Science shows why it’s important to speak — not write — to people who disagree with you

i doubt this is GENERALLY true. Take Trump as an example. Some of the things that are expressed in writing are almost enough to make one think he has a point. But when he speaks, his language, his verbal tics, his large number of repetitions and poor grammar, make him come across as an ignorant buffoon.
So, i think, that these experiments would have to match EXACTLY what was said in written form with the verbal form, and this is impossible given the wide variations in tone, dialect, facial expressions, posture etc that exist when an argument is delivered verbally. EVEN if one simply heard an argument as opposed to it being read, I think there are likely any number of factors that may vary in the spoken form that do not exist in the written form, and these factors can work in different directions, such that all possible outcomes can be achieved in exits contrasting verbal vs printed arguments (speech rate being one of them, and the intensity of the speech another, along with whether one sounds educated or not. So, to me–I doubt that this work will live up to its billings–though it might, in the long run, help us identify what it is is speech that matters most re its ability to convince.