"No Collusion, No Obstruction:" Not Really True, but Is Trump Persuasive?

Donald Trump speaking at Turning Point USA Teen Action Summit

If there is anything that you can count on President Donald Trump to say, it is, "No Collusion." He may as well embroider it on his tailored jackets. You can also count on him to say "No Obstruction." Persuasion by slogan: repeat the same simple points many times. Classic Trump.

The denials, "No Collusion, No Obstruction," refer to the two volumes of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian interference in the 2016 election campaign. The first volume identified many contacts between the Russian government and the Trump campaign, but did not prove criminal collusion or conspiracy. The second volume identified many efforts by President Trump to obstruct the investigation, but declined to indict because Trump is a sitting president.

Here's my question: President Trump himself has said very little other than to call the investigation corrupt and to repeat, over and over and over, "No Collusion, No Obstruction." Those are not arguments; they are claims. It is unclear, to say the least, that Mueller's report supports either claim. Does that mean that Trump's simple, bald, unexplained denials aren't persuasive? It does not. That is because when we hear something over and over we might begin to believe it simply because we've heard it a lot. Repetition does not always persuade people, however. Let's look at Trump's repetition. 

Trump's denials
President Trump beat his slogans into the ground during his recent speech at Turning Point USA's Teen Student Action Summit 2019. Speaking to a friendly, uncritical, conservative crowd, Trump said, about halfway through the speech, "No collusion, no obstruction." He neither explained nor offered evidence. He ridiculed the investigation for taking too long and costing too much money, but did not say why there was no collusion or obstruction.

Trump continued the theme a moment later: "Their collusion [sic], no collusion. They have no collusion." (Applause.) After claiming that the Constitution gave him unlimited power, Trump said that, "But I don't even talk about that because they did a report and there was no obstruction. After looking at it, our great Attorney General read it. He is a total professional. He said, 'There's nothing here. There's no obstruction.' So they referenced, 'No obstruction.' So you have no collusion, no obstruction, and yet it goes on." Again, he didn't explain why he thought there was no collusion or obstruction. He just repeated his slogans.

Arguments against Trump's conclusion would include that repeated contacts between his campaign and the Russians might not be collusion or conspiracy, but some people think they are fishy. No reasonable reader of the Special Counsel's report would think that there was no obstruction. But those would be arguments. Trump didn't give arguments. He just repeated: "no collusion, no obstruction." And, of course, "No Collusion" and  "No Obstruction" are all over Trump's Twitter feed: 

Repeated Points Can Be Persuasive
Why could such plain repetition persuade people? A theory of persuasion called the Elaboration Likelihood Model was devised by psychology professors John T. Cacioppo and Richard E. Petty. This model shows how audiences think about persuasive messages. 

Cacioppo and Petty's research found that persuasion could occur by two different routes. They called the first route the central route of mental processing, compared to the peripheral route that involves less mental processing. When something is important to us, when we have the time and tools to evaluate carefully, we tend to think about things carefully, evaluate the pros and cons of evidence, and reach rational decisions. That's the central route. When conditions like that don't apply, we tend to make decisions by peripheral cues. Peripheral cues might include whether we like the speaker, whether the speaker is attractive, and, yes, how often we have heard something. I suspect that Trump's Turning Point USA audience had no interest in critical evaluation or central processing because they were already emotionally committed to Trump's presidency. So, yes, under some conditions, repetition can be persuasive. But there are catches. 

Repetition Doesn't Always Do Much Good
The first catch is that persuasion through the peripheral route tends to be short-lived and have less effect on behavior. Persuasion that occurs in the central route – when we take the time to evaluate evidence and think things through – is likely to last longer and have more effect on behavior. So, something that we believe simply because it's been repeated may not stick in our brains very long and may not affect how we vote.

The second catch is that Cacioppo and Petty's research found that moderate repetition was the most effective. When an audience hears something over and over and over, they may get tired of hearing it and the persuasive effect can diminish. So, Trump may be overusing his catch phrases. They are getting old. I'm tired of hearing them. Aren't you?

Trump's Repetition: Pros and Cons
So, first, Trump can deal with the accusations against him by repeating his bald denials many times. However, first, these bald denials will not persuade people who make the effort to look into the facts. For example, no one who has read the Mueller report will take "No Obstruction" seriously. Second, since persuasion over the peripheral route has less effect on behavior, his denials might not change many votes. 

At some point, slogans aren't enough.  

If you want to read my earlier posts about the rhetoric of Trump and Mueller, here they are.


Image: White House YouTube channel