2 1 1 . 8 15.7 83 no no 113 4 7 84 no no 114 27 36 85 no no 115 16 7 8 6 no no 116 0 1 87 no no 117 5 4 8 8 no no 118 2 1 15 89 no no 119 0 0 90 yea no som e 1 2 0 0 0 260) E x p e rim e n ta l N oe. 14-64 Subject R eligious T ra in in g in Schoole S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin ce re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 14 Exp. No. 64 O bserved No. E xp. No. 14 Exp. No. 64 Observe* 1 c o n s e r. co n se r. 31 som e som e 2 old.adult old.adult 32 often often 3 d ark d ark 33 som e som e 4 24 3/4” 24 3/4” 34 none none 5 m edium m edium 35 som e som e 6 som e som e 36 som e som e 7 none none 37 down down 8 none none 38 high high 9 none none 39 ex cell. m edium som e 1 0 none none 40 good good 1 1 -------- -------- 41 ex cell. ex c ell. 1 2 -------- -------- 42 m edium m edium 13 none none 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s s e rio u s 44 som e som e 15 72-59% 71-56% . 45 none none 16 13-11% 1 0 - 8 % 46 1 3 17 37-30% 44-35% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 yes yes 46 P -S en. som e 19 p a rtly p a rtly 49 no yes som e 2 0 yes yes 50 no no 2 1 no no 51 yes no m uch 2 2 m a tu re m atu re 52 none none 23 yes yes 53 none none 24 som e som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 none none 27 none none 57 none none 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 132 150 59 som e som e 30 none som e som e 60 none som e som e 261' E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 14-64 Subject R elig io n s T ra in in g in Schools S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 14 E xp. No. 64 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 14 E xp. No. 64 O b serv ed 61 so m e none som e 91 no no 62 som e som e 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 som e som e 67 som e som e 97 n e v e r n e v e r 6 8 none none 98 som e som e 69 none none 99 n e v e r n e v e r 70 none none 1 0 0 yes yes 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r som e som e 72 none none 1 0 2 som e som e 73 no no 103 often often 74 no no 104 n e v e r seldom som e 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n e v e r 78 no y e s som e 108 265 315 79 no y es som e 109 6 % 4% 80 no no 1 1 0 4% 2 % 81 yes no som e 1 1 1 14 16 82 no no 1 1 2 19 19.8 83 no no 113 5 6 84 no no 114 50 58 85 no no 115 9 9 8 6 no no 116 1 3 87 no no 117 4 4 8 8 no no 118 13 16 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 1 0 262 E x p e rim e n tal N oe. 32-82 Subject C om pulsory H ealth In eu ran ce S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. Exp. No. 32 Exp. No. 82 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 32 Exp. No. 82 O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n se r. 31 som e som e 2 youth youth 32 often often 3 d ark d a rk 33 som e som e 4 25 1/2” 25 1/2” 34 som e som e 5 relax ed rela x ed 35 som e som e 6 som e som e 36 som e som e 7 none none 37 down down 8 often often 38 high high 9 none none 39 e x c ell. m edium som e 1 0 none none 40 av erag e av erag e 1 1 good good 41 ex cell. e x c e ll. 1 2 good m ixed som e 42 poor m edium som e 13 so m e som e 43 co n v er. pub.sp. som e 14 s e rio u s s e rio u s 44 none none 15 19-14% 23-18% 45 none none 16 49-38% 44-36% 46 2 2 17 60— 47% 55-45% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 p a rtly yes som e 48 P -S en. som e 19 no no 49 yes y es 2 0 no no 50 no yes som e 2 1 no no 51 yes yes 2 2 youthful youthful 52 re s ta te . su m m ary som e 23 yes yes 53 none none 24 none som e som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 none none 27 som e som e 57 som e none som e 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 162 180 59 som e som e 30 none none 60 som e som e 263 E x p e rim e n ta l Noa 32-82 Subject C o m p u lso ry H ealth In su ra n ce S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 32 E xp. No. 82 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 32 E xp. No. 82 O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 som e som e 92 no no 63 none none 93 no yes som e 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 som e som e 67 none som e som e 97 som e n e v e r som e 6 8 none none 98 yes yes 69 none none 99 n e v e r n e v e r 70 none none 1 0 0 no no 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r som e som e 72 none none 1 0 2 none som e som e 73 no no 103 som e som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 yes yes 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n ev e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r som e som e 78 no no 108 350 368 79 no no 109 6 % 6 % 80 no no 1 1 0 2 % 3% 81 no no 1 1 1 13 1 1 82 no yes som e 1 1 2 26.9 33.4 83 no no 113 1 1 2 0 84 no no 114 60 52 85 no no 115 6 4 8 6 no no 116 2 5 87 no no 117 5 2 8 8 no no 118 13 1 1 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 0 0 264 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 23-73 Subject U n iv e rsa l M ilita ry T ra in in g S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech C hange Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 23 E xp. No. 73 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 23 E xp. No. 73 O b serv ed 1 m ed .co n .m ed .co n . 31 som e som e 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 b lack b lack 33 som e som e 4 26 3/4” 26 3/4” 34 none som e som e 5 m edium m edium 35 som e som e 6 som e som e 36 none none 7 none none 37 down down 8 som e som e 38 high high 9 often som e som e 39 poor poor 1 0 none none 40 good good 1 1 good good 41 m edium m edium 1 2 m ixed m ixed 42 poor m edium som e 13 none som e som e 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s s e rio u s 44 none none 15 28— 25% 37-30% 45 none none 16 17-16% 4-3% 46 1 1 17 64-59% 81%-66% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 p a rtly no som e 48 en . en. 19 no no 49 no yes som e 2 0 no no 50 no no 2 1 yes yes 51 no no 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 r e s ta te . a ffirm . som e 23 yes yes 53 none none 24 som e som e 54 som e none som e 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 none none 27 som e som e 57 som e none som e 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 114 114 59 som e som e 30 som e som e 60 none som e som e 265 E x p erim e n tal N o b . 23-73 Subject U n iv ersa l M ilitary T ra in in g S in cere In sin ce re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 23 E xp. No. 73 O bserved No. Exp. No. 23 Exp. No. 73 O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 none som e som e 92 no no 63 none som e som e 93 no no 64 none none 94 no yes som e 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 som e som e 67 none none 97 n ev e r n ev er 6 8 none none 98 yes yes 69 none none 99 n ev er som e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 no yes m uch 71 none none 1 0 1 n ev er n ev er 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 often none m uch 74 no no 104 n ev er n ev e r 75 no no 105 n ev e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n ev e r n ev e r 77 no no 107 som e n ev er som e 78 no yes som e 108 224 240 79 no no 109 8 % 9% 80 no no 1 1 0 3% 5% 81 no no 1 1 1 8 1 2 82 no no 1 1 2 28 2 0 83 no no 113 6 5 84 no no 114 53 57 85 no no 115 2 7 8 6 no no 116 2 1 87 no no 117 4 4 8 8 no no 118 8 1 1 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 0 1 266 E x p e rim e n ta l Noe 22-72 Subject T h ird P o litic a l P a r ty S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Ite m Speech Speech C hange No. E xp. No. 2 2 E xp. No. 72 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 2 2 E xp. N o. 72 O b serv ed 1 m ed.con m ed. con. 31 none som e som e 2 youth youth 32 seldom seld o m 3 blond blond 33 som e som e 4 25 1/2” 25 1/2” 34 none none 5 m edium m edium 35 som e som e 6 som e som e 36 none som e som e 7 none som e som e 37 sam e sam e 8 som e som e 38 m edium m edium 9 som e som e 39 e x c e ll. m edium som e 1 0 none som e som e 40 good good 1 1 good good 41 ex c ell. e x c e ll. 1 2 m ixed good som e 42 e x c e ll. m edium som e 13 none som e som e 43 pu b .sp . pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s se rio u s 44 none none 15 13-11% 9-7% 45 none none 16 84-71% 46-40% 46 2 1 17 18-15% 62-53% 47 in d ire c t d ire c t som e 18 p a rtly p a rtly 48 P -S en. som e 19 no no 49 no yes som e 2 0 no no 50 no no 2 1 no yes som e 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 su m m a ry none som e 23 yes yes 53 none none 24 none som e som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 som e none so m e 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e som e 27 none none 57 none none 28 som e often som e 58 none none 29 180 156 59 none som e som e 30 none som e som e 60 som e som e 267 E x p e rim e n ta l N o b . 22-72 Subject T h ird P o litic a l P a r ty S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech C hange Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 2 2 E xp. No. 72 O b serv ed • o fc E xp. No. 2 2 E xp. No. 72 O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 none so m e som e 92 no no 63 so m e none som e 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 som e som e 67 som e none som e 97 som e som e 6 8 none som e so m e 98 y es yes 69 none none 99 n e v e r n e v e r 70 none none 1 0 0 y es y es 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none som e som e 73 no no 103 som e som e 74 no no 104 seld o m seld o m 75 no no 105 n e v e r seld o m som e 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n e v e r 78 no no 108 353 310 79 no yes som e 109 8 % 3% 80 no no 1 1 0 3% 2 % 81 no no 1 1 1 13 13 82 no no 1 1 2 27.1 23.8 83 no no 113 7 1 0 84 no no 114 85 35 85 no no 115 7 3 8 6 no no 116 2 7 87 no no 117 4 3 8 8 no no 118 13 13 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 0 0 268 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 27-77 Subject Sex E d u catio n in S chools S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In s in c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. E xp. No. O b serv ed No. E xp. No. E xp. No. O b serv ed 27 77 27 77 1 m ed.con. m ed.con. 31 often som e som e 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 b lack b lack 33 often often 4 26 1 / 2 ” 26 1 / 2 ” 34 som e som e 5 rela x ed re la x e d 35 m uch m uch 6 som e som e 36 none none 7 som e som e 37 down down 8 often often 38 m edium m edium 9 often often 39 e x c e ll. e x c e ll. 1 0 none none 40 good good 1 1 good good 41 e x c e ll. e x c e ll. 1 2 good good 42 m edium m edium 13 often often 43 co n v er. co n v er. 14 p le asa n t p le asa n t 44 none none 15 3-2% 6-5% 45 none none 16 95-74% 96-82% 46 1 2 17 30-23% 14-12% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 no no 48 en. M -s som e 19 no no 49 y es yes 2 0 no no 50 no no 2 1 no no 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 appeal a ffirm . som e 23 yes yes 53 som e none som e 24 none none 54 none none 25 none som e som e 55 none som e som e 26 stro n g stro n g 56 none none 27 often som e som e 57 none none 28 often often 58 none none 29 126 126 59 som e som e 30 often often 60 none som e som e 269 E x p e rim e n ta l N o b . 27-77 Subject Sex E ducation in Schools Item No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 27 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 77 Change O b serv ed Item No. S in cere Speech Exp. No. 27 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 77 Change O b serv ed 61 som e none som e 91 no no 62 none som e som e 92 no no 63 som e som e 93 yes no som e 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n ev e r som e som e 67 none none 97 som e som e 6 8 none som e som e 98 yes y e s 69 none none 99 n e v e r som e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 no som e som e 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 som e som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n e v e r 78 no no 108 269 270 79 no no 109 1 1 % 1 2 % 80 no no 1 1 0 3% 4% 81 no no 1 1 1 13 1 1 82 no no 1 1 2 20.7 24.5 83 yes yes 113 7 1 0 84 no no 114 30 44 85 no no 115 7 4 8 6 no no 116 2 0 87 no no 117 4 7 8 8 no no 118 13 9 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no yes som e 1 2 0 0 2 270 E x p e rim e n ta l N oe. 13-63 Subject R eligious T ra in in g in Schools S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech C hange No. E xp. No. 13 E xp. No. 63 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 13 E xp. No. 63 O b serv ed 1 m ed .co n . m ed.con. 31 often som e . som e 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 black black 33 often often 4 25” 25” 34 som e som e 5 re la x e d rela x ed 35 m uch m uch 6 som e som e 36 none nont 7 none som e som e 37 down down 8 often often 38 high high 9 often often 39 ex cell. ex c ell. 1 0 none often m uch 40 good good 1 1 good good 41 ex c ell. ex cell. 1 2 good good 42 m edium e x c e ll. som e 13 som e som e 43 co n v er. co n v er. 14 p le a sa n t p le a sa n t 44 none none 15 23-19% 14-11% 45 none none 16 59— 49% 48-38% 46 4 2 17 32-26% 62-50% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 p a rtly p a rtly 48 en. P -S som e 19 no no 49 yes yes 2 0 no no 50 yes yes 2 1 no yes som e 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 none a ffirm . som e 23 yes yes 53 none som e som e 24 none none 54 none none 25 none som e so m e 55 som e none som e 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e som e 27 so m e som e 57 none none 28 often often 58 none none 29 156 150 59 som e som e 30 often often 60 som e none som e 271 E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 13-63 Subject R eligious T ra in in g in Schools S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. E xp. No. O b serv ed No. E xp. No. E xp. No. O b serv ed 13 63 13 63 61 none som e som e 91 y es yes 62 none som e som e 92 y es no som e 63 none som e som e 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n e v e r n e v e r 67 none som e som e 97 som e som e 6 8 som e none som e 98 yes yes 69 none none 99 n e v e r n e v e r 70 none none 1 0 0 y es yes 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r n ev er 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 som e none som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n ev e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n e v e r 78 no no 108 308 316 79 no no 109 1 2 % 9% 80 no no 1 1 0 5% 5% 81 yes no som e 1 1 1 15 16 82 no no 1 1 2 20.5 19 83 no no 113 9 5 84 no no 114 37 43 85 no no 115 7 5 8 6 no no 116 5 5 87 no no 117 3 6 8 8 no no 118 14 1 1 89 no no 119 0 0 90 yes yes 1 2 0 1 5 272 E x p e rim e n ta l N oe. 2-52 Subject E x tr a c u r r ic u la r A ctiv ity S in ce re In sin c e re S in ce re In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 2 E xp. No. 52 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 2 E xp. No. 52 O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n s e r. 31 som e som e 2 o ld .ad u lt old. adult 32 often often 3 d a rk d ark 33 som e none som e 4 27 1/4” 27 1/4” 34 none none 5 m edium m edium 35 so m e som e 6 som e som e 36 som e som e 7 none none 37 down down 8 none none 38 low low 9 som e often som e 39 m edium m edium 1 0 none none 40 good good 1 1 good good 41 ex c e ll. ex c e ll. 1 2 good good 42 medium poor som e 13 so m e none som e 43 p u b .sp . pub.sp. 14 p le a sa n t se rio u s som e 44 som e som e 15 46-38% 36-30% 45 som e som e 16 21-17% 27-22% 46 1 3 17 55— 45% 59-48% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 p a rtly p a rtly 48 en . en. 19 no no 49 yes no som e 2 0 no no 50 y es yes 2 1 no no 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 none none 23 yes yes 53 som e none som e 24 none none 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 none som e som e 27 none som e som e 57 none none 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 1 2 0 144 59 som e som e 30 none none 60 none som e som e 273' E x p e rim e n ta l N o*. 2-52 Subject E x tr a c u r r ic u la r A ctiv ity S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 2 E xp. No. 52 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 2 E xp. No. 52 O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no yes som e 62 none none 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none som e som e 96 som e som e 67 none none 97 som e often som e 6 8 som e som e 98 y es yes 69 none none 99 n e v e r n ev e r 70 none none 1 0 0 yes y es 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 som e som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 som e n e v e r som e 78 no no 108 245 290 79 no no 109 1 0 % 6 % 80 no no 1 1 0 6 % 3% 81 no no 1 1 1 15 15 82 no no 1 1 2 16.3 19 83 no no 113 5 9 84 no no 114 27 33 85 no no 115 9 4 8 6 no no 116 1 4 87 no no 117 5 7 8 8 no no 118 14 15 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 1 0 274 E x p e rim e n ta l No8. 12-62 S ubject O utlaw ing C o m m u n ist P a r ty S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech C hange Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 1 2 E xp. No. 62 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 1 2 E xp. No. 62 O b serv ed 1 m ed.con. m ed.con. 31 som e som e 2 youth youth 32 often often 3 black black 33 som e som e 4 24” 24” 34 none som e som e 5 m edium m edium 35 som e som e 6 som e som e 36 none none 7 none none 37 down down 8 som e often som e 38 m edium m edium 9 often som e so m e 39 m edium m edium 1 0 none none 40 av erag e av era g e 1 1 good good 41 e x c e ll. e x c e ll. 1 2 poor good m uch 42 m edium m edium 13 som e often som e 43 p u b .sp . pub.sp. 14 se rio u s s e rio u s 44 none none 15 16-12% 11-9% 45 none none 16 97-79% 107-86% 46 2 4 17 11-9% 9-7% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 no no 48 P -S en . som e 19 no no 49 no no 2 0 no no 50 no no 2 1 no no 51 som e no som e 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 su m m a ry ap p eal som e 23 yes yes 53 none none 24 none none 54 none som e som e 25 none so m e som e 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e som e 27 som e som e 57 none none 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 138 156 59 som e som e 30 none none 60 som e none som e 279 E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 12-62 Subject O utlaw ing C om m unist P a rty Item No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 1 2 In sin c e re Speech Exp. No. 62 Change O b serv ed Item No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 1 2 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 62 Change O b serv ed 61 so m e som e 91 no no 62 som e none som e 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n e v e r som e som e 67 none none 97 som e none som e 6 8 none som e som e 98 yes yes 69 som e none som e 99 often som e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 yes yes 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 som e som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r seldom som e 75 no no 105 n e v e r n ev e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n ev e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n e v e r 78 no yes som e 108 296 319 79 yes yes 109 8 % 9% 80 no no 1 1 0 6 % 5% 81 no no 1 1 1 13 2 1 82 no no 1 1 2 22.7 15 83 no no 113 4 3 84 no no 114 53 51 85 no no 115 5 13 8 6 no no 116 2 2 87 no no 117 6 5 8 8 no no 118 1 0 19 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 2 2 276 E x p erim e n tal Noa. 1-51 Subject Sex E ducation in Schools Item No. S in cere Speech Exp. No. 1 In sin ce re Speech E xp. No. 51 Change O bserved Item No. S in cere Speech Exp. No. 1 In sin ce re Speech Exp. No. 51 Change O bserved 1 m ed.con. m ed.con. 31 often som e som e 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 black black 33 som e som e 4 25 3/4” 25 3/4” 34 none none 5 stiff stiff 35 som e m uch som e 6 som e som e 36 none none 7 none none 37 down down 8 som e som e 38 low low 9 none none 39 ex cell. m edium som e 1 0 none none 40 av erag e average 1 1 good good 41 poor poor 1 2 m ixed poor som e 42 poor poor 13 none som e som e 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 se rio u s none som e 44 m uch m uch 15 60— 50% 71-67% 45 som e som e 16 2 - 2 % 2 - 2 % 46 1 2 17 58— 48% 33-31% 47 d ire c t in d ire c t som e 18 yes yes 48 en. P -S som e 19 yes yes 49 no no 2 0 yes yes 50 no yes som e 2 1 yes no som e 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m atu re 52 none re s ta te . som e 23 yes yes 53 som e none som e 24 none none 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 weak weak 56 none none 27 none none 57 none som e som e 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 126 138 59 som e som e 30 som e som e 60 none none 27T E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 1-51 S ubject Sex E d u catio n in Schoola Item No. S in ce re Speech E xp. No. 1 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 51 » Change O baerved Item No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 1 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 51 Change O b aerv ed ftl* none + som e som e 91 no no 62 none som e som e 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n e v e r n e v e r 67 none aom e som e 97 n e v e r n e v e r 6 8 none none 98 yes yes 69 none none 99 n e v e r n ev e r 70 none none 1 0 0 yes yes 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r som e som e 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 often often 74 no no 104 n e v e r n ev e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 som e n e v e r som e 78 no no 108 260 248 79 no no 109 7% 9% 80 no no 1 1 0 2% 1 % 81 no no 1 1 1 1 1 15 82 no no 1 1 2 23.5 16.5 83 no no 113 5 8 84 no no 114 47 33 85 no no 115 6 8 8 6 no no 116 3 1 87 no no 117 2 6 8 8 no y es som e 118 1 1 15 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 0 1 278 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 7-57 Subject C o m p u lso ry H ealth In su ra n ce S in ce re In sin c e re S in ce re In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 7 E xp. No. 57 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 7 E xp. No. 57 O b serv ed 1 m ed .co n . m ed .co n . 31 som e som e 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 black b lack 33 som e som e 4 26” 26” 34 none none 5 stiff stiff 35 so m e none som e 6 often often 36 som e none som e 7 none none 37 sam e sam e 8 often often 38 m edium m edium 9 often som e som e 39 poor poor 1 0 none none 40 av erag e av erag e 1 1 po o r m ixed som e 41 m edium poor m uch 1 2 m ixed poor som e 42 m edium m edium 13 som e som e 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s pained som e 44 none none 15 24-20% 9-9% 45 none none 16 62-52% 77-75% 46 2 4 17 32-28% 16-15% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 no no 48 en. en. 19 no no 49 no no 2 0 no no 50 no yes som e 2 1 yes no som e 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 su m m a ry none som e 23 no no 53 none none 24 som e som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 som e none som e 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e som e 27 none none 57 none som e som e 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 132 115 59 none som e som e 30 none som e som e 60 none none 279 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 7-57 Subject C o m p u lso ry H ealth In au ran ce S in ce re In ain c ere S in cere In sin c e re Ite m Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 7 E xp. No. 57 O b aerv ed No. E xp. No. 7 E xp. No. 57 O baerved 61 som e none aom e 91 yea no aom e 62 none aom e aom e 92 yea no som e 63 none none 93 yea no som e 64 none none 94 no y es som e 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n e v e r n e v e r 67 none none 97 often aom e so m e 6 8 som e aom e 98 yea yea 69 none aom e aom e 99 aom e often som e 70 none none 1 0 0 yea yes 71 aom e none aom e 1 0 1 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none aom e aom e 73 no no 103 aom e none aom e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 yea no aom e 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 aom e n e v e r aom e 78 no yea aom e 108 266 198 79 no no 109 14% 1 1 % 80 no no 1 1 0 5% 8 % 81 no no 1 1 1 23 15 82 yea no som e 1 1 2 11.5 13 83 no no 113 6 4 84 no no 114 23 24 85 no no 115 1 2 1 0 8 6 yea no som e 116 3 2 87 yea no so m e 117 8 3 8 8 no no 118 19 15 89 no yea som e 119 0 0 90 yea no som e 1 2 0 4 0 280 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 4-54 Subject R eligious T ra in in g In Schoola S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 4 E xp. No. 54 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 4 E xp. No. 54 O b serv ed 1 m ed.cona . m ed.cons 31 som e so m e ■ 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 d a rk d a rk 33 none som e so m e 4 26 1 / 2 ” 26 1 / 2 ” 34 none none 5 m edium m edium 35 none none 6 often often 36 som e som e 7 none none 37 sam e down som e 8 none none 38 low low 9 none none 39 e x c e ll. ex c ell. 1 0 none none 40 good good 1 1 -------- 41 m edium poor som e 1 2 -------- -------- 42 m edium m edium 13 none none 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s s e rio u s 44 som e som e 15 75-58% 103-85% 45 none none 16 27-21% 7-5% 46 2 3 17 26-20% 11-9% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 p a rtly yes som e 48 P -S en. som e 19 p a rtly y es som e 49 no no 2 0 no no 50 no y es so m e 2 1 no no 51 no yes som e 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 r e s ta te . su m m ary so m e 23 y es yes 53 none none 24 none som e som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 none none 27 none none 57 som e none som e 28 none none 58 none none 29 114 156 59 som e som e 30 none none 60 none som e som e 281 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 4 -5 4 S ubject R eligions T ra in in g in Schools S in cere In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 4 E xp. No. 54 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 4 Exp. No. 54 O b serv ed 61 som e none som e 91 no no 62 som e none som e 92 no no 63 som e none som e 93 y es no som e 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 som e som e 67 none none 97 som e n e v e r so m e 6 8 none none 98 seld o m som e som e 69 none none 99 n e v e r n e v e r 70 none none 1 0 0 y es y es 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r som e som e 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 som e som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n ev e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n e v e r 78 no no 108 303 313 79 no no 109 1 2 % 1 2 % 80 no n o 1 1 0 4% 5% 81 yes yes 1 1 1 17 16 82 no no 1 1 2 17.8 19.5 83 no no 113 5 8 84 no no 114 37 33 85 no no 115 1 1 6 8 6 no no 116 0 1 87 no no 117 6 9 8 8 no yes som e 118 16 16 89 y es no som e 119 0 0 90 yes no som e 1 2 0 1 0 282 E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 6-56 Subject O utlaw ing C om m unist P a rty S in cere In sin ce re S incere In sin ce re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. E xp. No. O bserved No. Exp. No. E xp. No. O bserved 1 c o n s e r. c o n se r. 31 som e som e 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 d ark d a rk 33 often often 4 25 1 /2 " 25 1/2” 34 som e som e 5 rela x ed m edium som e 35 much m uch 6 som e som e 36 none none 7 none none 37 down down 8 often often 38 low low e som e som e 39 ex cell. ex c ell. 10 none none 40 good good n good good 41 ex cell. ex cell. 1 2 m ixed good som e 42 ex cell. m edium som e 13 som e som e 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s se rio u s 44 none none 15 2 - 2 % 11-9% 45 none none 16 13-11% 7-6% 46 1 1 17 101-87% 98-84% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 no no 48 tim e en. som e 19 no no 49 no no 20 no no 50 no no 2 1 no no 51 yes yes 2 2 m atu re m atu re 52 appeal appeal 23 yes yes 53 none none 24 som e som e 54 none som e som e 25 som e som e 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 none none 27 som e som e 57 som e som e 28 often often 58 none none 29 144 126 59 som e som e 30 often often 60 none none 283 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 6-56 Subject O utlaw ing C o m m u n ist P a r ty Item No. S in ce re Speech E xp. No. 6 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 56 C hange O b serv ed Ite m No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 6 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 56 Change O b serv ed 61 often none m uch 91 no no 62 som e none som e 92 no no 63 som e none som e 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 som e som e 67 none som e som e 97 n e v e r som e som e 6 8 none none 98 yes yea 69 none none 99 n e v e r som e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 yes yes 71 none none 1 0 1 n ev e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 som e none som e 73 no y es som e 103 som e som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n e v e r 78 yes no som e 108 279 244 79 no no 109 16% 1 0 % 80 no no 1 1 0 7% 6 % 81 no no 1 1 1 19 13 82 no no 1 1 2 14.6 18.7 83 no no 113 2 8 84 no no 114 37 49 85 no no 115 9 7 8 6 no no 116 0 3 87 no no 117 1 0 3 8 8 no no 118 14 13 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 5 0 284 E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 10-60 Subject Sex E d u catio n in Schools S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re I te m Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 1 0 E x p . No. 60 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 1 0 E xp. No. 60 O b serv ed 1 m ed.con. m ed.con. 31 som e so m e 2 youth youth 32 often often 3 black b lack 33 som e som e 4 25 1/4” 25 1/4” 34 none none 5 m edium m edium 35 som e som e 6 som e som e 36 none so m e som e 7 none none 37 sam e down som e 8 none none 38 m edium m edium 9 som e none som e 39 poor m edium som e 1 0 none none 40 av e ra g e av erag e 1 1 good -------- 41 poor p oor 1 2 poor -------- 42 m edium m edium 13 som e som e 43 pub.sp. p ub.sp. 14 pained pained 44 none som e som e 15 66-53% 48-48% 45 none none 16 55— 45% 0 - 0 % 46 2 1 17 1 - 1 % 52-52% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 yes no som e 48 en. en. 19 p a rtly p a rtly 49 no no 2 0 p a rtly p a rtly 50 no yes som e 2 1 no yes som e 51 yes no som e 2 2 youthful youthful 52 su m m a ry su m m ary 23 no no 53 none none 24 som e som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 none none 27 som e none som e 57 none none 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 138 132 59 som e som e 30 som e none som e 60 none none 289 E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 10-60 Subject Sex E d u catio n in Schools Item No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 1 0 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 60 Change O b serv ed Item No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 1 0 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 60 Change O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 som e none som e 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n e v e r som e som e 67 som e none som e 97 som e n e v e r som e 6 8 som e none som e 98 yes y es 69 none none 99 som e n ev e r som e 70 none none 1 0 0 y es yes 71 none none 1 0 1 n ev e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 often often 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n ev e r n ev e r 77 no no 107 n ev e r som e som e 78 no no 108 279 2 2 1 79 no no 109 14% 7% 80 no no n o .8 % 1 % 81 no no 1 1 1 18 1 2 82 no no 1 1 2 15.5 18.4 83 no no 113 9 8 84 no no 114 41 42 85 no no 115 1 0 1 0 8 6 no no 116 3 1 87 no no 117 5 1 8 8 no no 118 18 1 1 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 0 1 286 E x p e rim e n ta l N oe. 28-78 Subject L arg e C o lleg e s A re S u p e rio r S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 28 E xp. No. 78 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 28 E xp. No. 78 O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n s e r. 31 none none 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 black b lack 33 som e som e 4 26 3/4” 26 3/4” 34 none none 5 re la x e d relax ed 35 som e som e 6 som e som e 36 som e som e 7 none none 37 down down 8 none none 38 m edium m edium 9 none often m uch 39 m edium poor som e 1 0 none none 40 good good 1 1 -------- good 41 p o o r ex c ell. m uch. 1 2 -------- poor 42 poor poor 13 som e som e 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 p le a sa n t pained m uch 44 none none 15 62-50% 27-31% 45 none none 16 15-12% 30-34% 46 1 0 4 17 46-38% 29— 33% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 y es p a rtly som e 48 en. en. 19 p a rtly no som e 49 no no 2 0 no no 50 yes no som e 2 1 no yes som e 51 no no 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 none none 23 yes yes 53 none none 24 none som e som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 weak weak 56 none none 27 none none 57 som e none som e 28 none som e som e 58 none none 29 126 114 59 none som e som e 30 som e none som e 60 none none 287 E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 28-78 Subject L arg e C o lleg es A re S u p erio r Item No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 28 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 78 Change O b serv ed Item No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 28 In s in c e re Speech Exp. No. 78 Change O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 none none 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 often often 67 none none 97 som e n e v e r som e 6 8 none none 98 som e som e 69 none none 99 n ev er som e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 yes yes 71 none none 1 0 1 n ev e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none som e som e 73 no no 103 som e often som e 74 no no 104 n ev e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n ev er n e v e r 78 no no 108 257 167 79 no no 109 6 % 7% 80 no no 1 1 0 3% 1 % 81 no no 1 1 1 16 7 82 no no 1 1 2 16 23.8 83 no no 113 7 9 84 no no 114 40 37 85 no no 115 8 3 8 6 no no 116 3 2 87 no no 117 5 2 8 8 no no 118 16 7 89 no no 119 0 0 90 yes no som e 1 2 0 0 0 288 E x p e rim e n ta l N o b . 5-55 S ubject E x tr a c u r r ic u la r A ctivity Since re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech C hange No. E xp. No. E xp. No. O b serv ed No. E xp. No. E xp. No. O b serv ed 5 55 5 55 1 c o n a e r. c o n s e r. 31 som e none som e 2 youth youth 32 seldom seld o m 3 d a rk d a rk 33 som e som e 4 26 1 / 2 ” 26 1 / 2 ” 34 none som e som e 5 rela x ed rela x ed 35 m uch m uch 6 som e som e 36 none none 7 none som e som e 37 down down 8 som e som e 38 low low 9 often often 39 m edium ex c e ll. som e 1 0 often som e som e 40 good good 1 1 poor m ixed som e 41 poor ex c ell. m uch 1 2 m ixed m ixed 42 poor poor 13 often often 43 co n v er. pub.sp. som e 14 s e rio u s s e rio u s 44 som e m uch som e 15 80-64% 42-35% 45 som e none som e 16 13-10% 46-38% 46 3 1 17 32-25% 32-26% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 yes yes 48 en. en. 19 no no 49 no no 2 0 no no 50 yes yes 2 1 yes yes 51 yes y es 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 su m m a ry appeal som e 23 yes y es 53 som e none som e 24 none none 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e none som e 27 none som e som e 57 none none 28 often often 58 none none 29 156 2 0 1 59 none som e som e 30 none none 60 none som e som e 280 E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 8-55 S ubject E x tr a c u r r ic u la r A ctiv ity S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In s in c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech C hange No. E x p . No. 5 E xp. No. 55 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 5 E xp. No. 55 O b serv ed 61 aom e none som e 91 no no 62 som e none som e 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n e v e r so m e som e 67 none none 97 som e often som e 6 8 none som e som e 98 som e yes som e 69 none som e som e 99 n e v e r often m uch 70 none none 1 0 0 yes som e som e 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 yea n o som e 103 som e som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n ev e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r som e som e 78 no no 108 323 408 79 no no 109 9% 9% 80 no no 1 1 0 3% 4% 81 no no 1 1 1 2 0 18 82 no no 1 1 2 16 2 2 . 6 83 no no 113 3 4 84 no no 114 43 59 85 no no 115 1 0 1 0 8 6 no no 116 4 8 87 no no 117 6 0 8 8 no y es som e 118 16 17 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no y es som e 1 2 0 4 1 290 E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 16-66 Subject U n iv e rsa l M ilita ry T ra in in g S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 16 Exp. No. 6 6 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 16 E xp. No. 6 6 O b serv ed 1 m ed .co n . m ed.con. 31 none aom e som e 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 b lack black 33 som e som e 4 28” 28” 34 none none 5 m edium m edium 35 som e som e 6 often often 36 som e som e 7 none none 37 down down 8 none none 38 m edium m edium 9 often often 39 poor m edium som e 1 0 none none 40 av era g e av era g e 1 1 good good 41 poor p oor 1 2 m ixed m ixed 42 m edium poor som e 13 so m e som e 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 pained se rio u s som e 44 none none 15 3-2% 1 0 - 8 % 45 none none 16 16-13% 14-11% 46 1 3 17 96-77% 104-81% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 no no 48 en. P -S som e 19 no no 49 no no 2 0 no no 50 no no 2 1 no no 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 su m m ary r e s ta te . som e 23 no no 53 none none 24 som e som e 54 none none 25 none none 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e som e 27 none none 57 none none 28 som e som e 58 none none 29 162 174 59 som e som e 30 none none 60 som e none som e 291' E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 16-66 Subject U n iv ereal M ilita ry T ra in in g S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 16 E xp. No. 6 6 O b serv ed No. Exp. No. 16 Exp. No. 6 6 O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 none som e som e 92 no no 63 none som e som e 93 no no 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n ev e r n e v e r 67 som e none som e 97 often often 6 8 som e som e 98 yea y es 69 none none 99 n e v e r n e v e r 70 none none 1 0 0 yes yes 71 none none 1 0 1 n e v e r n ev e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 som e none som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n ev e r seldom som e 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n e v e r 78 no no 108 338 371 79 no yes som e 109 5% 1 0 % 80 no no 1 1 0 2 % 5% 81 no no 1 1 1 13 16 82 no no 1 1 2 26 23 83 no no 113 5 9 84 no no 114 43 58 85 no no 115 5 1 1 8 6 no no 116 4 1 87 no yes som e 117 4 4 8 8 no no 118 13 16 89 no no 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 0 0 292 E x p e rim e n ta l N os. 11-61 Subject Sex E d u catio n in Schools S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E xp. No. 1 1 E xp. No. 61 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 1 1 E xp. No. 61 O b serv ed 1 m ed .co n . m ed . con. 31 som e som e 2 adult adult 32 often often 3 d a rk d a rk 33 often often 4 28 1 / 2 ” 28 1 / 2 ” 34 som e som e 5 re la x e d re la x e d 35 som e m uch som e 6 often often 36 none none 7 none none 37 down down 8 none none 38 m edium m edium 9 som e often som e 39 poor ex c e ll. som e 1 0 none none 40 av e ra g e av erag e 1 1 good good 41 e x c e ll. ex c ell. 1 2 m ixed m ixed 42 p oor poor 13 often often 43 co n v ers co n v e rs. 14 p le a sa n t p le a sa n t 44 none none 15 51— 41% 27-24% 45 none none 16 70-56% 78-70% 46 1 2 17 2 - 1 % 3-3% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 yes p a rtly som e 48 en. en. 19 no no 49 no no 2 0 no no 50 no y es som e 2 1 no no 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 none su m m ary som e 23 yes yes 53 none none 24 none none 54 none none 25 none none 55 som e som e 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e som e 27 none som e som e 57 none none 28 som e often som e 58 none none 29 126 162 59 som e som e 30 som e none som e 60 none none 293 E x p e rim e n ta l N oe. 11-61 Subject Sex E d u catio n in Schoole S in ce re In sin c e re S in ce re In sin c e re Item Speech Speech C hange Item Speech Speech C hange No. E x p . No. 1 1 E xp. No. 61 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 1 1 E xp. No. 61 O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 none som e som e 92 no no 63 none none 93 no no 64 none som e som e 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 som e n e v e r so m e 67 som e none som e 97 often often 6 8 som e som e 98 yes y es 69 none none 99 som e n e v e r som e 70 none none 1 0 0 yes yes 71 som e none som e 1 0 1 n e v e r n e v e r 72 none none 1 0 2 none none 73 no no 103 som e none som e 74 no no 104 n ev e r n e v e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n e v e r 77 no no 107 som e n e v e r som e 78 no no 108 263 296 79 no no 109 8 % 12% 80 no no 1 1 0 4% 4% 81 no no 1 1 1 1 2 14 82 no no 1 1 2 21.9 2 1 83 no yes som e 113 7 6 84 no no 114 42 48 85 no no 115 6 6 8 6 no no 116 2 5 87 no no 117 4 3 8 8 no no 118 1 2 13 89 no no 119 0 0 90 yes no som e 1 2 0 0 1 294' E x p e rim e n ta l N oa. 8-58 Subject O utlaw ing C o m m unist P a r ty S in ce re In sin c e re S in cere In sin c e re Item Speech Speech Change Item Speech Speech Change No. E x p . No. 8 E xp. No. 58 O b serv ed No. E xp. No. 8 E xp. No. 58 O b serv ed 1 c o n s e r. c o n s e r. 31 som e som e 2 youth youth 32 often often 3 blond blond 33 often often 4 25 1/2” 25 1/2” 34 som e som e 5 re la x e d re la x e d 35 som e m uch som e 6 often often 36 som e none som e 7 none som e som e 37 down down 8 often often 38 m edium m edium 9 often often 39 e x c e ll. ex c ell. 1 0 none none 40 good good 1 1 good good 41 ex cell. ex c ell. 1 2 good m ixed som e 42 ex c ell. ex c ell. 13 none som e som e 43 pub.sp. pub.sp. 14 s e rio u s p le asa n t som e 44 none none 15 30-24% 14-10% 45 none none 16 72-58% 65-47% 46 1 2 17 21-17% 59-42% 47 d ire c t d ire c t 18 no no 48 en. en. 19 no no 49 no no 2 0 no no 50 no no 2 1 no yes som e 51 yes yes 2 2 m a tu re m a tu re 52 r e s ta te . su m m a ry som e 23 yes yes 53 none som e som e 24 none none 54 none none 25 som e som e 55 none none 26 stro n g stro n g 56 som e som e 27 som e som e 57 none none 28 often often 58 som e none som e 29 192 162 59 som e som e 30 som e som e 60 none som e som e 295 E x p e rim e n ta l N oe. 8-58 Subject O utlaw ing C o m m u n ist P a r ty Item No. S in cere Speech E x p . No. 8 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 58 C hange O b serv ed Item No. S in cere Speech E xp. No. 8 In sin c e re Speech E xp. No. 58 Change O b serv ed 61 none none 91 no no 62 none som e som e 92 no no 63 none som e som e 93 ye« yes 64 none none 94 no no 65 none none 95 no no 6 6 none none 96 n e v e r som e som e 67 som e none som e 97 som e n ev e r som e 6 8 som e none som e 98 som e som e 69 none none 99 n e v e r som e som e 70 none none 1 0 0 no som e so m e 71 none none 1 0 1 som e som e 72 none none 1 0 2 som e som e 73 no no 103 so m e often som e 74 no no 104 n e v e r n ev e r 75 no no 105 n e v e r n e v e r 76 no no 106 n e v e r n ev e r 77 no no 107 n e v e r n ev e r 78 yes no som e 108 394 378 79 no no 109 5% 4% 80 no no 1 1 0 2 % 2 % 81 no no 1 1 1 1 0 8 82 no no 1 1 2 39 47.2 83 no no 113 9 1 0 84 no yes som e 114 97 1 0 1 85 yes yes 115 3 1 8 6 no no 116 6 1 87 no no 117 1 6 8 8 no no 118 9 8 89 yes no som e 119 0 0 90 no no 1 2 0 1 0

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A Historical Study Of Speech Education At The University Of Southern California (1880 Through 1950)

PDF

An Experimental Study Of The Influence Of Subliminal Cue Words On Audience Responses To A Filmed Speaker'S Sincerity, Effectiveness, And Subject Matter

PDF

An Experimental Application Of 'Cloze' Procedure As A Diagnostic Test Of Listening Comprehension Among Foreign Students

PDF

An Empirical Study Of Self-Feedback During Speech Communication

PDF

A Historical Study Of The Characteristics Of Acting During The Restoration Period In England (1660-1710)

PDF

An Experimental Study Of Effects Of Interest And Authority Upon Understanding Of Broadcast Information

PDF

An Experimental Study Of The Retention And Comprehension Of Poetry Resulting From Silent Reading And From Oral Interpretation

PDF

An Analytical-Historical Study Of The Factors Contributing To The Successof Mark Twain As An Oral Interpreter

PDF

Critical Study Of The Nominating Speeches At The Democratic And Republican National Conventions Of 1960

PDF

An Experimental Study Of The Effect Of Listener Feedback On Speaker Attitude

PDF

An Experimental Study Of The Accuracy Of Experienced And Inexperienced Speakers In Identifying Audience Behavior As Indicative Of Feelings Of Agreement, Indecision, Or Disagreement

PDF

A Survey And Analysis Of Current Attitudes Toward Censorship Of The Legitimate Theatre In The United States

PDF

A Historical Study Of The Speechmaking At The Abilene Christian College Lectureship, 1918-1961

PDF

A Historical Study Of The Belasco Theatre In Los Angeles And The Forces That Shaped Its History: 1927-1933

PDF

A Historical Study Of Gilmor Brown'S Fairoaks Playbox: 1924-1927

PDF

An Experimental Comparison Of Spoken Communication Developed Individually and Interindividually

PDF

A Historical Study Of Oral Interpretation In London, 1951-1962 As A Form Of Professional Theatre

PDF

An Experimental Study Of An Application Of Game Theory To The Selection Of Arguments By College Debaters

PDF

Becket's chameleon character: an analytical study of the universal appeal of Thomas Becket's dramatic character

PDF

A Comparative Study Of Acting And Oral Interpretation Theory And Practiceas Revealed In Selected American College Texts: 1900-1970

Asset Metadata

Creator Wills, John William (author)

Core Title An Empirical Study Of The Behavioral Characteristics Of Sincere And Insincere Speakers

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Speech

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,Theater

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Dickens, Milton (committee chair), Butler, James H. (committee member), McCoard, William B. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-93827

Unique identifier UC11357926

Identifier 6101711.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-93827 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6101711.pdf

Dmrecord 93827

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Wills, John William

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA