Abstract
Research on persuasive writing has investigated writing quality but has not fully considered students’ perceptions of writing and of the language used in persuasive writing. Essentialist language – including words like “always,” “every,” and “prove” – insists on one explanation, ruling out other possibilities and making for poorer-quality, one-sided arguments. In Study 1, undergraduates provided characteristics they believed were important to writing and listed rhetorical indicators of those characteristics. Analysis revealed students identified essentialist-related characteristics (e.g., one-sidedness, inclusion of other viewpoints) as related to writing persuasiveness. Study 2 investigated students’ actual reactions to essentialist language. Participants read pairs of writing samples (one with essentialist language, one non-essentialist), indicated which was better and why, and rated each sample’s persuasiveness. Results revealed no difference in how often students chose essentialist samples or non-essentialist samples as better, although different reasons were associated with essentialist and non-essentialist choices. Students who preferred non-essentialist writing rated it as more persuasive, but students with essentialist or no preference rated the persuasiveness of essentialist and non-essentialist samples similarly. These results support the notion that many undergraduates fail to consistently adjust their judgments of essentialist writing to align with a reported awareness of the essentialism-persuasiveness relationship.
- Journal
- Journal of Writing Research
- Published
- 2018-02-01
- DOI
- 10.17239/jowr-2018.09.03.03
- CompPile
- Open Access
- OA PDF Diamond
- Topics
- Export
- BibTeX RIS
Citation Context
Cited by in this index (0)
No articles in this index cite this work.
References (0)
No references on file for this article.
Related Articles
-
Computers and Composition Jun 2026Navigating platform algorithms: Global south feminist activists’ rhetorical and composition practices in digital advocacy on social media ↗Kalpana Shrestha
-
Computers and Composition Jun 2026Legacies, commitments, and new challenges: The Sweetland Digital Rhetoric Collaborative interviews three generations of Computers and Composition editors ↗Ali Alalem; Alyse Campbell; Thais Rodrigues Cons; Funmilola Fadairo; Nicole Koyuki Golden
-
Computers and Composition Jun 2026How Baldwin's voice moved Cambridge: Activation contours, mimesis, and a computational approach to rhetoric's sensorium ↗David M. Rieder; Michael R. Jackson
-
Written Communication May 2026Rebecca Lorimer Leonard; Angela Rounsaville
-
Business and Professional Communication Quarterly May 2026Joe Edward Hatfield