Convictive Communication and Persuasive Communication

Vlăduţescu, Ştefan

doi:10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.26.164

ILSHS > Volume 26 > Convictive Communication and Persuasive...

< Back to Volume

Convictive Communication and Persuasive Communication

Removed due to low scientific level

Full Text PDF

Abstract:

The study starts from the identification of the discourses and conversations ongoing existence of two ways of communication processes. On the one hand, some processes are structured by concatenating rational arguments; arguments are often natural logic and occasionally may be of formal logic. On the other hand, other processes are directed and developed communication based on emotional arguments. In relation to the type of arguments that are used in communication delimit two types of communication: convictive communication and persuasive communication. The two types are found rarely in pure configuration. In the current communication the two intersect. Convictive or persuasive character of a statement is given by the predominance of one or other type of arguments.

Info:

Periodical:

International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences (Volume 26)

Pages:

164-170

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.26.164

Citation:

Ş. Vlăduţescu, "Convictive Communication and Persuasive Communication", International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, Vol. 26, pp. 164-170, 2014

Online since:

April 2014

Authors:

Ştefan Vlăduţescu

Keywords:

Communication, Convictive Communication, Persuasive Communication

Export:

RIS, BibTeX, Text

Distribution:

Open Access

This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References:

[1] D. Newsom, B. Carrell (2004). Redactarea materialelor de relaţii publice. Iaşi: Editura Polirom.

[2] S. Cojocaru (2005). Metode apreciative in asistenta sociala. Ancheta, supervizarea si managementul de caz. Polirom, Iasi.

[3] R. Berger (1976). Artă şi comunicare. Bucureşti: Editura Meridiane.

[4] A. Borowski, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 14 (2014) 7-17.

[5] DEX (1996). Bucureşti: Editura Univers Enciclopedic.

[6] V. Florescu (1973). Retorica şi Neoretorica. Bucureşti: Editura Academiei.

[7] V. Tonoiu (1997). Dialog filosofic şi filosofie a dialogului. Bucureşti: Editura Ştiinţifică.

[8] C. Perelman (1977). L'Empire rhétorique. Paris: Vrin.

[9] Paul Dobrescu, Alina Bârgăoanu (2003). Mass media şi societatea. Editura Comunicare.ro, Bucureşti.

[10] A. Borowski, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 11 (2014) 1-168.

[11] C. Daremberg, E. Saglio (1892). Dictionnaire des antiquites grecques et romaines. Paris: Hachette.

[12] V. Tabără (2012). Dezvoltarea capacităţii administrative. Bucureşti: Editura CH Beck.

[13] D. C. Balaban (2005). Comunicare publicitară. Cluj-Napoca: Accent.

[14] R. Barker (2012). Social networking and identity, Chapter in: The Handbook of Research on Technoself: Identity in a Technological Society. IGI-Global (www.igi-global.com/ijt).

[15] M. Sălcudean (2009). Tudor Arghezi: discursul polemic. Iaşi: Institutul European.

[16] D. Arpinte, S. Cace, S. Cojocaru, Revista de cercetare şi intervenţie socială 31 (2010) 77-85.

[17] Ion Dur, Studii de istorie a filosofiei româneşti 8 (2012) 57-71.

[18] D. Cojocaru, S. Cace, C. Gavrilovici, Journal for the Study of Religions & Ideologies, 12(34) (2013).

[19] S. Cace, D. Arpinte, C. Cace, S. Cojocaru, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences 33E (2011) 49-66.

[20] D. D. Dănişor, Agora International Journal of Juridical Sciences 7(4) (2013).

[21] D. Cojocaru, Revista de Cercetare şi Intervenţie Socială 38 (2012) 122-131.

[22] A. Pintea (2013). Intertextuality, Dialogism and the Social Construction of Journalistic Discourse. Studia Universitatis Petru Maior.

[23] S. Frunză (2011). Comunicare etică şi responsabilitate socială. Bucureşti: Tritonic.

[24] R. Barker, The Journal of Management and World Business Research 6(1) (2009).

[25] Marioara Avram, Aurelia Traistaru (2014). A computational line of comprehension of account. International.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ilshs.24.79

[26] Maior, G. C. (2009). Istoricism, legalism şi teoretizare în studiul intelligence-ului- ditorial. Revista Română de Studii de Intelligence.

[27] Ion Dur, Studii de istorie a filosofiei româneşti 9 (2013) 86-105.

[28] Marian Siminică, Aurelia Traistaru, International Journal of Education and Research, 1(12) (2013).

[29] Sandu Frunza, Revista de cercetare şi intervenţie socială 31 (2011) 155-171.

[30] S. Frunză, Revista de cercetare şi intervenţie socială 33 (2011) 178-196.

[31] J. Grabara, P. Bosun, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 14 (2014) 59-65.

[32] G. C. Angelopulo, R. Barker (2013). Integrated Organisational Communication. 2nd Edition. Cape Town: Juta.

[33] S. Frunză (2013). Ethical Communication and Social Responsibility. LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.

[34] C. Gavrilovici, L. Oprea, Revista Română de Bioetică 11(3) (2013) 3-5.

[35] N. Gavriluţă (2003). Fractalii şi timpul social. Cluja-Napoca: Dacia.

[36] A. Borowski, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 14 (2014) 33- 41.

[37] V. Modrak, P. Bosun, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 14 (2014) 66-72.

[38] N. Gavriluţă (2009). Antropologie socială şi culturală. Polirom.

[39] A. Borowski, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 2 (2014) 110-121.

[40] Colhon M. (2009). Hierarchical Distibuted Systems Based on Semantic Schemas. The 9th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Digital Communications, (2009).

[41] Sandu Frunză (2014). Advertising and Administration under the Pressure of Ethics. Les Arcs: Editions de la Suers.

[42] A. Borowski, International Letters of Socia and Humanistic Sciences 2 (2014) 110-121.

[43] A. Borowski, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 3 (2013) 46-53.

[44] Rajesh K. Yadav, Nishant Dabhade, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 4 (2013) 49-69.

[45] Jacek Tittenbrun, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 11 (2013) 10-34.

[46] Ștefan Vlăduțescu, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 10(2) (2014) 100-106.

[47] Gorun A. coordonator, Jinaru Aron, Niculescu George, Caragea Alexandru, Caragea Smaranda (2010). Recadrări transdisciplinare. Un demers focalizat pe cercetarea antreprenorială în turismul cultural. Editura Academica Brâncuşi, Târgu-Jiu.

[48] Ion Grosu, Intelligence 6(16) (2009) 3-4.

[49] A. P. Olimid (2009). Politică românească după 1989. Craiova: Aius.

[50] P. J. Fourie (Ed.) (2010). Media studies: media history, media and society (Vol. 2). Juta and Company Ltd.

[51] L. Oprea, Revista Română de Bioetică 7(2) (2009) 57-70.

[52] P. J. Fourie (Ed.) (2009). Media studies: media content and media audiences: Volume 3. Cape Town: Juta.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/ajs.30.2.253

[53] L. B. Vlad, F. Coldea (2011). Symmetry and Asymmetry in International Relations. Impact Strategic.

[54] A. Sandu, D. Cojocaru, C. Gavrilovici, L. Oprea, Revista Romana De Bioetica 11(1) (2013).

[55] M. N. Turliuc, M. Marici, Revista de Cercetare şi Intervenţie Socială 42 (2013) 28-49.

[56] E. Unguru, (2010). Features of lie in verbal and nonverbal communication/ Trăsături ale minciunii în comunicarea verbală şi non-verbală. Postmodern Openings.

[57] P. Dobrescu, A. Bârgăoanu (2001). Geopolitica. Fac. de Comunicare şi Relaţii Publice" David Ogilvy.

[58] S. Yoshimi, D. Buist, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 4(3) (2003) 433-450.

[59] S. Sonderling, 2001. Media and language, in P. J. Fourie (Ed.) Media studies Volume 2: Content, audiences and production. Cape Town: Juta.

[60] S. Sonderling (2001). Media and ideology, in P. J. Fourie (Ed.), Media studies Volume 1: Institutions, theories and issues. Cape Town: Juta.

[61] Marioara Avram, Aurelia Traistaru, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 13 (2014) 79-88.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ilshs.24.79

[62] R. Barker (2003). Connecting to culture, Chapter in: Strategic organizational communication: paradigms and paradoxes. Heinemann: Sandown.

[63] J. Popova (2005). Organizational communication. Ruse.

[64] W. Louw, World 25 (2005) 28.

[65] A. Borowski, International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences 3 (2013) 69-74. ( Received 13 April 2014; accepted 19 April 2014 ).

Show More Hide

Cited By:

[1] A. (Frunză), A. Sandu, "Epistemic and Pragmatic Backgrounds of Supervision of Ethics", Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 149, p. 142, 2014

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.08.178

[2] M. Reza Hosseini, M. Maghrebi, N. Chileshe, S. Travis Waller, "An Investigation into the Perceived Quality of Communications in Dispersed Construction Project Teams", Construction Research Congress 2016, p. 1813, 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784479827.181