PROCESS TO CONVINCE 1

Writing Project 2:

The Effective Way for Author to Persuade Readers

Honghao (Oliver) Li

University of California, Santa Barbara

PROCESS TO CONVINCE 2

The process to convince readers

In today's society, coffee is an alienable component of our life: it brings positive

economic growth to many countries; it solves the unemployment problem by providing many

positions related to the coffee industries. However, the essential reason why coffee plays a huge

role in our life is that the major component of coffee: caffeine, which can bring numerous

benefits to the human body. In my essay, I will analyze two different articles from distinct

disciplines to explain how caffeine can be beneficial to the human body. Also, I will analyze the

effectiveness of evidence used by authors to persuade their audience. In the first article, Exercise

and Sport Performance with Low Doses of Caffeine, the author Spriet used the Physiology aspect

to approach this topic. In the second article, Coffee and the liver: a potential treatment for liver

disease?, Mastertona and Hayes explained how caffeine could prevent liver disease by using

biochemistry approaches. In my essay, I will analyze how the similarity and differences in the

use of evidence and wording in the article. Also, I will explain why the difference makes the

second article more persuasive.

First of all, both authors chose to put the literature reviews at the beginning of their

articles. At the beginning of both of the articles, the authors used literature reviews in their

introduction of the article. The literature review can give readers a hint about the approximate

content of the article that will be introduced to this topic and provide background information to

readers. As Stedman said in the article Annoying Ways People use Sources, authors should

introduce their topic or source before they are using the source (Stedman, 2012). In the first

article, Spriet stated that "a brief overview of the research that has examined the administration

of low doses of caffeine on exercise and sport performance" (Spriet, 2014, p. 1). Spriet used
PROCESS TO CONVINCE 3

literature reviews to introduce audiences to the discipline he discussed in the following article.

After guidance done by literature reviews, readers won't feel strange before they use experiment

results or other evidence to support their idea

Another essential feature that the literature served is the ability of ethos appealing. It can

increase the credibility of articles since the review shows some pervious works done by field-

related professionals. In the passage Literacy Practices, Barton and Hamilton stated that

"different literacies associated with different domains of life," (Barton & Hamilton, 2012), which

means that in different fields, the representative figures are also different. By citing the findings

of some people who are essential in this field, it allows readers to understand the authors' ideas

better. In the second article, Mastertona and Hayesb indicated that "with regard to the liver,

several epidemiological studies and case-controlled trials "(Mastertona & Hayesb, 2010, p. 1).

After using the literature review, the author increases the credibility of his article since this

shows the author's research is based on their research, which also appeals to other authors' ethos.

The second similarity is that both authors demonstrate the repeatability of their

experiments or experiments they use to prove their topic. The reproducibility of experimental

results contributes to the reliability of experimental data. That's because the repeatability shows

the objectiveness of the experimental results while eliminating the instability of the experimental

results. In the first article, Exercise and Sports Performance with Low Doses of Caffeine, Spriet

explained the experiment trails and controlled conditions to readers. In the article, he shows that

"the experiment used different controlled experiments in the four different research

questions" (Spriet, 2014, p . 2), and he repeats all of the experiments three times to make sure no

artificial errors happen. Through this process, the author demonstrates the repeatability of these
PROCESS TO CONVINCE 4

experimental process and results, which is crucial characteristics in any scientific experiments.

With these two characteristics, the credibility of Spriet's article has significantly improved, and

readers are more convincing by his report.

Similarly, the author in the second article, Coffee and the liver: a potential treatment for

liver disease?, reviewed previous topic related studies and "discusses the implications for

patients with liver disease" (Mastertona & Hayesb, 2010, p. 1). The author proved that these

experiments were performed under similar conditions and with the same procedure; the author

showed the repeatability of the trials, which is the essential concept to improve the credibility in

the scientific research paper. Moreover, the author also indicated that all experiments he used in

the article were performed by various experts from all over the world, which appeal to

professionalisms' ethos. The appeal to others' ethos will further increase the credibility of his

paper, making his article more convincing.

The third similarity is that they both state the limitation of experiments they used in the

article. In any research paper, it's essential to indicate the restriction of the experiment at the end

of their paper. This can show the subjectivity of the paper. The author of the first article, Spriet,

said that "some of the reaction mechanism about the caffeine remains unknown" (Spriet, 2014, p.

8), which indicate the imperfection of his experiment. In the second article, the author stated the

restriction of the experiment results he review. In the observational experiments he reviewed, he

concludes that "none were interventional and no study was randomized or placebo

controlled" (Mastertona & Hayesb, 2010, p. 5), which shows that the potential un-repeatability of

experiments. The authors of both articles have voluntarily acknowledged the limitations of their
PROCESS TO CONVINCE 5

experiments, which proves that their logic is meticulous and can take into account all aspects of

their experiments, thus increasing the credibility and persuasion of their articles.

Both of the authors introduced their topic to their readers, presented the repeatability of

experiments, and admitted the limitation of their experiments effectively. However, what makes

the first article more convincing to me is the age of source used and the language that writer to

convey their ideas.

In the first article, the authors used experiments done by himself majority to support his

argument. Compared with that, the author in the second article only used experimental results

from others and isn't from the recent study. This will not doubt decreases the credibility of the

article. The majority studies the author used to support his idea in the second article was done by

long time ago, which means some of the environmental conditions have changed. Those

experiments were done about 15 years ago, so people's lifestyles have changed a lot. As we

know, the majority cause of the liver disease is unhealthy lifestyles, such as long-term

alcoholism. Those unhealthy patterns may vary between these years, so the conclusion from 15

years ago is less convincing under the current condition. That's one of the reasons that decreases

the credibility of the first article.

The second important feature that makes the first article more convincing is the wording

of the authors. The wording of the article is crucial when considering the persuasiveness of an

article. The word choice of these two articles is different since they are from different discourse

communities. As Barton and Hamilton said in the Literacy Practices that "different discourse

community has different literacy practices" (Barton & Hamilton, 2012). In the first article,

Exercise and Sport Performance with Low Doses of Caffeine, which is in the physiology domain,
PROCESS TO CONVINCE 6

authors introduced the dose of caffeine intake by saying that "no more caffeine than may be

consumed in 1–2 small cups of coffee or one large coffee" (Spriet, 2014, p. 2). Spriet used

straightforward words and language when they describe the process of the experiment, which

lowered the accessibility boundaries of the article. This will no doubt increase the persuasiveness

of the article because readers can follow and understand the author's idea easily, even though

they were not specialistic in this domain like me.

In conclusion, to persuade readers effectively, the author should not only use literature

review in the introduction to build credibility and inform readers about the restart of the article;

they should demonstrate the repeatability of experiments used to supports their topic; finally,

they should admit the limitation of experiments. But the most important for the writer is to use

recent experimental results and straightforward language, which are the two main reasons that

the first article is more convincing to me.

PROCESS TO CONVINCE 7

Reference

Barton, D., & Hamilton , M. (2012). Local literacies : Reading and writing in one community.

London ; New York: Routledge.

Mastertona, G. S., & Hayesb, P. C. (2010). Coffee and the liver: a potential treatment for liver

disease? European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 22(11), 1277-1283.

Spriet, L. L. (2014). Exercise and Sport Performance with Low Doses of Caffeine. Sports

medicine, 44(Supplement 2), 175-184.

Stedman, K. D. (2012). Annoying Ways People Use Source. 244-245. Anderson, South Carolina,

United States of America.