In 

speech-act theory, a perlocutionary act is an action or state of mind brought

about by, or as a consequence of, saying something. Also known
as perlocutionary effect.

Examples and Observations

 "Intuitively, a perlocutionary act is an act performed by saying

something, and not in saying something. Persuading, angering, inciting,
comforting and inspiring are often perlocutionary acts; but they would
never begin an answer to the question 'What did he say?' Perlocutionary
acts, in contrast with locutionary and illocutionary acts, which are
governed by conventions, are not conventional but natural acts (Austin
[1955], p. 121). Persuading, angering, inciting, etc. cause physiological
changes in the audience, either in their states or behavior; conventional
acts do not."
 An Example of a Perlocutionary Effect
"Consider a negotiation with a hostage-taker under siege. The police
negotiator says: 'If you release the children, we'll allow the press to publish
your demands.' In making that utterance she has offered a deal
(illocutionary act). Suppose the hostage-taker accepts the deal and as a
consequence releases the children. In that case, we can say that by making
the utterance, the negotiator brought about the release of the children, or
in more technical terms, that this was a perlocutionary effect of the
utterance."

 Fire!
"In the perlocutionary instance, an act is performed by saying
something. For example, if someone shouts 'fire' and by that act causes
people to exit a building which they believe to be on fire, they have
performed the perlocutionary act of convincing other people to exit the
building. . . . In another example, if a jury foreperson declares 'guilty' in a
courtroom in which an accused person sits, the illocutionary act of
declaring a person guilty of a crime has been undertaken. The
perlocutionary act related to that illocution is that, in reasonable
circumstances, the accused person would be convinced that they were to be
led from the courtroom into a jail cell. Perlocutionary acts are acts
intrinsically related to the illocutionary act which precedes them, but
discrete and able to be differentiated from the illocutionary act."
 The Accordion Effect
"Perlocution has no upper border: any consequential effect of a speech act
may be considered as perlocutionary. If breaking news surprises you so
that you trip and fall. my announcement has not only been believed true by
you (which is already a perlocutionary effect) and thus surprised you, but
has also made you trip. fall, and (say) injure your ankle. This aspect of the
so-called 'accordion effect' concerning actions and speech actions in
particular (see Austin 1975: 110-115; Feinberg 1964) meets general consent,
apart from those speech-act theorists who prefer to limit the notion of
perlocutionary effect to intended perlocutionary effects . . .."