Power and Persuasion: A Systematic Literature Review on the Persuasive Impact of Political Speech Acts

This study systematically examined the persuasive impact of speech acts in political speeches. This was to understand the influence of such speeches in shaping public opinion, social realities, and political authority. The Systematic Literature Review (SLR) utilised the Web of Science (WoS) and SCOPUS databases, guided by a number of specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. A final sample of 13 articles were identified and analysed. The findings further supported past scholars’ assertion that speech acts are powerful persuasive tools which are predominantly used to achieve various effects. As such, politicians were reported to use commissive, assertive, and declarative acts (apart from other pragmatic tools such as mitigators, disclaimers, and politeness strategies) to convey commitments, foster unity, assert authority, and maintain credibility. The use of these acts has allowed politicians to manage their public image while resonating with their audiences. Despite the powerful persuasion, speech acts, if manipulated through fallacies, incivility, or deceptive illocutionary acts, can severely damage long-term political trust and legitimacy. Therefore, speech acts must be employed prudently by politicians as the effectiveness of these persuasive tools is closely tied to audience interpretation. Misuse of speech acts can erode public trust.

Persuasion, politicians’ speeches, speech acts, pragmatics, systematic literature review

1. Al-Shboul, O. K., Al-Khawaldeh, N. N., Hamdan, H. J., & Alqbailat, N. (2024). Macro and micro analysis of motivational speech acts in Biden’s political speech. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 12(1), 362-373. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alharbi, A. (2018). Towards a performative theory of solidarity discourse. Cogent arts & humanities, 5(1), 1495044. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alinezhad, H., & Nemati, M. (2019). Divulging Power of Words-Personal Pronouns and Speech Acts in Political Speeches. Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 211-224. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Angermuller, J. (2015). Discourse studies. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.03216-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Astiandani, F. R., Setiawan, S., & Mustofa, A. (2022). Speech acts and language styles of Biden’s victory speech for promoting peace values. Studies in English Language and Education, 9(2), 812-831. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words. Harvard university press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Ayeomoni, O. M., & Akinkuolere, O. S. (2012). A Pragmatic Analysis of Victory and Inaugural Speeches of President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua. Theory & Practice in Language Studies (TPLS), 2(3). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bahrn, F. F. S., Shaharuddin, S. S. S., & Aziz, M. N. (2024). Addressing Multilateralism Reboot among Nations: Analysis of Speech Acts in Anwar Ibrahim’s UNGA Speech. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(8), 4062-4073. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Bakhriddinova, B. M., & Ismatova, S. (2025, September). Linguopragmatic Analysis of Political Discourse Based on Speech Act Theory. In 2025 10th International Conference on Computer Science and Engineering (UBMK) (pp. 428-432). IEEE. 10.1109/UBMK67458.2025.11206761 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Dayter, D. (2021). Dealing with interactionally risky speech acts in simultaneous interpreting: The case of self-praise. Journal of Pragmatics, 174, 28-42. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Dhayef, Q. A., & Fadhil, E. M. (2024). Disclaiming in the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson's Questions (PMQs) Sessions: A Pragmatic perspective. Journal of Ecohumanism, 3(7), 4351-4365. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Efat, A. A., Atiq, A., Abeed, A. S., Momin, A., & Alam, M. G. R. (2023). EMPOLITICON: NLP and ML based approach for context and emotion classification of political speeches from transcripts. IEEE Access, 11, 54808-54821. 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3282162 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. El-dali, H. (2019). Perfecting the theory of meaning: the story of pragmatic and discourse analyses. Adv Soc Sci Cult, 1(1), 50-89. https://doi.org/10.22158/assc.v1n1p50 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Gervais, B. T. (2023). Political communication. In Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance (pp. 9587-9595). Cham: Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-319-20928-9_2531 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Goovaerts, I., & Turkenburg, E. (2023). How contextual features shape incivility over time: An analysis of the evolution and determinants of political incivility in televised election debates (1985–2019). Communication research, 50(4), 480-507. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Haroon, H. A., Rahim, N. A. A., Basir, N., & Zubir, Z. (2020). Lakuan Ilokusi Ucapan Zahid Hamidi dalam PAU 2017 dan 2018. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 20(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hamad, S. S., Ali, A. M., Paramasivam, S., & Jabar, M. A. A. (2022). Complex Speech Act as a Performance of Fallacies in Nouri al-Maliki's Political Speeches. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 22(4). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Hamo, M., & Kampf, Z. (2023). “But Then Again, Too Few to Mention”: Negotiating Regret in Israeli and American News Interviews. Contrastive Pragmatics, 4(3), 410-436. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Hudkins, J. M. (2015). Speaking with the People's Voice: How Presidents Invoke Public Opinion. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Khater, H. A., Altakhaineh, A. R. M., & Dahnous, F. (2024). Pragmatic analysis of King Abdullah’s speech: exploring speech acts and societal context. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 11(1), 2433879. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Kotenko, O., Кosharna, N., Chepurna, M., Trebyk, O., & Bakhov, I. (2023). Linguistic and stylistic features of English public speeches. World Journal of English Language, 13(4), 56-60. 10.5430/wjel.v13n4p56 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Koussouhon, L. A., & Dadjo, S. D. (2016). Pragmatic analyses of President Goodluck Jonathan’s concession speech and General Muhammadu Buhari’s acceptance speech: a comparative appraisal. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 5(4), 12. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kravchenko, N., Zhykharieva, O., & Kryknitska, I. (2023). The Topos of “Precaution” in the German Discourse on Assistance to Ukraine: Iconic Reproduction through Linguistics and Pragmatics. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem, 31(3), 1272-1302. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Latif, E. A. (2017). Arabic political discourse. In The Routledge Handbook of Arabic Linguistics (pp. 518-530). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315147062 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Liu, J., & Ali Huddin, M. R. (2025). Illocutionary speech acts in the debate between Trump and Biden in the 2024 presidential race. LINGUISTICA SILESIANA. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mardiana, D., Rokhman, F., Rustono, & Mardikantoro, H. B. (2025). Speech act of political figures in the discourse of educational development: an interpersonal pragmatic approach. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 12(1), 2463728. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Roberts, T. (2023). How to do things with deepfakes. Synthese, 201(2), 43. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Shkvorchenko, N. (2020). Linguistic and gender peculiarities of English political discourse. Analele Universităţii din Craiova. Seria Ştiinţe Filologice. Lingvistică, (1-2), 398-416. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Simburger, E. (2017). Discourse analysis. Discourse and Society, 6(4), 459-460. 10.1002/9781118430873.est0632 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Strukowska, M. E. (2024). Exploring speech act patterns in anthropological pragmatics. Linguistica Silesiana, 45(1), 215-236. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Ziarani, M. Z., & Mirkooshesh, A. (2025). Public communication and leadership: A study of Trump and Harris' public speeches. 10.22059/jcountst.2024.382880.1164. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Zitha, I., Mlambo, R., & Kwarere, T. (2026). Conditional clauses and political persuasive discourse: a case study of the 2024 South African election. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 13(1), 2625593. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Culture: The (In) Human Engagement with Nature
• Identity Crisis in Orhan Pamuk’s The Black Book: A Critical Interpretation
• Metaphor in Pop-Up Swahili Sayings: Is it a New Meaning or a New Idea?
• Racial Identity and Ecological Belonging in Toni Morrison’s Beloved: A Study through Social Identity Theory and Eco-Race Theory
• The Role of Non-Human Agency in Contemporary Literature: A Posthumanist Analysis