 PDF | 297 Downloads |
Melissa H. Weresh
ABSTRACT: This article studies how distraction influences results and whether there is therefore a potential for the intentional use of distraction, or redirection, in advocacy. Of course, with such an inquiry, inevitable questions arise. Can a successful lawyer effectively refer to the concept of distraction in the context of advocacy? How might distraction or redirection be deliberately employed to influence results? What sources could be consulted to determine how this phenomenon is effectively employed to guide an audience? If distraction or redirection does influence results (spoiler alert, it does), how might this concept be used in advocacy? Would such uses be ethical?
With these questions in mind, the purpose of this article is to begin an analysis of the potential role of distraction, misdirection, or redirection in persuasion. Attempting to draw a possible connection between the effective use of misdirection in narrative, psychology and, ultimately, persuasion, the article will first explore the concept of persuasion in story, examining how the concept of narrative realism tolerates the use of misdirection techniques in successful stories. This section attempts to explain how distraction works in narrative, providing an analogous framework for how distraction might work in legal advocacy. The article then considers the role of distraction in persuasion, examining psychological theories that demonstrate a positive relationship between the two and which support a plausible foundation for consideration of distraction in advocacy.
With the backdrop of those studies providing context, the article then turns to a brief examination of techniques used in advocacy that could be characterized as redirection techniques. Finally, the article raises-but does not fully resolve-concerns about the ethical use of misdirection or redirection in advocacy. These inescapable concerns, beyond the scope of this article, certainly warrant a more thorough examination.