Analyzing the Use of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos in Professional Communication
Abstract
Effective communication is paramount in the professional business world, serving as a crucial tool to bridge gaps and foster collaboration in workplace settings. The standard measurement of an organization's success lies in the professionalism of its communication, ensuring a seamless conveyance of messages to constituents. Daily interactions are influenced by numerous individual, institutional, and societal factors, which may complicate what might initially seem like a natural and straightforward process. The inability to communicate in a professional manner, both verbally and in writing, can lead to breakdowns in communication among colleagues. This qualitative research aims to explore the practical application of Aristotle's ethos, pathos, and logos in writing within the workplace, with the objective of enhancing professional communication in the 21st century. The focus is on the reliance on persuasive email writing to elaborate on how these three rhetorical appeals are employed in professional communication. The study will delve into various situational factors, including audience characteristics, the type of communication, and the organizational culture, and their influence on the application of ethos, pathos, and logos. The research also seeks to quantify the use of these rhetorical appeals across diverse forms of professional communication, such as reports and emails. A sample of fifty employees from the Klang Valley region participated in the study. Surveys were conducted, and samples of formal email writings were collected from participants who have agreed to remain anonymous, adhering to organizational requirements. The acquired data underwent a thematic analysis grounded in Aristotle's Rhetorical Theory to extract meaningful insights. This research aspires to contribute to a deeper understanding of effective professional communication, providing practical insights for the improvement of communication skills in the contemporary workplace. The thematic analysis will illuminate patterns and nuances in the application of ethos, pathos, and logos, ultimately facilitating more nuanced and impactful communication strategies.
References
Alexandru, M. (2018). The role of communication in enhancing work effectiveness of an organization. Research Gate.
Aristotle & Kennedy, G. A. (1991). Aristotle on Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
Biber, D. & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Cheshin, A. (2020). The impact of non-normative displays of emotion in the workplace: How inappropriateness shapes the interpersonal outcomes of emotional displays. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 6.
Durmuş, H. E., & Okyayuz, Ş. (2023). An Appraisal Approach to Emotion, Culture and Discourse in Audio Description. Language, Expressivity and Cognition, 209.
Firouznia, M., Hosseini, S. H., & Karamabad, M. M. M. (2021). Affective-cognitive nature of engagement: correlating psychological capital and core-self-evaluations to work engagement via positive effects. International Journal of Procurement Management, 14(2), 213-229.
Hill, J. (2019). Logos, ethos and pathos and the marketing of higher education. Research Gate.
Jaspal, R. (2020). Content analysis, thematic analysis, and discourse analysis. Research methods in psychology, 1, 285-312.
Jennifer, L. L. & Jorge,V. (2018). Affective Effects of Offering Options on Persuasiveness of Fear Appeals, Journal of Promotion Management, 1-15.
Liu, S. & Zhang, J. (2021). Using metadiscourse to enhance persuasiveness in corporate press releases. SAGE Journals. Logos, ethos, and pathos in political discourse. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(11), 1939-1945
Ma, Y. (2022). Role of Communication Strategies in Organizational Commitment, Mediating Role of Faculty Engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.3389%2 Ffpsyg.2022.921797
Minkov, M., & Kaasa, A. (2022). Do dimensions of culture exist objectively? A validation of the revised Minkov-Hofstede model of culture with World Values Survey items and scores for 102 countries. Journal of International Management, 28(4), 100971.
Peter, S. (2020). The short history of rhetorical theory. Research Article, 53(1), 75-88.
Riazi, M., Ghanbar, H., & Rezvani, R. (2023). Qualitative data coding and analysis: A systematic review of the papers published in the Journal of Second Language Writing. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 11(1), 25-47.
Saaty, A. (2020). The rhetoric of Twitter in terms of Aristotelian appeals (Logos, ethos, and pathos) in ESL/EFL educational settings. English Language Teaching, 13(5), 115- 124.
Sander, F., Föhl, U., Walter, N., & Demmer, V. (2021). Green or social? An analysis of environmental and social sustainability advertising and its impact on brand personality, credibility, and attitude. Journal of Brand Management, 28, 429-445.
Simon, N. (2020). Investigating ethos and pathos in scientific truth claims in public discourse.
Science Communication, 8(1), 129-140.
Ting, S. H. & Collin, J. (2018). Framing disease risk messages in airport banners. International Journal of Law, Government and Communication, 2(6), 63-75.
Yuan, G., & Sun, Y. (2023). A bibliometric study of metaphor research and its implications (2010–2020). Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 41(3), 227-247.
Zaini, N., Aziz, A. & Mohamad, N. (2022). Rhetorical Appeals in Professional Communication Presentation: An ODL Setting. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(11), 1541 – 1549.
