Gradualization = Pacing then Leading in Hypnosis

4 replies
Apparently Gradualization is similar if not the exact same thing as Pacing then Leading in hypnosis. At least that's the connection I've made. It makes sense though since Schwartz was into the power of mind stuff. Gradualization was likely something he picked up from the world of Hypnosis.
#gradualization #hypnosis #leading #pacing
  • Profile picture of the author ewenmack
    I just seeing it as not saying anything the reader won't believe.

    If there is something that will be hard to believe,
    then you need to get little agreements prior to the bigger one.

    Seems common sense when you think about it this way.

    Best,
    Ewen
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6799913].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WinstonTian
    Originally Posted by JasonParker View Post

    Apparently Gradualization is similar if not the exact same thing as Pacing then Leading in hypnosis. At least that's the connection I've made. It makes sense though since Schwartz was into the power of mind stuff. Gradualization was likely something he picked up from the world of Hypnosis.
    Yes, it's really similar to the pace-lead, but I find there are
    several rather "invisible" and behind-the-scenes action going
    inside the brain:

    Firstly, the brain likes repetition, because each repetition
    strengthens the synapses in a series of connections of neurons
    in the brain, according to the Hebbian theory on synaptic
    plasticity.

    It states that any two cells, or rather any two systems, which
    are simultaneously AND repetitively active, will tend to be
    "associated" with each other.

    For example, "nokia" might pop out when you prime your mind
    with "mobile phone". A certain kind of horse, with a certain kind
    of colour might pop out in your mind when you think of "horse".

    What about your last experience at the bakery?

    (Did that take you back to the smell?)

    There are tons of things being associated if you'd go with this
    Pace-Lead structure.

    You're doing "minor conditioning" to the reader. At first, when
    you start off with an information bit of high believability, the
    reader's brain fires a connection associated with agreement.

    And then, the second statement does the same thing...

    And then, the third statement again...

    The increasing "associations" in each progressive statement
    starts to fire off the same shortcut...

    But what happens, on a second layer of effect, is a limit of
    the human mind. The average human being has a working
    memory capacity of 9 plus/minus 2 bits of information.

    And when you start repeating bits of information that fire off
    the same connection, closer to your working memory capacity.

    It kind of "shuts down" your logical faculty to let your brain
    process the new information. Not the best way to say it, but
    it's layman.

    However, I feel that the problem with using gradualization in
    the text form, is that the short number of repetitions and
    associations will never be sufficient for conditioning.

    That's why copywriting bases itself on using EXISTING
    reference experiences, emotions, personal buzz words, beliefs,
    thoughts, objections etc.

    It's kind of leveraging whatever neuronal shortcuts you
    already have in your brain..

    For example, if you're being exposed to tons of advertising
    that tells you that buying XYY milk over organic milk is far
    healthier... and then the news verifies it again...

    You're more likely to respond to an ad on XYY milk, wouldn't
    you?

    And of course, it boils back down to how you communicate
    with the reader - linguistics and/or psycholinguistics?

    Which of course, good copywriters have a natural/trained
    flair in writing compelling sentences and "flow".

    Best,
    Winston Tian
    Signature

    Cheers,
    Winston
    The Beginner's Doctor

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6807156].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Pusateri
      A sparkling jewel of a post, Winston. Any newbie who reads and understands it will leapfrog his peers.

      Originally Posted by WinstonTian View Post


      However, I feel that the problem with using gradualization in
      the text form, is that the short number of repetitions and
      associations will never be sufficient for conditioning.

      That's why copywriting bases itself on using EXISTING
      reference experiences, emotions, personal buzz words, beliefs,
      thoughts, objections etc.

      It's kind of leveraging whatever neuronal shortcuts you
      already have in your brain..
      That same leveraging is the neural root of branding, which when you prune away the overgrowth, is associating your product/business with preexisting positive beliefs, experiences and emotions.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6809640].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BrianMcLeod
    Wow, some really good threads lately.

    Nice, JP and Winston!

    Made me want to share something cool David Garfinkel and I created about this topic.

    Here's a cheat sheet PDF from our Fast Effective Copy live monthly training in January, "How To Keep Your Copy Believable (In An Increasingly Skeptical World)":

    FEC_LiveTraining_011212_Believability_CheatSheet.p df

    #2 is specifically about Gradualization, but the other sections are equally applicable, really.

    Enjoy!

    Brian
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6808535].message }}

Trending Topics