It’s amazing how a single, coordinating conjunction can impact our behavior and thinking. To a surprising degree, the majority of people don’t realize the power of this single word. Once that conjunction is pronounced or written, they become putty in the hands of the user. Indeed, a single word can be used to persuade us, even against our interests, through what Edward Bernays, the founder of public relations, called the “engineering of consent.”
How does a single word gain such power over us? Simple. Our memories are faulty. Our perceptions are partial or biased. Our interpretations of the same events differ. And we draw differing conclusions from experiences. Because of these limitations, we are vulnerable and open to the word of another. A single word exploits our faulty memories, our limited perceptions, our prejudices, inferences and predictions. Understanding how this term can slip up on you will help you avoid work fears, show you how to turn a conversation around, give balance to your understanding of important financial or political matters and think more critically about what’s going on.
I’m not referring to that overly familiar, favorite four letter “f . . . “ expletive that displays the limits of dumb, movie-action characters’ gray matter. Instead, I’m referring to that single, damnable, three-letter conjunction, “but.”
Think I’m making too much out of a conjunction? Here’s an exercise for you. Finish each sentence after the conjunction but with your own experiences or ideas and then analyze your emotions from that test.
You did a good job, but. . .
I’d like to go out with you, but. . .
The President’s new health care policy is a start, but. . .
It’s a possible strategy, but. . .
Newt Gingrich is very intelligent, but. . .
Jean can usually be counted on to support you, but. . .
Some meanings
The conjunction has a storied background, coming out of the Old English, the Old High German and even the Old Norse. As language has evolved, the word takes on two related meanings. First, it’s a quick way to say that something is true (or not true), except for the fact. . . “You did a good job on this project, but it really lacks pizzaz.”
The conjunction also is used in opposition to a first statement. “Your broker acts as though he’s really very smart, but his results don’t support that.” “The defendant is innocent, but pleads guilty to avoid the risk of greater punishment.” Both definitions show how the conjunction creates a conflict, qualifying and reframing the previous statement by placing limitations upon the initial sentence substance.
Persuasion strategy
As I’ve described the approach to using the conjunction, the persuasion process is a form of what we call sequential persuasion. When applied to sales, it’s a sneaky way of getting your foot into the doorway. Some salespeople mention your neighbors by name, some ask for a glass of water, or some promise they’re not going to try to sell you anything.
When the sequential model is applied to our conjunction situation, it’s compressed into a single sentence. It begins with a statement that you may agree or disagree with, disrupts that statement and then reframes the issue. Journalists, of course, can’t focus on the individual. So they make a widely recognized statement, disrupt it with the conjunction, and then reframe the issue.
A page of Jeff Pfeffer’s book, Power, happened to be open as I was writing. He summarizes his first chapter with a blatant use of the power of disruption by conjunction and reframing. He argues that power and influence entail doing a good job and making certain those in power notice you, “but performance by itself is seldom sufficient, and in some instances, may not even be necessary.”
Extensive research supports this process. In a series of studies, Davis and Knowles (1999) researched different methods for the sale of Christmas cards sold by a charitable organization. Sometimes the experimenter would include a subtle error, such as “the price is 300 pennies. . . I mean 3 dollars.” Informing the participants the cards are a bargain increased the likelihood of purchases, but only if the statement followed the reference to 300 pennies. In fact, this slip virtually doubled sales in some situations.
Ferris, Das and Pruyn (2004) also verified the worthwhileness of this technique. Furthermore, they found that technique often amplified its benefits. In study after study, confusion techniques have been shown to distract attention from the earlier statement. Additional research dating from as late as 2007 found that disruption techniques are exceptionally successful in changing attitudes. The disrupt/reframe approach cultivates a more candid, trusting relationship. In general, people like to demonstrate they are consistent over time and, therefore, like to acquiesce to subsequent information or demands. In short, the disrupt-then-reframe tactic diverts people from resisting the new idea or request.
More than awareness
It’s obviously important to learn about persuasion because it enhances your own knowledge and awareness of the various processes. Knowledge is power, as they say.
More significantly, learning how the conjunction but and the disruption/reframe techniques work serves a defensive function. I say this with full awareness that people tend to underestimate the influence of persuasion on themselves and overestimate its effects on others, a process known as the third-person effect. Thus, you may be more defenseless than you realize.
When the strategy is being used on you, put your brain in gear. One strategy is to go back to the first clause of the sentence and deal with it before you get suckered by the disrupt/reframe technique.
Take one of the sentences from above where your boss tells you, “You did a good job on this project, but I need more timeliness in the future.” Thank your boss for the feedback, and go back to the first clause. “I recognize the project was late, but what, specifically, was especially effective on this project?” You’re after more information, but you’re also disrupting your boss’s agenda. Get him to discuss your fine work, perhaps even explaining why the work took more time than anticipated or the number of priorities you’re dealing with. And then go back to the subject of timeliness, apologizing, and checking with him and his priorities procedures, all of which involve the timeliness issue. (Notice that I used disruption/reframing to deal with another’s disruption/reframing.)
When I encounter the technique in the statements of journalists or pundits regarding a subject of interest to me, the bells go off. My thinking goes to the entire subject, not merely the reframing. That approach to critical thinking is highly informative, enabling me to be more accurate in both my thinking and decision making.
The conjunction is frustrating because it often catches you off guard. Confusing, because you have to handle multiple ideas simultaneously. And dangerous, because it’s a persuasive strategy designed to lead you astray.
The conjunction but belongs to the same category of language as the well understood by the way (BTW). They’re both signals that we need to watch very carefully.
Photo: Flickr.com, Canadian