Sharing Family Proclamation Principles

Alan J. Hawkins

President Spencer W. Kimball taught that “the time will come when only those who believe deeply and actively in the family will be able to preserve their families in the midst of the gathering evil around us” (Kimball, 1980). While our own families are our most important responsibility, every family of the earth is in need of the vital blessings that come from living proclamation principles. I believe, therefore, that a deep and active belief in the principles articulated in “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” should motivate us not only to apply true principles to protect our own families, but it should also move us to share these principles with others. The statement by the prophet Joseph Smith applies here—that when we gain a witness of the truth, we will not be “content with blessing [our] family alone, but [range] through the whole world, anxious to bless the whole human race” (Smith, 1976). In the Doctrine and Covenants we are taught, “And the voice of warning shall be unto all people, by the mouth of my disciples, whom I have chosen in these last days” (D&C 1:4). “And let your preaching be the warning voice, every man to his neighbor, in mildness and in meekness” (D&C 38:41). As we share the principles of the proclamation with others, we can fulfill that directive to preach and warn our neighbors, helping them strengthen their families. 

Over the past decade, I have been teaching a foundational class at Brigham Young University that explores, in depth, the family proclamation. One of my goals for this class is to encourage students to share and defend proclamation principles with others near and far. Therefore, not keeping them solely for personal profit. I tell students that the proclamation is to the world, but that we, as Latter-day Saints, are the messengers that take its truths to our friends, associates, and family members, who collectively constitute the world; we are that mild and meek warning voice.

Defending the Family

Students’ Share and Defend Experiences with Members of Other Faiths 

The cohabitation question. Now I relate some of my students’ experiences. One of the most common topics that my students bring up when they are sharing and defending proclamation principles, is living together before marriage, what family scholars call cohabitation. In class we talk about how common cohabitation is these days, but we also discuss its association with an increased risk of divorce if the couple eventually marries, which many do (Jose et al., 2010). My students almost seem relieved to learn this. Their faith has taught them right and wrong, but the culture they grew up in has bought into the so-called logic of cohabitation. 

One student—I’ll call him Richard—reached out to a high school friend and initiated a conversation about cohabitation. He had recently joined the Facebook revolution and set up his own social networking site on the Internet. Within a few hours, a good friend from high school he had lost contact with, sent him a hello and they were exchanging messages. Richard discovered that his friend, Tom, had just decided to move in with his girlfriend. Tom said he and his girlfriend were hoping to get married someday in the distant future, but there were no formal plans (Rhoades et al., 2009).  Richard realized this was an ideal share and defend experience for my class assignment, if he could muster the courage. Richard said he knew that Tom was a young man of good character who cared deeply about his girlfriend, and he knew that he wouldn’t want to do anything that would hurt her. So Richard shared some concerns about Tom’s decision to live with his girlfriend by telling him some of the research on cohabitation he had just learned in class. For instance, he mentioned the research that cohabitation before marriage actually increases the risk of a future divorce, if the couple is not engaged first (Rhoades et al., 2009). He said he didn’t want to offend him, but as a friend, he wanted to share his concerns. He was anxious while anticipating Tom’s reply. Tom did reply and sincerely thanked Richard for his concern. Tom said he knew that living together was not the best thing. Despite this, unfortunately, Tom said he was going to do it anyway. Nevertheless, Richard had planted a good seed and had been obedient to the commandment to give warning in mildness and meekness. 

However, several of my students have had more success, so to speak, with this issue. One student also bravely dived in when her best friend back home called to tell her the news about deciding to move in with her new boyfriend. Again, in a series of long and sometimes difficult phone conversations, Natalie shared with her friend the research on the risks of cohabitation. She also shared her own feelings and faith about marriage as the proper guardian of human sexuality: “Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God. . . . [and] God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife” (¶¶ 1, 4). Natalie said she got resistance from her friend, first questioning the research, then confessing that she felt some pressure to move in with her boyfriend and really was unsure. Eventually, Natalie’s friend expressed appreciation for her concern and support, and told Natalie that she had decided against living with her boyfriend. I don’t know the end of this story, but I have confidence that a life was blessed by a brave young woman who helped a friend to follow the Light of Christ within her.

Students’ Share and Defend Experiences with Latter-day Saint Family Members and Friends 

Valuable experiences sharing the proclamation are not limited to friends and associates who do not share fully our faith. Some of the most inspiring stories my students have shared, have been reaching out to Latter-day Saint friends and even to their own family members. Let me share a few of those stories. 

Sanctity of life. One young freshman student— Cindy—was listening in class one day to the statistics about the large number of abortions, the declining number of adoptions, and prophetic statements about the sanctity of human life. Her thoughts went out to a close friend from her ward in the town she grew up in. Cindy knew that her friend had made some bad choices and had become pregnant by her boyfriend. Her friend had struggled to know what to do. She received pressure from different directions: abort the child; keep and rear the child herself; give the child up for adoption. Eventually, after pleading in prayer, Cindy’s friend gave the child life and then gave her to an overjoyed Latter-day Saint couple. Thinking about this, after class Cindy called her friend, who had just weeks before given such an unselfish gift to this couple. Cindy shared her feelings about the sanctity of life and how proud she was of her friend. Her friend echoed Cindy’s sentiments, and also said how happy she was that the Lord could make something so beautiful out of her mistake. This was a powerful, confirming experience for Cindy and her faith in sacred truths:

We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God’s eternal plan. . . . Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity (¶¶ 5, 7).

One of the most memorable share and defended experiences I have heard came from Rachel. Rachel had lost track of her best friend growing up when she went off to college. But out of the blue one day, Rachel’s childhood friend called her up—somehow getting a hold of her brand new cell phone number—and confessed that she was pregnant by her boyfriend. The unborn child was six months along when Rachel’s friend discovered that the baby tested positive for Down’s Syndrome. Rachel’s friend decided that she was going to end the mess by getting an abortion. Rachel summoned her courage to express her feelings about the sacredness of life, and she related to her friend a story shared by a classmate just a day earlier. This classmate, during a discussion of the sacredness of human life, said that she had tested positive for Down’s Syndrome prenatally, but her parents decided to give her life anyway, a rare occurrence these days. The test was a false positive, and she was born perfectly normal. Perhaps as a result of hearing this story, Rachel’s friend decided to give her unborn child life rather than abort. In raising a warning voice in mildness and meekness, Rachel helped to preserve a sacred life. 

Most of the stories that my students tell me about sharing proclamation principles are not as dramatic as this one. They are on the more prosaic elements of family life, like compassion and forgiveness. But students have related to me powerful experiences conversing about these topics with family members. 

Maternal nurturing. For instance, Mary told me of a share and defend experience that ended up being more than a class assignment. She was talking for two hours to her younger sister back home who was complaining, as teenagers typically do, about their mother and how she was overbearing, overprotective, and hypercritical. Finally, Mary jumped in. She related to her sister some statistics about how so many mothers feel unappreciated by society for the nurturing work they do. Despite this, they still believe that the most important work they do is in the walls of their own homes (Erickson & Aird, 2005). This holds true even when they work outside the home, as Mary’s mother did part time to help support the family. Mary talked to her sister about how mothers sacrifice so much for their families. Mary quoted the proclamation phrase, “Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children” (¶ 7). She pointed out why mothers sometimes seem overbearing because they care so deeply for the happiness of their children, and their God-given responsibility to “rear their children in love and righteousness” (¶ 6). Mary urged her sister to cut their mother a little slack. After a few moments of silence, Mary heard muffled sniffles coming from the other end of the line. Her sister choked a few words out and said she would try harder. They hung up, but a few minutes later, Mary’s phone rang and it was her mother on the other end. “Mary, what did you say to your sister?” she asked. Mary recounted to her mother just a few of the things she had said. Her mother simply responded, “Mary, thank you. I don’t know everything you said, but it made a huge impact on your sister.”

Family compassion. That same semester, Melissa recounted a rather touching experience she had trying to urge family members to be compassionate towards another family member. Her mother was visiting her at BYU during general conference weekend. Listening to conference, Melissa noticed that her mother was getting emotional. She also noticed that the emotion was most evident when the talks were focused on family responsibilities. At one point, Melissa’s mother began to cry. Melissa asked what was wrong. Her mother then shared with her the heartbreaking news that her brother had become ensnared in the trap of pornography. Her mother sobbed her fears and self-doubt. She also worried that Melissa’s father would be harsh and severe with his son and that this would drive him away.

Melissa tried to comfort her mother. Later, Melissa was pondering how she could help. She felt that she should send her father an email letting him know that she was aware of the family problem. She expressed her support to him in his divine responsibility as a father to “preside over [his family] in love and righteousness” and protect his family (¶ 7). But boldly, and knowing her father the way she did, she encouraged him to use compassion with her brother. I didn’t get to hear the end of the story, but Melissa did express confidence that things would be handled differently—with more compassion—in this situation than what might have occurred. She came to understand that sometimes a mild, meek, and sensitive voice of warning is needed within family circles.

Family forgiveness. Another student, Anne, took advantage of a difficult family situation to urge forgiveness. Her younger sister, Maggie, called very upset. Another younger sister, Trisha, was going through a rebellious time and getting into serious trouble. Maggie had been very compassionate and supportive, trying to do her best to love her troubled little sister, Trisha. Then one night, Trisha stole Maggie’s car keys and went for a joy ride. She was underage and didn’t have a license, and got pulled over for speeding. Because she didn’t have a license, she gave the police officer Maggie’s name instead of her own. When the speeding ticket arrived in the mail, Maggie quickly figured out what had happened and became furious. That’s when she called her older sister, Anne, my student. Maggie said that she was done supporting her ungrateful little sister. She didn’t know how she could ever forgive Trisha. Anne then quietly rehearsed to Maggie some of the things we had been learning in class about forgiveness in families. She reminded her that she had a spiritual duty to forgive all and that harboring this anger and resentment would only canker her own soul. Forgiving, as difficult as it can be, would be liberating for her. Maggie was crying and saying how hard it would be, but she said she would try. She went to Trisha and expressed her love and said that she forgave her for stealing her car and the lie she told the police officer. A few weeks later, Anne was home and visited with Trisha, reciting the proclamation for her, and telling her how much she loved her. Again, I don’t know if there was a storybook ending; the semester ended before the final chapter of the story. But I know that Anne and Maggie were reaching out, in accordance, with truth to bless a family member in need.

Hearing these students’ stories has been a personal privilege. There is great value in sharing the principles contained in the family proclamation and great fulfillment to be found in doing so. The family proclamation is an inspired document—President Boyd K. Packer (The Church of Jesus Christe of Latter-Day Saints, 2008) called it “revelatory” and “scripturelike in its power”—and it contains timeless truths that will bless not only our lives but also the lives of those around us as we reach out, near and far, to share it. 

How to share your knowledge with others in public

My Own Share and Defend Experiences

A reverend’s curiosity. A few years ago, I was in a car for a couple of hours traveling from a conference back to the Atlanta airport. The driver, an ordained minister, led a large African American congregation in an eastern state. I don’t think he’d had many opportunities to learn directly about Latter-day Saint beliefs. Since the conference we had been attending was about strengthening marriages, he was asking many questions about Latter-day Saint beliefs on marriage and family life. I did the best I could to respond to his questions, first with phrases directly from the proclamation. (I have memorized the family proclamation, something I also ask my students to do.) For instance, we discussed the concept of eternal families and the purpose of temples. I quoted from the proclamation: 

“The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally (¶ 3).”

I sensed he enjoyed the conversation. I promised to send him a copy of the proclamation and did so. He wrote me back expressing appreciation. When I saw him again about a year later at another conference, he thanked me again for sending him the proclamation. I doubt this incident will produce any conversions, but I do not doubt that a man of religious influence will be less susceptible to accept or pass on misinformation about our faith now. “By small and simple things are great things brought to pass” (Alma 37:6).

A Christmas gift. On a number of occasions, I have shared the proclamation as a whole, not any specific part. For instance, a few years ago I gave the proclamation as a Christmas gift to colleagues I was working with on a national project to build the National Healthy Marriage Resource Center. The project director called me a few days after she received her copy. It was a gloomy, stressful period in our project when we were uncertain whether the project we had invested so much in was even going to survive the New Year. But her voice was a bit more cheerful as we began our conversation that day. “Thank you so much for sending me that document,” she said. “It really brightened my day, and I needed it today.” Again, I do not expect that this deeply religious woman will become a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. But I rejoice in the sweet spirit that accompanies that document; it can inspire people of very different backgrounds across the world.

Using Social Science Research to Discuss the Family

Thomas W. Draper

A broad cultural discussion is going on about the meaning of marriage and family. “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” is relevant to this discussion. One attempt to defeat the “great plan of happiness” (Alma 42:8) as it is taught in the proclamation, involves redefining marriage and the family. If humankind can be persuaded to pursue the right thing in the wrong way, our chances of finding happiness will be diminished. Much of the broad discussion is being conducted with social science data and interpretations of data (Armour & Haynie, 2007; Harden et al., 2008; Orh et al., 2010; Twenge, 2006). One may or may not appreciate the social sciences, but if one wants to join the discussion, some knowledge about how the social sciences are used may be helpful. Gaining that knowledge is one of the reasons there is a university class on the proclamation at Brigham Young University.

Social science is the part of science that looks at human attributes, traits, attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, and relationships. It is generally thought to cover the disciplines of anthropology, clinical psychology, economics, family science, geography, human development, family therapy, political science, psychology, social work, and sociology. But it is much larger than that. Any time scientists study human attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, and relationships, they are likely doing social science, regardless of the official name of their disciplines. Advertising, biology, business, communications, education, history, law, medicine, organizational behavior, psychiatry, religious studies, and testing all conduct some social science. I recently attended an academic symposium at one of the top scientific organizations in the world. The symposium had been organized by mathematicians (Farley et al., 2010). Nevertheless, much of the symposium dealt with human attributes, traits, attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, and relationships, and was, in fact, social science.

Mathematicians, biologists, and physicists turn to opinion polls for the same reasons social scientists do. Pressing questions need to be answered, and people cannot think of any better way to get a tentative answer. Everyone has elusive questions they would like answered, and virtually everyone engages in social science, like activities, though often without availing themselves of the best techniques the social sciences have to offer.

That said, most thoughtful people have some concerns about the ambiguities and uncertainties of the social sciences. For example, the tobacco companies got away with selling unhealthy products for decades because the correlations between self-reported tobacco use and poor health were ambiguous. The findings always could be interpreted in more than one way. The tobacco companies could always call top scientists to testify that it was unclear whether smoking was unhealthy or whether smoking and premature death were both manifestations of some other factor, such as a genetic propensity to seek stimulants and take risks. Incidentally, people may have thought those tobacco studies were purely medical studies, but the common self-reports of behaviors used in them make them partly social science. That is, even if a scientist has direct physiological measurements in one part of a study, if he or she is correlating that data with individual reports of beliefs, behaviors, or attitudes, the study is open to the thoughtful concerns associated with the social sciences. 

Despite these concerns, social science can shed light on the importance of the family in society, healthy and unhealthy family dynamics, and the principles that can strengthen family relationships. The social sciences have a definite place as a secondary witness to some important proclamation truths and as a diffuse guiding light on some important family issues. Here are a handful of things to consider when using social science research in our discussions on the family:

Moral Agency. Some people doubt the value of the social sciences because the findings seem to suggest that many important choices are simply the product of one’s environment or biological makeup. The importance of moral choices in the plan of happiness cannot be overstated. Moral agency is central to our progression. Many choices are implied in the proclamation. Social scientists typically do not say much about that which is sovereign and divine within us. They cannot. Social science is about explaining human phenomena that can be explained. Social scientists study the outward manifestations of behavior, the inner workings of the mind, and the contexts in which beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors are forged. The observation that much human behavior appears to be following predictable scripts does not obviate agency. The predictable scripts social scientists study are nothing more than behavioral summaries of what most people will do in a given situation most of the time. Moral agency must always be considered in individual circumstances, something most research will not comment on. 

Truth. In some discussions about the family, people may make allegations of proof from the social sciences. Sometimes these allegations go contrary to proclamation principles. For this reason, it is useful to take a look at the nature of truth in the social sciences. Like many academic disciplines, the social sciences deal with truth that is constructed according to rules. The rules for constructing social science truth are the common ones for publishing peer-reviewed research (Salkind, 2009), which is a different set of rules for defining eternal truth.

Politics. In the proclamation, responsible citizens are asked to engage in political processes and support measures that will “maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society” (¶ 9). Rarely do both sides of a political discussion start out on equal footing. One side or the other, depending on the particular context for the discussion, is initially presumed to be more correct. Individuals representing a viewpoint that is in the minority will almost always have to make a better presentation than the side representing the majority viewpoint. In the social sciences, the majority point of view is often different from the principles put forward in the proclamation. These political points of view can be present in (a) the selection of the research topic, (b) the interpretations that are made of the data, and (c) the decisions as to which articles get published or rejected. With such forces in play, one should not marvel if literature reviews of scientific research on politically sensitive topics seem one-sided. Often it is easier for one side of the discussion to get their research and interpretations published than it is for another.

No Difference. On occasion, social science studies may report a comparison that seems to contradict proclamation principles. Most of the time when social scientists compare two groups, there are two possible outcomes: (a) the groups are different, or (b) the researcher was unable to tell whether the groups were different (Salkind, 2011). Group comparison statistics are set up to detect differences between groups with 95 percent confidence so that we will not say there is a difference when there is not one. The failure to demonstrate such a difference between two groups does not mean the two groups are the same. If, after the statistical analysis, a social scientist’s data suggests that there was only a 90 percent certainty that the two groups were different, then by the rules for constructing social science truth, the scientist would most often say, “There was no difference between the groups.” Consequently, if a study reported that two groups were not different, for example, that gay parents were no different from straight parents, that would not necessarily mean that the two types of parenting had similar impact and produced similar outcomes. But when the finding gets reported in the popular press, that is the way it would sound. This error was made in a state supreme court ruling on the constitutionality of denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The judges were presented in testimony with two opinions about the effects of same-sex parenting on children. One respected scholar testified that there were multiple studies that had concluded that there were no meaningful differences in outcomes for children raised by same-sex parents as compared to opposite-sex parents. A second scholar accurately testified that the body of social science literature on this question was still too weak to provide the courts with a reliable answer to the question. The court ignored the correct argument presented by the latter scholar in favor of the easier-to-grasp no differences argument of the first scholar (see Varnum v. Brien, 2009).

The Premature Assumption (or Non-Assumption) of Causation. The term likely is often interpreted to mean helps to cause. Yet, social scientists mostly analyze their data using correlation coefficients. Most everyone who has had a basic statistics class has heard the quip, “Correlation does not imply causation.” The quip is correct. But neither does correlation, of necessity, imply the lack of causation (remember the tobacco studies). The presence or lack of causation in correlation studies is usually unknown. Sometimes interpreters of social science make or imply the causal statements they want, rather than the ones that are appropriate given their research design.

Included and Excluded Variables. When confronting studies that seem to contradict proclamation principles, one should examine the independent as well as the dependent variables. The variables social scientists choose to include and exclude in their analyses can influence the results obtained and the interpretations made. One ought always to ask, “What other relevant variables could have been included in this study that might change its findings?” When research is offered in support of hot political topics, one should also ask how many different ways the data was analyzed before the results that supported what the researcher wanted to say were obtained. While it is not appropriate, it is not uncommon for researchers to massage the data and to do multiple analyses until preferred results are obtained.

Though social science research is often ambiguous and probabilistic, I have no trouble offering my witness that by the persistent application of social science’s small, probabilistic findings, coupled with spiritual discretion, great and useful things can come to light and aid one’s family. In applying the findings, one should not expect success all the time. And some findings should simply be ignored. If the Spirit says something is wrong, don’t do it—no matter what the social sciences say. Trying to live and raise a family by only attending to social science findings is a recipe for disaster. But pondering the secondary witness of the social sciences and receiving confirmation of one’s best guesses about what will make family life better within one’s stewardship, can be invaluable.

For better and for worse, in spite of its insufficient philosophical grounding and many problems and detractors, social science is being persuasively employed in the grand discussions that are defining marriage and family in our culture. Many people who are in positions to make and change social policy at various levels are being swayed by social science. Those cultural discussions and the social science claims made within some of them are important for shaping the futures of our children and families, as well as our neighborhoods and states. Rather than waiting for social sciences to solve all of their problems and resolve all of their ambiguities, I believe it is best to enter the discussions now, informed by a knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the type of knowledge influential policymakers are finding persuasive. Effective Advocacy skill - backing it up with science, statistics and research: 

(Engle, 2024)

Distinguishing Scholarly from Non-Scholarly Periodicals: A Checklist of Criteria

Introduction

Journals, magazines, and newspapers are important sources for up-to-date information in all disciplines.

With an information collection as large and diverse as we have in this world, it is often difficult to distinguish between the various levels of scholarship found in the collection.

In this guide, we have divided the criteria for evaluating periodical literature into four categories:

• Scholarly

• News and General Interest 

• Popular

• Sensational and Tabloid

Definitions

Scholarly or peer-reviewed journal articles are written by scholars or professionals who are experts in their fields. In the sciences and social sciences, they often publish research results.

Substantive news articles are reliable sources of information on events and issues of public concern.

Popular articles reflect the tastes of the general public and are often meant as entertainment.

Sensational and tabloid articles intend to arouse strong curiosity, interest, or reaction. They do not follow the standards of journalistic ethics, and are not factually accurate.

Keeping these definitions in mind, and realizing that none of the lines drawn between types of journals can ever be totally clear cut, lists of more specific descriptive criteria follow on the next pages.

Permissions Information

If you wish to use or adapt any or all of the content of this Guide, please review our Research Guides Use Conditions including our terms of use and Creative Commons license.

Scholarly

Scholarly journals are also called academic, peer-reviewed, or refereed journals. Strictly speaking, peer-reviewed (also called refereed) journals refer only to those scholarly journals that submit articles to several other scholars, experts, or academics (peers) in the field for review and comment. These reviewers must agree that the article represents properly conducted original research or writing before it can be published.

To check if a journal is peer-reviewed and/or refereed, search the journal by title in Ulrich’s Periodical Directory–look for the referee jersey icon.

What to look for

• Scholarly journal articles often have an abstract, a descriptive summary of the article contents, before the main text of the article.

• Scholarly journals generally have a sober, serious look. They often contain many graphs and charts but few glossy pages or exciting pictures.

• Scholarly journals almost always cite their sources in the form of footnotes or a bibliography. These bibliographies are generally lengthy and cite other scholarly writings.

• Articles are written by a scholar in the field or by someone who has done research in the field. The affiliations of the authors are listed, usually at the bottom of the first page or at the end of the article--universities, research institutions, think tanks, and the like.

• The language of scholarly journals is that of the discipline covered. It often assumes some technical background on the part of the reader.

• The main purpose of a scholarly journal is to report on original research or experimentation in order to make such information available to the rest of the scholarly world.

• Many scholarly journals, though by no means all, are published by a specific professional organization.

Examples of Scholarly Journals:

• Applied Geography

• Archives of Sexual Behavior

• JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association

• Journal of Marriage and the Family (Published by the National Council on Family Relations)

• Journal of Theoretical Biology

• Modern Fiction Studiesournal of the American Medical Association

Substantive News and General Interest

These periodicals may be quite attractive in appearance, although some are in newspaper format in their printed versions. Articles are often illustrated, generally with photographs.

What to look for:

News and general interest periodicals rarely cite sources.

Articles may be written by a member of the editorial staff, a scholar, or a freelance writer. The author's information is called a byline in news sources. The language of these publications is geared to any educated audience. There is no specialty assumed, only interest, and a certain level of intelligence. They are generally published by commercial enterprises or individuals, although some emanate from specific professional organizations. The main purpose of periodicals in this category is to provide information, in a general manner, to a broad audience of concerned citizens.

Substantive news sources are accountable for the accuracy of their reporting and use recognized journalistic standards.

Examples of Substantive News and General Interest Periodical

• The Economist

• National Geographic

• The New York Times

• Scientific American

• Vital Speeches of the Day

Popular

Popular periodicals come in many formats, although often slick and attractive in appearance with lots of color graphics (photographs, drawings, and the rest).

These publications do not cite sources in a bibliography. Information published in popular periodicals is often second or third hand, and the original source is rarely mentioned.

Articles are usually very short and written in simple language.

The main purpose of popular periodicals is to entertain the reader, to sell products (their own or their advertisers), or to promote a viewpoint.

Examples of Popular Periodicals:

• Ebony

• Parents

• People Weekly

• Readers Digest

• Sports Illustrated

• Vogue

Sensational and Tabloid

Sensational periodicals come in a variety of styles, but most often use a small newspaper format. Tabloid newspapers have been a staple in the U.S. since the 19th century.

Sensational and tabloid publications use elementary, inflammatory language meant to arouse curiosity, cater to popular superstitions, increase sales, and promote the publisher's political agenda. They often do so with flashy headlines designed to astonish (for example, Half-man Half-woman Makes Self-Pregnant) or by falsely reporting on domestic and international events. The recent spate of fake news reporting is a recent, online version of this type of publication.

Examples of Sensational and Tabloid Publications:

• Globe

• National Enquirer

• Star

• Weekly World News

Adding light versus bringing darkness and contention to your audience

(Hales, 2002)

The Power of Persuasion and Influence

The COVID-19 Pandemic and the Power of Persuasion

In the year 2020, the world experienced a worldwide pandemic of COVID-19. This virus had a significant impact on the lives of individuals, families, and communities all over the world. Many died due to the effects of this illness. Others lost their jobs and livelihoods as many businesses were shut down. In places where public schools exist, children were sent home to be educated through online resources, or no resources at all. Much more could be said, but to be short, 2020 became a year of tremendous social, emotional, political, and financial upheaval.

With all the terrible effects of this virus, the COVID-19 pandemic has also been an impetus for much innovation in medicine, communication, education, cooperation, and beyond. However, this pandemic not only exposed the high level of polarization and unintelligence that already existed in many countries, it also exacerbated and amplified these weaknesses. Yes, this was a pandemic of an infectious disease to be sure, but other contagions such as anxiety, excessive screen media, tribalism, and poor inquiry also spread, perhaps faster than the infection itself.

For example, many people everywhere were easily persuaded to be either afraid of the virus or afraid of the government. To be anti-vaccine or pro-vaccine. To wear two masks when in public, or to mock those that do. To be fair, there were certainly large numbers of people who were not strongly in either of these camps. Even so, this all begs the question: how did so many become so easily influenced by politicians, political commentators, social media influencers, and news media?

One might think that it was the convincing power of science and medical expertise. As you have already learned, finding and applying truth is vital to human development and family functioning. You also know that these truths can come from multiple sources such as scripture, Latter-day prophets, science and research, and so forth. Objective scientific inquiry is a powerful tool, because it can take some of the guesswork out of what promotes human flourishing and what does not.

Returning to the question, was it the power of scientific evidence that persuaded so many to have such strong opinions regarding COVID-19 related issues? This explanation makes little sense considering that those on the extremes of either side of these issues claimed to have experts and science backing them up. Something beyond research and facts played a significant role in convincing people to one position or another. Part of the answer lies in what evolutionary psychologists have called group selection, where humans choose a “tribe” to join and then search for evidence that supports the group's position. Yet, even deeper than this tribal explanation, is a power that influences one’s decisions through emotion more than the logical mind. How is this done and why does it matter? Exploring these questions regarding the power of persuasion and its role in promoting and protecting the family will be the focus of this portion of the chapter.

The Science of Persuasion

If you only had to pick one answer, which of the following do you think is more powerful in persuading individuals that something is good for them or bad for them?

1. Research and facts

2. Stories and personal narratives

Interestingly enough, most people would say research and facts, however, even research does not support this answer. For centuries, information was scarce, and the decisions individuals, families, and governments made were often reliant on local expert advice, ancient wisdom, or personal intuition. However, with the advent of the internet, most people in the world can seek answers and make informed decisions independently. Unfortunately, the abundance of information has led to a different challenge – the prevalence of informational noise, making it difficult to find clear answers.

As illustrated during the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, our current reality is characterized by an overwhelming amount of information, making us more susceptible to compelling, emotional stories. Why is this? Stanford University professor Dr. Jennifer Aaker has discovered that meaningful stories can play a crucial role in shaping our beliefs, because they are memorable, impactful, and foster personal connection.

To illustrate the importance of memorability, Dr. Aaker tells the story of Eugene O'Kelly, the CEO of a consulting company. She goes on to say:

Eugene started having headaches and he was referred to a top neurosurgeon in New York where he was diagnosed with late-stage brain cancer. He was given 3 months to live. He started talking to his wife about how he was going to spend those hundred days. He was purposeful about who he spent time with and what stories to share with them. He also thought hard about what would be remembered in those last 100 days. He and his wife would live each day with a focus on finding perfect moments where time expands and when noise is separated from signal. All that exists is that single moment. And he found in those perfect moments, those were the most memorable stories that defined his life. (Future of StoryTelling, 2013)

Studies reveal that stories outshine statistics in terms of memorability. In one study, researchers asked students to make a one minute persuasive pitch to other members in the class. On average, a typical student used 2.5 statistics in their pitch, only one in ten told a story. 10 minutes later, the researcher asked everyone to pull out a sheet of paper and write down every single idea they remember. Only 5% remember any statistic. Over 60% of the students remember the story. Stories are memorable in a way that statistics aren't (Graeber et al., 2022). 

Research also indicates that individuals are more likely to support a cause if they believe in the associated story. In a study on fundraising for Save the Children (Small, n.d.), two groups were asked to donate their money. The first group listened to the story about a seven-year-old girl from Mali named Rokia. The second group only heard facts and figures about those who are suffering on the continent of Africa. The participants in the first group donated more than twice the amount as the second group. So, if you are looking to persuade someone, research is telling us that story and personal narrative is more impactful than research itself.

Lastly, stories can foster a personal connection between individuals. Dr. Aaker explains that “research shows that if we present statistics to an audience, a certain part of the brain, called the Broca's and Wernicke's area, gets activated. So the language processing part of the brain is activated and we can understand, but not feel. When the story is shared, the audience feels the story. Our whole brain is activated and meaning is extracted. The meaning of the story comes from the personal connection the audience feels. When they're listening to the story and when a story is well told, they're able to feel connected. Not just to the story, but to the storyteller.” (Future of StoryTelling, 2013).

Recent behavioral research emphasizes the power of storytelling, suggesting that those who excel at storytelling will emerge as effective leaders, and there is no other cause in need of powerful leadership than in the home and in family advocacy. Asking ourselves the fundamental question of what is the story or why am I doing this, may lead to different choices in how we allocate our time and efforts in promoting and protecting the family (Polletta & Redman, 2020).

Is Persuasion a Weapon or a Tool?

Given the evidence regarding the persuasive power of storytelling, one might wonder if wielding this power to advocate for the family is self-serving or selfless? In other words, is persuasion of God or the devil?

Consider how incredibly persuasive Satan is at getting each of us to sin! You might say that the devil could teach a master class on persuasion. If you look throughout the scriptures for individuals who might be spokesmen for Satan, you will find a pattern of persuasive individuals who know how to charismatically prey on the people's emotions. For instance, Amalickiah “was desirous to be a king, and those people who…were also desirous that he should be their king…had been led by the flatteries of Amalickiah.” (Amla 46) He was also so persuasive, the scriptures describe him as a man of “cunning device and a man of many flattering words, that he led away the hearts of many people to do wickedly.” Flattery is a powerful way to manipulate people’s emotions and beliefs. It is defined as “false and insincere praise given to further one’s own interest.” Knowing the psychological and brain research regarding the power of story, there is little doubt that Amalickiah used stories and narratives to deliver his flattering remarks.

Contrast that example with how the Lord uses the word persuasion in Doctrine and Covenants section 121 when speaking to those who lead and influence in the church.

“No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile…”

In sum, any skill or ability can be used for selfish or selfless purposes. Regardless of your positions on the COVID-19 related issues mentioned previously, we need to be aware that all human beings are susceptible to believing half-truths if they are couched in a powerful story and narrative. One group of researchers (Frischlich et al., 2019) discovered that propaganda employing powerful narratives regarding extremist views about religion and violence were quite effective in changing participants' views. What does this teach us? If one is not grounded in correct principles, then stories can be used as a weapon of manipulation. A simplified way to thank about this is:

• Research influences a person’s logical head.

• Story and narrative affect their emotional heart.

Having a healthy balance of the two will help minimize the chances that one is either manipulating and/or manipulated.

To get a better idea of how persuasion can be used for good or evil, consider searching the scriptures to find other examples of how the word persuasion is used, and write down what you find. Also think about writing down a few other synonyms for persuade that you find as well.

Ponder this: When was the last time you tried to persuade someone that your ideas were correct and good? What was your approach?

In a BYU Devotional address titled "Truth and Tolerance", President Dallin H. Oaks offers this counsel:

When believers seek to promote their positions in the public square, their methods and their advocacy should always be tolerant of the opinions and positions of others who do not share their beliefs. We should not add to the extremism that divides our society. As believers, we must always speak with love and show patience, understanding, and compassion toward our adversaries. Christian believers are under command to love their neighbors (see Luke 10:27), to forgive (see  Matthew 18:21–35), and to do good to those who despitefully use them (see Matthew 5:44). They should always remember the Savior’s teaching that we ‘bless them that curse [us], do good to them that hate [us], and pray for them which despitefully use [us], and persecute [us]’ (Matthew 5:44).

As believers, we should also frame our arguments and positions in ways that contribute to the reasoned discussion and accommodation that are essential to democratic government in a pluralistic society. By this means we will contribute to the civility that is essential to preserve our civilization.

Important Elements of Persuasion in Family Advocacy

A Captivating Story

When writing persuasively, you need to start with a powerful hook or a way to capture the attention of your audience. Starting with a story or shocking statistical data is a great way to hook your audience. Once you’ve got them hooked, you need to keep them engaged with a captivating story. A captivating story evokes strong emotion in your audience, describes the experience(s) in vivid detail, and fosters the reader’s desire to know more and stay engaged in your story.

Story of Self, Story of Us, Story of Now

For those who are deeply interested in the family unit and in sustainable societies, the message that needs to go down into the hearts of others, should be based in truth. Assuming that we are anchored in doctrinal and scientific truths, how then can we use stories effectively and responsibly? 

Harvard University professor and renowned community organizer, Marshall Ganz, introduced the concept of "Story of Self, Story of Us, and Story of Now" (Ganz, 2009) as a framework for effective persuasion and social change. Here's a brief summary of each component:

Story of Self

This involves sharing a personal narrative and/or story, connecting one's individual experiences and values to the cause or message being communicated. The goal of the “story of self” is to establish authenticity, build trust, and demonstrate how personal values align with the broader purpose. By telling a compelling story of self, the communicator humanizes the message and the messenger, and makes it relatable to others. This can also be done by using the personal story of another person, but it is often most effective with one’s own personal story. 

Here is an example of a story of self from a fellow BYU-Idaho student:

"My mom grew up in a house, not a home. I describe it this way because my mom was raised by two abusive parents. Unfortunately, her own father and mother were also victims of abuse and neglect in their own upbringing. This is what likely led to toxic parenting strategies when it came to raising my mom and her two older siblings. My mom and her siblings were expected to be seen and not heard …They always had a sense of when their dad was in a particularly bad mood and often felt they had to look out for themselves, rather than each other…survival of the fittest.

Although what my mom lived through as a child was the norm for their family, it wasn’t until she dated my dad that she knew things could be different. She saw the love and respect my dad’s family had for each other and wanted that for her future family. My mom began to recognize what intergenerational abuse had done to her and her siblings so she fought to end the cycle with her. Because of her courageous efforts, I grew up in a home, not merely a house.

Because of her, I will never know the fear of getting on Mom or Dad’s bad side or the terror felt wondering if or when they will unleash a barrage of physical or verbal slaps on me. I will never know what it is like to have a parent tell me I’m worthless or watch my sister endure a punishment for something she didn’t do. I will never experience the pain that my mom suffered at the hands of her own parents because she found a way to stop it. She found her way out of the abuse and married a man with the same goal of raising children in a loving home. I am so thankful and in awe at the work my mom put in to end the intergenerational abuse in her family."

Story of Us

The "Story of Us" expands the narrative to include the collective experiences and shared identity of a community or group. For example, earlier in this chapter, we discussed the COVID-19 pandemic, which was an example of the “story of us.” This helps the intended audience bond more with not only the messenger but the message itself. This part of the storytelling framework aims to foster a sense of belonging and solidarity among the audience.  It emphasizes the common values, struggles, and aspirations that bind individuals together.

Story of Now

The "Story of Now" focuses on the current moment, highlighting the urgency and significance of taking action. It connects the personal and collective narratives to the immediate challenges or opportunities at hand. This part of the framework serves as a call to action, motivating individuals to engage in the cause or movement. It also helps the audience (listener or reader) understand the relevance of the message to what is happening right now in their private and public lives.

In essence, Professor Ganz's storytelling framework recognizes the power of personal narratives (Story of Self), the importance of fostering a shared identity and connection among a group (Story of Us), and the need to link these stories to the present moment to drive action (Story of Now). It's a strategic approach to storytelling that has been widely used in the realms of community organizing, activism, and leadership development.

What This Means for Family Advocacy

If the COVID-19 pandemic has taught the citizens of this world anything, it is that truth can be hard to discern, and people can be easily persuaded for better or worse. But what does all of this mean for those who are motivated “to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit in society”? If we want to be successful at promoting the family, we need to understand that research can ground us in facts, but story is what moves hearts. Both of these–research and story–can be combined to create a powerfully persuasive elixir that changes the world for the better. As with any ability or power, it ought to be used responsibly. We all can, and should, put in the work to develop our ability to cultivate the power of persuasion.

References

Armour, S., & Haynie, D. L. (2007). Adolescent Sexual Debut and Later Delinquency. In Adolescent Sexual Debut and Later Delinquency: Vol. Volume 36 (p. pages 141-152). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10964-006-9128-4

Engle, M. (2024). Distinguishing Scholarly from Non-Scholarly Periodicals: A Checklist of Criteria: Introduction. Cornell University Library. https://guides.library.cornell.edu/scholarlyjournals

Erickson, M. F., & Aird, E. G. (2005). The Motherhood Study: Fresh Insights on Mothers’ Attitudes and Concerns (p. 10). Institute for American Values.

Frischlich, L., Rieger, D., Morten, A., & Bente, G. (2019). The Power of a Good Story: Narrative Persuasion in Extremist Propaganda and Videos against Violent Extremism. International Journal of Conflict and Violence (IJCV), a644 Pages. https://doi.org/10.4119/IJCV-3106

Future of StoryTelling (Director). (2013). Persuasion and the Power of Story: Jennifer Aaker.

Ganz, M. (2009). What Is Public Narrative: Self, Us & Now. Harvard Library Office for Scholarly Communication.

Graeber, T., Roth, C., & Zimmermann, F. (2022). Stories, Statistics and Memory. Harvard Business School, 80.

Hales, R. D. (2002, April). Out of Darkness into His Marvelous Light. Ensign.

Harden, K. P., Mendle, J., Cruz, J. E., Turkheimer, E., & Emery, R. (2008). Rethinking Timing of First Sex and Delinquency. National Institues of Health. 4/17/2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-007-9228-9

Jose, A., O’Leary, K. D., Moyer, A., & Buehler, C. (2010). Does Premarital Cohabitation Predict Subsequent Marital Stability and Marital Quality? A Meta-Analysis (Vol. 72). State University of New York.

Kimball, S. W. (1980, October). Families Can Be Eternal. General Conference. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1980/10/families-can-be-eternal?lang=eng

Orh, U., Robins, R., & Trzesniewski, K. H. (2010). The Development of Self-Esteem. Journal Information Journal TOC. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414547414

Polletta, F., & Redman, N. (2020). When Do Stories Change Our Minds? Narrative Persuasion About Social Problems. Sociology Compass, 14(4), e12778. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12778

Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., & Markman, H. J. (2009). Working with Cohabitation in Relationship Education and Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332690902813794

Small, D. (n.d.). To Increase Charitable Donations, Appeal to the Heart—Not the Head.

Smith, J. Jr. (1976). History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. OUTLOOK VERLAG. https://www.amazon.com/History-Church-Christ-Latter-day-Saints/dp/3368906569

The Church of Jesus Christe of Latter-Day Saints. (2008). Worldwide Leadership Training Meeting Building Up a Righteous Posterity.

Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generations: The real differences between Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, Boomers, and Silents - and what they mean for America’s future (First Atria Books hardcover edition). Atria Books.