COMM475 Final Study Guide Compliance Gaining and Sequential Persuasion What is it Persuasion but limited to interpersonal contexts Early research Marwell Schmitt 1967 o Promise if you comply I will reward you ex you offer to increase Matt s allowance if he studies more o Threat if you do not comply I will punish you ex you threaten to forbid Matt to use the car if he doesn t start studying more o Expertise positive if you comply you will be rewarded because of the nature of things ex You tell Matt if he gets good grades he will be able to get into a good college o Expertise negative if you do not comply you will be punished because of the nature of things ex You tell Matt if he does not get good grades he will no be able to get into a good college o Liking act friendly and helpful to get the person in a good frame of mind so that he or she will comply with the request ex you try to be as friendly and pleasant as possible to put Matt in a good mood before asking to study o Pregiving reward the person before requesting compliance ex you raise Matt s allowance and tell him you now expect him to study o Aversive Stimulation Continuously punish the person making cessation continue contingent on his or her compliance ex you forbid us of the car and tell him he cant use it unless he studies more o Debt You owe me compliance because of past favors ex you point out that you have sacrificed and saved to pay for Matt s education so he should get good grades o Moral Appeal you are an immoral person if you do not comply ex you tell Matt that it is morally wrong for anyone not to get as good grades as possible and that he should study more o Self Feeling Positive you will feel better about yourself if you comply ex you tell Matt he will feel proud if he studies more o Self Feeling negative you will feel worse about yourself if you do not comply ex you will feel ashamed if you get bad grades o Altercasting positive a person with good qualities would comply ex you tell Matt that because he is a mature person he will naturally want to study more o Altercasting negative only a person with bad qualities would not comply ex you tell Matt that he should study because someone who is childish does not study o Altrusim I need your compliance very badly so do it for me ex you tell matt you want him to get into a good college it is a personal favor to you o Esteem positive people you value will think better of you if you comply ex you tell Matt that the whole family will be proud if he gets good grades o Esteem negative people you value will think less if you if you do not comply ex you tell Matt the whole family will be disappointed in him if he gets bad grades Situational factors affecting strategy selection type of relationship power reward coercive expert legitimate referent communicator characteristics design logics expressive design logic conventional design logic rhetorical design logic Type of relationship select different strategies based on ex strangers vs intimates Power French and Raven 1959 people with power are usually more persuasive Reward ability to reward Coercive ability to punish Expert power because you re an expert somewhere Ex Doctors Legitimate based on the roles that you play ex CEO vs someone in the mailroom Referent having to do with someone s charisma Perceived resistance if we think the person is going to say no to us Personal benefits if you are going to benefit from it ex trying to convince your friends to help you move Rights if you have the right to ask Relational consequences if you think it ll have an effect on your relationship ex if you think someone will get mad at you break up with you How to resist other s compliance gaining strategies McLaughlin Cody and Robey 1980 Non negotiation Negotiation work with the person to come up with another solution Identity management altercasting Justifying rationalization Criticisms of compliance gaining research Lacks of comprehensive list of strategies Kellerman and Cole 1994 growing and growing unmanageable is it really providing anything great Choosing from a list rather than constructing a list give scenarios and ask what people would do in those situations Sender focus what the sender of the message is doing transactional process of creating meaning bring in receiver and see how this can be negotiated Directions for current future compliance gaining research Dillard 2004 2008 Goals Plans Action Theory Primary goals actual thing we want the other individual to do Secondary goals o Identity goals concerned with maintaining our own identity and the identity of the other person o Interaction goals certain norms for interacting we want to maintain this as we go through these concern with our social identity o Resource get as much out of the situation as we can want to maintain gain resources not lose them Sequential Persuasion Used a lot in sales Questionable ethics Specific type of compliance gaining strategy Persuasive messages delivered in a sequence the frist messages isn t what you really want the second message is delivering message in the sequence is more successful in gaining compliance than delivering the message itself The tactics pre giving foot in the door door in the face foot in the mouth That s not all lowball bait and switch disrupt and then reframe legitimizing paltry contributions fear and relief happiness and then disappointment What are they Be able to identify examples Pregiving giving them something first then waiting then asking for what it is that you actually want Food in the door FITD ask for a small request gain compliance for this request and then later come back and ask for a much larger request that you actually want o Request is not too large or too small o Prosocial causes money for charity or asking people to volunteer their time o No external incentives all has to be done voluntarily o Doesn t need to be the same person o Labeling as helpful may increase effectiveness Foot in the mouth can you not help them o Hard to get around o Ask how you re doing you say well they say there s people doing a lot worse than you how Door in the face opposite of FITD asking for a big request and getting it denied then asking for the smaller request after because it doesn t seem like as big of a deal o First request needs to be large enough but not too large o Prosocial causes o Second request immediately follows first o More successful if it is the same person doing the same request That s Not All More likely to