Identifying Effect on Reader

Purpose

💡

As part of each of these modules, there will be a purpose that connects back to VCE English.

Effect on reader is pretty much the reason why students study Argument Analysis - to learn this properly is quite important. Don’t mistake this for what readers WILL react with, but rather what readers MAY think/feel/react with after reading a persuasive technique. This means that the Effect on reader ties closely with the persuasive techniques used.

Post-Module Learnings

💡

Following this module, these are the following skills you should have.

I am able to define what the intended effect on reader means.

I am able to identify specific target audience for a persuasive technique.

I am able to determine what the difference between the intended effect on reader is in terms of what they may think, feel or react with.

Content

Definition of Effect on Reader

This is the most important element of Argument Analysis - so it’s important you understand how it works, and the different types of effect on reader.

❓

The intended effect on reader refers to what the author may want readers to think, feel or react with after they have read/been exposed to a persuasive technique.

It is important that you can break down this definition into its individual components, and then from there be able to unpack exactly what it means.

Let’s do so.

The Intended Effect

First thing to note is that the effect on reader is only the ‘intended’ effect. We don’t know whether or not a reader will ACTUALLY have a certain reaction, only that it is probably what the author intended.

What does this mean in practise?

When you are writing your intended effect on reader, you need to avoid being definitive in your phrasing. We need to be more measured, and propose what readers may react with, not what they WILL definitely, 100% feel.

E.g. AVOID this: The reader WILL feel sad… OR The reader MUST be angry… OR The reader IS happy.
E.g. DO this: Readers MAY feel… OR Readers are LIKELY to feel… OR Readers are PROMPTED to believe …

When you are mentioning the intended effect, it is okay to be unsure if it’s actually to be what the author wants. For example, let’s say you read a persuasive technique and you’re unsure whether it’s supposed to make readers feel angry or happy, don’t panic, just go with more moderate wording.

E.g. AVOID this: Readers are extremely angry or depressed… instead make it a bit more passive, readers are likely to feel disappointed.

Structure of an Analysis of a Technique + Effect on Reader

Think, Feel or React

This is extremely important to understand and unpack to be able to actually analyse correctly in Argument Analysis. For many students, they struggle with breaking down what the different types of ‘effects’ there are.

What a reader may think

How a reader may feel

How a reader may react

Normally speaking, it is good to have a mix of these three types of effect on reader for your own analysis. This is the part that most students struggle with.

❓

Students tend to focus on just one of the three, generally the ‘FEEL’, and end up in a situation where they repeat similar ‘FEELs’ each time they mention effect on reader.

It’s important that you understand what each of the three above mean.

Think

This refers to how readers may have a new understanding or belief after reading a sentence/article.

For example, especially after including a statistic or expert opinion, it is common for readers to re-evaluate what they previously knew, and have a new perspective.

This is what think refers to, how a reader’s perspective or perception has changed after being exposed to a persuasive technique.

E.g. The crypto ownership rate in Australia is 17%, which is higher than the global average of 15%. [Source: Finder]

After reading the statistic above, it is likely a reader is going to now believe that cryptocurrencies are a lot bigger in Australia than one might first imagine.

Feel

This refers to how readers may have a new feeling or emotion after reading a sentence/article. As with most advice with Argument Analysis, try not to go overboard when describing the emotion, avoid emotions that are extremely strong (e.g. furious or exuberant, try and stick with words that are more moderate).

For example, especially after an appeal to family/wellbeing or some sort of inclusive language, or you heard an anecdote from a writer, it is common for readers to have a new emotion, strengthened emotions around a certain situation.

E.g. “I wanted to get to $500,000 (£414,000), then take half out. I had over $300,000 around Christmas,” Duncan says (cryptocurrencies). However, speaking from his home in Edinburgh, he confesses to having lost almost all of it in the recent digital assets market rout. He is left with a portfolio worth (at the time of writing) about £4,000 – a fraction of the estimated £40,000 he poured in. He remains sanguine: “I’ve got friends who have lost eight-figure sums of money.”

This is what feel refers to, how a reader may develop new or stronger feelings after being exposed to a persuasive technique.

React

This refers to how readers may be pushed or prompted to have some sort of reaction (in terms of an action they should take) after reading a sentence/article. This one is the hardest to define, so I’ll try and give some practical examples in terms of what this actually means.

Readers may be prompted to speak out, or help spread the word, or denounce/challenge a belief.

This is what react refers to, how a reader may be prompted to take some sort of action or stand.

Just make sure you understand every effect on reader is based on a persuasive technique. The problem is when students believe that persuasive techniques have to have an obvious, clear name for the technique (e.g. rhetorical question, statistic).

Most students are (wrongly) taught that the way to analyse a persuasive technique is by name-dropping, e.g. ‘the use of rhetorical question OR statistics’. Remember, this is important, it is NOT the name of the technique that is convincing, but rather the words used within the technique.

Just because something is a rhetorical question DOES NOT make it convincing, you really need to analyse the specific words within the rhetorical question for it to make sense. This is the element/aspect that a lot of students forget in Argument Analysis. It’s not convincing because of the name of the technique, but rather the words within the technique.

It is not the name of the persuasive technique that makes a technique convincing. Don’t just analyse the name of the technique.

Putting it Together

The key to good writing in Argument Analysis, is in following the steps I have outlined below. If you can do that, then you will easily be able to analyse a strong persuasive technique and effect on reader.

You need to use the
📼
Identifying Basic Persuasive Techniques in order to select a Persuasive Technique to analyse. Generally speaking, whatever technique you find, you should make sure it links to the Support, Condemn, Victim, Solution structure that you have found for the first Body Paragraph.

With the Persuasive Technique, make sure you can analyse a specific word or phrase within the technique itself, try to avoid just finding an obvious technique because it was easy to find.

When analysing the intended effect on reader, ensure that you can choose two of the three types at least, think, feel or react, choose TWO out of the three at least.

❓

I would usually recommend spending 2-3 sentences analysing a persuasive technique, rather than just one.

The usual structure follows one of the three structures below:

The two sentence standard analysis. In this one, you basically spend two sentences analysing a Persuasive Technique, the first sentence is usually dedicated on introducing the technique with a little bit of Effect on Reader, while the second sentence is primarily effect on reader.

The one sentence quick analysis. In this one, you cram together the Persuasive Technique and Effect on Reader in just one sentence. This should only be used if you really can’t think of anything else for the Effect on Reader.

Overall, there are really three ways you can analyse, either with one, two or three sentences.

It is best to explore what each of these three looks like, and we’ll spend some time analysing each one, so that you can see which one can be used when.

🔑

These are good effect on reader openings, but remember, you need to make sure you expand on it.

Author-Led Effect on Reader

It means that it’s about what the author intends for reader to think/feel/react with.

Ignites a passion for exploration within readers

Invites readers to challenge their preconceptions

Impart a sense of urgency among readers

Establishes a sense of camaraderie with readers

Delves into the intricacies of readers' emotions

Unearths a deeper understanding for readers

Bolsters intellectual curiosity in readers

Provokes contemplation and introspection in readers

Disconcerts readers with unsettling themes

Instills feelings of unease and discomfort in readers

Generates tension and apprehension among readers

Sows seeds of doubt and skepticism in readers

Provokes feelings of indignation in readers

Elicits a grim and somber mood in readers

Exacerbates readers' feelings of isolation and disconnection

Accentuates a sense of disillusionment in readers

Fuels feelings of hopelessness and despair among readers

Confounds readers with perplexing complexities

Example List

"Fuels feelings of hopelessness and despair among readers": The persuasive article might paint a bleak picture of a world where AI has an excessive influence on students, causing readers to feel an overwhelming sense of despair over a potential future where individuals have become overly dependent on AI.

"Confounds readers with perplexing complexities": The article could delve into the intricate nature of AI and the myriad ways it can lead to addiction among students, leaving readers grappling with convoluted moral, ethical, and practical challenges tied to AI implementation.

"Provokes feelings of indignation in readers": The persuasive piece might use charged language and stirring examples to emphasise the dangerous implications of AI in an educational setting, arousing a sense of injustice and indignation in readers who then question how and why AI has become so prominent in the lives of students.

"Exacerbates readers' feelings of isolation and disconnection": The article could draw attention to instances where students relying on AI for educational support forfeit meaningful human interactions, fostering a sense of isolation and loneliness. This would evoke a sense of concern in readers, highlighting the unintended consequences of AI dependency.

Reader-Led Effect on Reader

A specific type of reader will have a specific type of effect on them, this is about identifying that.

For a … readership/audience, they are more likely to …

Specific Target Audience

Generally speaking, there are a couple of ‘common’ and broad ways to mention the ‘reader’.

Reader (the most generic form of how to analyse reader).

Audience (normally for presentations but can also be used for articles)

Listeners (when it’s not an article, but rather a speech or presentation or video call).

❓

A lot of students tell me they can’t come up with the effect on reader, they don’t know what readers are supposed to think, feel or react. You need to learn how to put yourselves into the shoes of an actual potential target audience and really think from their perspective.

However, decent teachers will usually tell you to be more ‘specific’ about how you mention the ‘reader’. It is best to avoid calling the reader just ‘reader’, but to add a bit of specificity to what they are.

Obviously, there are other words that you can use, here’s a list categorised with the PESTEL framework to help you break it down further.

General

Enthusiasts

Parents - Whenever you have an article about kids, students, you can use parents as a target audience.

Voters - Whenever it’s about government, you can use voters.

Taxpayers - Whenever it’s about the government, specifically a new project or something, you can use taxpayers.

Shoppers/Customers - Whenever it’s about a company or some sort of restaurant or business.

More conservative/liberal minded - this is for more political topics.

Patriot

PESTEL

Political

Politicians

Voters

Patriots

Government Officials

Members of Parliament

Army Members

Retired Veterans

Taxpayers

Professors (or Lecturers)

Environmental

Scientists

Climate Activists

Social

Parents

Teachers

Families

Youths

Teenagers

Sports enthusiasts (e.g. tennis enthusiasts, soccer enthusiasts)

Doctors (OR Medical Professionals)

Technological

Analysts

Software Engineers

Investment Advisors

Investors

Legal

Lawyers (OR Solicitors)

Lawmakers

Policymakers

Scenario 1 - Application

“paradoxical promotion of Carlton breweries and McDonald’s”, deliberately mentioning the brands of “Carlton breweries and McDonalds”

fear and concern for children, especially those vulnerable to these kinds of marketing advertisements that they can’t really separate as unhealthy.

disappointment and anger at allowing or enabling these large corporations to take advantage of an otherwise healthy and happy moment for Australians and imprinting sportslovers with unhealthy habits.

shock that nothing has been done to prevent such open displays of unhealthy food marketing.

In deliberately mentioning the brands of “Carlton breweries and McDonalds” in exploiting young children’s excitement at sports events to prey on their desire for unhealthy junk food, it is likely that parents may feel concern at those younger generations who are vulnerable to the broad advertisements that specifically target children. Thus, readers may feel disappointed at the lack of regulation enabling these large corporations to take advantage of an otherwise happy and healthy moment for Australians by imprinting sportslovers with unhealthy habits.

We know this first body paragraph is mainly negative, most of the paragraphs here in the article are ‘negative’. We know it’s a Condemn (the author is condemning these unhealthy food companies and beverage companies).

We know that we’re condemning sports sponsorships from these junk food and unhealthy beverage companies.

I know now, that my effect on reader needs to be more specifically about how the author wants readers to feel about the junk food and unhealthy beverage companies.

Title - first technique “sports sponsorships and kids health - who are the real winners?”

Raising unseen concerns [THINK], [FEEL] piquing the parent’s interest and fear of their children’s wellbeing.

❓

Start with phrasing and effects that are a lot more moderate at the beginning of your paragraph, rather than trying to jump to the most fancy and extravagant effects on reader that you can think of.

❓

A lot of students say: I ran out of ideas, I don’t know what other effects on reader I can use. The problem isn’t that they don’t have enough ideas or effect on reader concepts, it’s rather that they started too strong and had nowhere left to build to.

Two Sentence

Commencing with a title that contrasts a disparity between “sports sponsorships and kids health”, the deliberate challenging of the “real winners” off-field immediately raises minor concerns around how sports marketing may be manipulating the emotions and naivety of children. For parents, this may be additionally concerning as their fear of children’s wellbeing is piqued, specifically at the phrasing “real winners”, which highlights the long-term danger to a child’s health despite participating in frequent sports.

❓

The amount of effect on reader is really what varies, the difference, between a two sentence structure against a one sentence structure.

One Sentence

The author commences with the unexpected contrast of “sports sponsorships” against “kids health” in the title, in order to provoke parent’s fears around their children’s wellbeing, afraid that the “real winners” are actually large corporations preying on their child’s physical health.

❓

You are technically making a sacrifice when you decide to spend only one sentence on the technique. You will need to rush through your effect on reader.

❓

Frustration, anger, disappointment, loathing have been avoided in the first technique effect on reader because this is what I mean about ‘building up’. In the later techniques, that’s when you should be building up towards them.

“paradoxical promotion” - second technique (alliteration, harsh lexical choice)

In playing on parents fear with the alliteration of “paradoxical promotion”, the author seeks to undermine the trust parents have in fair and responsible “promotion” and advertisements, enabling them to question whether corporations are genuinely driven to nourish their children.

“hardly the fuel of champions”, Adam Goodes, Dale Thomas, (name and shame)

❓

You should be analysing the title of the piece whenever you can.

❓

Yes, I would recommend you analyse chronologically if you can, analyse in order of what the author presents in the article.

How can we help?