How to persuade and influence people: the art of effective geographical debate

Figures & data

Figure 1. Key elements of effective debate

Figure 2. Identifying the strongest themes of your argument

Table 1. Structuring the points of your argument

Structure	Illustration
1. Point	Whilst an additional charge on single-use plastic items may lead some people to a more sustainable alternative, others may not be able to afford either the additional charge either on items that they genuinely need, or alternative options.
2a. Example (large scale)	Whilst we are encouraged to shop more sustainably there are few alternatives that are equally priced or cheaper. Shopping in large supermarkets where most of the food is packaged in single-use plastic saves money. Applying an additional cost to each piece of this plastic would therefore increase the cost of a weekly food shop. Passing this cost on to the consumer would disproportionately affect people living in poverty much more than wealthier groups.
2b. Example (personal)	For example, in a supermarket on 7 July 2019 a single can of baked beans cost £0.75, whereas a pack of four tins wrapped in plastic cost £2.00. The same product wrapped in plastic cost a third less than its counterpart.
3. Analysis	This example illustrates how a charge on single use plastic would disproportionately affect people with less disposable income.

Note: We have chosen to use the P.E.A acronym here to structure the argument. You might also find the acronym PEEL (Point, Elaborate, Evidence, Link) a useful tool for structuring an argument.

Table 2. Different approaches to persuading people

Nature of Appeal	Example
Ethos (ethical)	Charging more for single use plastics will disproportionately affect the poorest people who cannot afford the additional charge. It discriminates against individuals who do not have the financial resources to make alternative purchasing decisions.
Pathos (emotional)	We have to do something, and soon, to address the environmental issue of single use plastics before we irrevocably damage our planet. A charge on single use plastics may not address the issue entirely, but it enables us to start making a difference straight away.
Logos (logical)	Charging more for single use plastics will reduce their use as people will choose to use re-usable bags rather than pay for a plastic bag each time they need one.

Table A1. Example debate structure

1. First Affirmative Constructive – 3 minutes This is an opportunity for the Affirmative team to speak uninterrupted A good introduction that attracts the audience’s attention and interest in the topic Clearly state the Affirmative’s position on the topic and support this with reasoned arguments and evidence Conclude effectively
2. Cross Examination of the Affirmative by the Negative – 5 minutes This is an opportunity for the Negative team to question what the Affirmative team have introduced The Negative team ask questions of the Affirmative team ensuring that the Affirmative team have the opportunity to respond to those questions The Negative team should have a strategy or at the very least a direction to their questioning New evidence may be introduced to challenge the points made by the Affirmative team
3. First Negative Constructive – 3 minutes This is an opportunity for the Negative team to speak uninterrupted. A good introduction that attracts the audience’s attention and interest in the topic Clearly state the Negative’s position on the topic and support this with reasoned arguments and evidence Question the Affirmative’s contentions/evidence Conclude effectively
4. Cross Examination of the Negative by the Affirmative – 5 minutes This is an opportunity for the Affirmative team to question what the Negative team have introduced The Affirmative team ask questions of the Negative team ensuring that the Negative team have the opportunity to respond to those questions The Affirmative team should have a strategy or at the very least a direction to their questioning New evidence may be introduced to challenge the points made by the Negative team
5. Second Affirmative Constructive – 3 minutes This is an opportunity for the Affirmative team to speak uninterrupted Clearly state each of your contentions - support with reason and evidence Respond to Negative arguments/attacks Conclude effectively
6. Cross Examination of the Affirmative by the Negative – 5 minutes This is an opportunity for the Negative team to question what the Affirmative team have introduced The Negative team ask questions of the Affirmative team ensuring that the Affirmative team have the opportunity to respond to those questions The Negative team should have a strategy or at the very least a direction to their questioning New evidence may be introduced to challenge the points made by the Affirmative team
7. Second Negative Constructive – 3 minutes This is an opportunity for the Negative team to speak uninterrupted Clearly state each of your contentions - support with reason and evidence Respond to Affirmative arguments/attacks Conclude effectively
8. Cross Examination of the Negative by the Affirmative – 5 minutes This is an opportunity for the Affirmative team to question what the Negative team have introduced The Affirmative team ask questions of the Negative team ensuring that the Negative team have the opportunity to respond to those questions The Affirmative team should have a strategy or at the very least a direction to their questioning New evidence may be introduced to challenge the points made by the Negative team
Rebuttal Speeches – no new arguments – new evidence and analysis are ok9. Negative Rebuttal – 3 minutes Rebuild the Negative case Summarize how the Negative position is superior Respond to the Affirmative arguments – extend arguments by giving additional support for them Conclude effectively
10. Affirmative Rebuttal – 3 minutes Rebuild the Affirmative case Summarize how the Affirmative position is superior Respond to the Negative arguments – extend arguments by giving additional support for them Conclude effectively

Adapted from: Jessamine (2019) available at: http://www.jessamine.k12.ky.us/userfiles/339/Classes/2291/Team%20Debate%20Format.doc