IB Psychology HL - SCLOA - Discuss the Use Of Compliance Techniques

• a form of social influence

- involves intellectual and emotional submission in reaction to a general request

• lowballing

- foot in the door (FITD)

• making a small request to increase compliance

• then later follow up with a larger request

Main study: Freedman and Fraser (1966)

1. 2 conditions:
   - FITD 1 (same topics)
   - FITD 2 (different topics)
   - control (proceeded directly to larger request)

FitD 1: Homeowners were requested to display a small ‘drive safely’ sign, then 2 weeks later asked to display a bigger sign
FitD 2: households were asked to sign a petition to “keep California beautiful”, then 2 weeks later were asked to display a big ‘Drive Safely’ sign

• control: only 17% compliance

• FitD 1: nearly full compliance with small request, and 76% compliance in actual request

• FitD 2: almost 50% compliance with actual request (despite the completely diff topics)

• signing the petition/putting up the small sign changed the homeowners’ views of themselves

• they began to think of themselves as unselfish citizens with civic principles

• their compliance with the bigger request was due to a need to comply with this new image

Cialdini (2009):
- due to our need to be consistent and show commitment to our previous acts

Burger (1999):

• must have time delay between first and second request

• first request must not be so unreasonable that most people will refuse them

Chartrand et al. (1999): if the same person makes both requests, the likelihood of refusal is higher

• takes advantage of people’s need to stay consistent to commitments

• people generally agree more if the second request is similar in topic to the first (in line with commitment)

• FitD is most powerful when self-image is related to the request

• particularly helpful to those trying to solicit donations of time, money, effort, and even body parts

• involves changing an offer to make it less attractive to the target person

• only after target person has agreed to it

Main studies: Burger and Cornelius (2003)

1. Students were contacted by a caller to donate $5 to a scholarship fund for underprivileged students

2. 3 conditions:
   - control: students were simply asked to donate
   - interrupt: students were told that contributors would get a free smoothie coupon but caller mentioned there were no coupons left before students answered
   - lowball: students were told that contributors would get a free smoothie coupon, but upon agreeing, were informed that there were no more coupons

• control: 42% compliance

• interrupt: 16% compliance

• lowball: 77.6% compliance

• shows that lowballing works because of commitment

Cialdini (2009): when people make public commitments; new self image increases resolve to commit

Hornik et al. (1990):

• compared the effectiveness of the FITD technique and lowballing in increasing the response rate of random people to interviews on public health issues

• lowballing was significantly more effective in inducing compliance

• but a technique combining both the FITD and the lowballing techniques emerged as even more effective than either applied alone

• hardcore ver of “analysis”

• give detailed information that reveals underlying assumptions or the interaction of various factors

• make judgments supported by evidence

• discuss the relative importance of different factors to the basic term/concept under consideration

• give a detailed description accompanied by a clear, thorough, and organized reflection of the matter

when examining each technique:
• distinguish the components of each technique and discuss how they relate to one another
- discuss principles underlying the technique and specific research methods influences data collection