persuasive
Chapter 7
Persuasion
Dorling Kindersley RF/Thinkstock
Learning Objectives
By the end of the chapter you should be able to:
· Describe the characteristics of communicators that make them more persuasive
· Describe what characteristics of a message make it more persuasive
· Describe how culture, age, and self-esteem affect persuasion
· Differentiate the central route from the peripheral route to persuasion within the elaboration likelihoodmodel
· Describe the persuasion techniques involving initial small requests
· Describe the use of reciprocity as a persuasion technique
· Explain techniques that begin with a large request
· Explain persuasion techniques that use scarcity
· Describe techniques that involve changing attention
Chapter Outline
7.1 Who—Characteristics of the Persuader
· Credibility: Expertise and Trustworthiness
· Attractiveness and Likeability
7.2 What—Characteristics of the Message
· Emotion
· Framing
· One-Sided and Two-Sided Messages
7.3 To Whom—Characteristics of the Audience
· Culture
· Age
· Self-Esteem
· Elaboration Likelihood Model
7.4 How—Persuasion Techniques
· Foot-in-the-Door Technique
· Lowball Technique
· Legitimization-of-Paltry-Favors
· Reciprocity
· Door-in-the-Face Technique
· That's-not-all Technique
· Scarcity
· Pique Technique
· Disrupt-Then-Reframe Technique
Chapter Summary
* * *
Every day, other people try to persuade us. Advertisements on television, the Internet, or the radio attempt to persuade us tobuy a product. Family members, friends, and employers ask us to do them a favor. Some of these messages we quickly dismiss,but others convince us to buy the extra absorbent paper towels, or bake cupcakes for that fundraiser.
Imagine watching an infomercial for an exercise machine. The product is described by an attractive and trim fitness expert to amildly skeptical person in front of an enthusiastic studio audience. The machine is demonstrated, the positive benefits and easeof use of the machine are touted, and viewers are offered the product at a low, low price. By the end of the infomercial theskeptic is convinced of the machine's miraculous powers and you find yourself picking up the phone to order one for yourself.What makes such communications persuasive? Social psychology can help us find the answers to these questions by applyingthe scientific method to different aspects of persuasion—the persuader, the message, and the audience—as well as investigatingspecific persuasion techniques. Knowing more about persuasion may allow us to better resist being persuaded in the future.
Persuasive communication can be divided into four parts: the communicator, the message, the audience, and the technique (seeFigure 7.1). First we will deal with what characteristics of persuaders make people more likely to be persuaded. Next, we willthink about characteristics of the message that lead people to change. Then, we will explore what characteristics of theaudience can lead them to be persuaded. Finally, we will cover a variety of persuasion techniques advertisers, charities, friends,or relatives might use to persuade.
7.1 Who—Characteristics of the Persuader
Persuasive messages come from a source. The source may be someone you respect or someone you dislike—someone who knows a lotabout a topic or someone who knows little. This someone could be a friend or a stranger. Depending on the characteristics of thepersuader, people may be easily persuaded or skeptical of the claims of a message. Characteristics that have received a great deal ofattention from researchers are credibility, attractiveness, and likeability.
Figure 7.1: The who, what, to whom, and how ofpersuasion
The four variables that affect persuasion are the person doing the persuading,the message being transmitted, the audience receiving the message, and thetechniques used by the persuader.
Credibility: Expertise and Trustworthiness
PNC/Photodisc/Getty Images
Lawyers often retain expert witnesses to help strengthen theirclient's case in favor of the jury.
As you watch an infomercial, a central communicator is likely to offerarguments for the product. Whether or not you listen to this person likelydepends on how credible you view that person to be. Credibility has twoaspects: expertise and trustworthiness (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953). Acommunicator with expertise is one who appears to have knowledge andis able to communicate it. A trustworthy communicator is one we believeis giving us accurate information.
Messages from expert sources are persuasive when the message includescoherent and high quality arguments from within that expert's field ofknowledge (DeBono & Harnish, 1988; Petty, Cacioppo, & Goldman, 1981).Messages that come from an expert source but are of low quality are lesspersuasive than messages coming from someone who is less of an expert,but who has strong arguments (Bohner, Ruder, & Erb, 2002; Tormala,Brinol, & Petty, 2006). However, an excess of confidence can sometimeslimit the effectiveness of the persuasion. For example, in court an expertwith a moderate level of confidence appears to be most persuasive,perhaps because a very high level of confidence is viewed as arrogant or unrealistic (Cramer, DeCoster, Harris, Fletcher, & Brodsky, 2011).Expert opinion is generally only persuasive within that expert's domain of expertise. For example, you might believe what fitness expertssay about exercise, but not what they say about cake decorating. An exception to this would be involving children, due to their place insociety. For example, using children to demonstrate the safety features in a new vehicle may resonate with an adult's perceived role asprotector and nurturer (Pratkanis & Gliner, 2004).
Expand Your Knowledge: Propaganda
Governments, political parties, organizations, andindividuals have all used persuasive communications in an effort to sway the public. The website Propaganda Critic from the Institute for Propaganda Analysis, offers alook at propaganda, including a page on why investigatingpropaganda matters and analysis of a number ofpropaganda techniques.
At times, we may receive a message and not have the time or energy tothink carefully through the arguments. In those instances thetrustworthiness of the communicator can serve as a cue regardingwhether we should trust the message. If we perceive that thecommunicator is providing us with accurate information, we may notfeel it necessary to carefully examine the message itself. When weperceive the communicator to be less trustworthy, we may carefullyexamine the message to determine if we can trust it. A message can, inthis instance, still be persuasive if it contains strong arguments. Anonexpert who cites a study by the American Heart Associationshowing that the exercise equipment improves heart health in 90% ofusers has a strong argument, despite lack of expertise. An expert whopoints out that the stainless steel frame of the equipment will matchany decor has a weak argument. Strong messages from non-expert sources can be persuasive because people carefully examine thearguments (Priester & Petty, 2003). Such careful examination creates stronger and more long-lasting attitude change.
Test Yourself
Click on the question below to reveal the answer.
· What are the two aspects of credibility?
Attractiveness and Likeability
The attractiveness of the communicator is another factor in the persuasiveness of the message. In general, physically attractivecommunicators are more persuasive than less attractive communicators (Chaiken, 1979; Debevec, Madden, & Kernan, 1986; DeBono &Telesca, 1990). Physically attractive communicators may be more persuasive because they are viewed as more trustworthy than lessattractive communicators—research has shown that we stereotype physically attractive people as having other positive qualities such asintelligence and honesty (Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijani, & Longo, 1991; Langlois, et al., 2000). We also tend to like physically attractivepeople more and want to interact with them (Reingen & Kernan, 1993). Even when a product is unrelated to attractiveness, we findattractive communicators more persuasive than less attractive communicators (Praxmarer, 2011).
Individuals we like are also more persuasive to us. You might buy Girl Scout cookies from the neighbor who you know and like, but youare likely to buy fewer cookies from the Girl Scout across town. For this reason, advertisers have found tricky ways to make it appear thatan appeal is coming from someone we know and like. An envelope that appears to be addressed by hand and have a note inside is morelikely to be opened and read than one that is clearly mass produced. In one study of this idea, a number of car owners in Dallas weresent an ad for car wax that appeared to have been ripped from a magazine, with a handwritten sticky note attached; if the recipient wasnamed Mary, for example, the note would read "Mary—Try this. It works!—J," with "J" being the supposed sender. The ad contained amail-in card for a free sample of the car wax. The ad was sent in an unmarked white envelope, hand-addressed, with a first-class stamp.Another set of car owners were mailed the same ad, but in a typed envelope sent through metered mail, and the ad inside was simplyprinted on a sheet of paper with no note attached. When the message in the ad was strong and it appeared to come from someone theyknew, almost double the number of car owners requested a free sample than if the message appeared to be mass produced (Howard &Kerin, 2004). A note from someone we might know is more persuasive than a message from a faceless company.
Should the communicators make their desires to persuade explicit? To maintain credibility and avoid reactance, advertisers generallyavoid stating that they are trying to persuade; however, in some contexts such information can be helpful. You would likely attributeselfish motives to the fitness expert who is trying to sell exercise equipment he designed. But your doctor presumably has your bestinterests in mind, so his or her obviously persuasive message about exercise may be received well (Campbell & Kirmani, 2000; Eagly,Wood, & Chaiken, 1978). Researchers have found that physically attractive communicators do well if they make their desire to persuadeexplicit. Unattractive communicators are not very successful in this instance (Messner, Reinhard, & Sporer, 2008). For the less attractive,keeping persuasive intent hidden is a better strategy. Similarly, disliked sources should conceal persuasive intent, while liked sources aremore persuasive when they are open about persuasive intent (Reinhard, Messner, & Sporer, 2006).
Test Yourself
Click on each question below to reveal the answer.
· Who is more persuasive, an attractive communicator or an unattractive communicator?
· What types of communicators should make you aware of their intent to persuade you?
7.2 What—Characteristics of the Message
When making persuasive appeals, communicators must carefully consider the message they want to portray and how they want to sharethat message. A persuader might try to scare you so you will adopt a healthy behavior. Should the message be terrifying, or just a littlefrightening to motivate you? Communicators must also consider whether sharing the other side's arguments is helpful. If a phonecompany knows that a rival phone has a feature that its own product does not have, should it make a mention of it in the advertising? Aswe discover in this section, how a message is constructed makes all the difference in how persuasive it will be.
Emotion
Within a persuasive appeal, a communicator might attempt to elicit an emotion. Emotions contain both physiological and cognitiveelements. For example, when you are frightened your blood pressure and your heart rate increase. The same bodily state may beinterpreted differently depending on the context. You might feel fear if you are in a dark alley and a stranger approaches. In the context ofa thrilling video game, that same racing heart could be interpreted as excitement (Schachter & Singer, 1962). Advertisers may capitalizeon this fact to help sell their products. A beer commercial with a lot of beautiful, scantily clad women may excite the men watching it—excitement that could transfer to the brand of beer the company is selling. When a camera follows a car down a curvy road through amajestic mountain landscape, we may feel a bit of awe at the beauty of the scenery, and we may transfer this sense of amazement to thecar.
Getty Images News/Getty Images
A graphic warning label such as this might scarepeople into rethinking their smoking habits.
One way persuaders may use emotion to convince us to do something is to draw onthe "appropriate" emotions from our culture and social context. We learn from thosearound us what emotions are appropriate to feel (Averill, 1980). For example,convinced by your peers or the media that your home should be clean and smell likeflowers, you buy a scented candle and spend more time cleaning to avoid feelingembarrassed. Or, having learned from an advertiser that a new car will make youhappy, you purchase a new vehicle.
Persuaders elicit specific emotions, such as fear, to motivate people to act. If a healtheducator were trying to convince smokers to quit smoking, would scaring them aboutthe potential consequences of continuing to smoke be effective? Researchers have longbeen interested in how persuasive messages that induce fear, what might be known asscare tactics, influence persuasion (Hovland et al., 1953, is an early example). Therelationship was hypothesized to follow the pattern of an inverted U, with littlepersuasion at low levels of fear, the greatest persuasion at moderate levels of fear, andlow persuasion at high levels of fear (see Figure 7.2). At low fear levels persuasionwould be low because there is not enough motivation to change. At a moderate rate offear, persuasion should be highest; here people would be motivated to make a changebut not so scared that they become paralyzed. At high levels of fear, according to thishypothesis, persuasion once again becomes less likely, as people become toofrightened to process the information and respond to it. At this level, individuals maybecome defensive and ignore the content of the message. At a low level of fear, anantismoking message may not motivate smokers to change; the consequences may notseem dire enough to make the effort of quitting worth it. At a high level of fear,smokers may dismiss a message or become defensive about their habit. When amessage induces a moderate level of fear smokers may be able to process the messagerather than becoming defensive and be motivated to change.
Yet this hypothesis is problematic because the supporting research is inconclusive(Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Janis & Leventhal, 1968). Some degree of fear is motivating,so messages that make it clear that the target is susceptible to the consequences of a threat are most effective (Maloney, Lapinski, &Witte, 2011). However, the most important predictor of behavior when confronted with scare tactics seems to not be the level of feararoused, but the belief of individuals in their ability to engage in actions that will allow them to avoid the feared consequence (Ruiter,Abraham, & Kok, 2001). Smokers might be exposed to a message that evokes a great deal or just a little fear about lung cancer, but if theydo not believe they can quit, thereby avoiding cancer, the level of fear in the appeal does not seem to matter much (Hoeken & Geurts,2005; Timmers & van der Wijst, 2007; Witte, 1998).
Figure 7.2: The inverted-U model
In Hovland's study, the relationship between fear and persuasion was hypothesized to resemble an inverted U.
Some persuasive appeals may use guilt to attempt attitude change. Charities,for example, might describe people who are hungry or sick or homeless in anattempt to persuade someone to give money or time. Guilt appeals can besuccessful; the more guilty people feel, the greater their intention to donate.However, if recipients are generally skeptical of emotional appeals and believethe communicator is manipulative, they will not feel as much guilt andtherefore not be as likely to donate (Hibbert, Smith, Davies, & Ireland, 2007).
Rather than working to generate certain emotions, advertisers can also appealto consumers by tapping into their current emotional experience. Happyholiday shoppers are likely to be persuaded by a happy message. The sweetand sappy commercials for engagement rings will do well with those who arein love and feeling sweet and sappy toward their significant other. A matchbetween the emotional state of the person and the emotional overtones of thepersuasive message is the most effective (DeSteno, Petty, Rucker, Wegener, &Braverman, 2004).
The complexity of the emotion presented in the message also influences persuasion. When people do not have a lot of time or energy todevote to processing a message, their resources are low. Sadness and happiness are relatively simple emotions, and can be quicklyprocessed by the individual. When the resources of the person are low and they are presented with an ad with simple emotions likehappiness or sadness, they are more persuaded. If resources were low and the effectiveness of the message relied on the emotion ofanxiety, a relatively complex emotion, the message would be less persuasive. For individuals with more time and energy to process themessage, anxiety within a message could be more persuasive than a simple emotion within that message (Lau-Gesk & Meyers-Levy,2009).
To generate an emotional response, persuaders might tell a story. Researchers have found that individuals are persuaded by stories if thestories are good, even when arguments themselves are weak. One element in persuasive stories is something called transportation. Inthe context of story, transportation is the joining of feelings, attention, and thoughts (Green & Brock, 2000). The listener joins thestoryteller on a journey, and, for the time being, focuses on the teller's thoughts, feelings, and experiences. As a result, the listener comesaway with a new or more informed perspective. On the other hand, when a message is shared not in a story but as a rational appeal, onlystrong arguments lead to attitude change (Escalas, 2007). People presented with personal narratives of a health risk viewed themselvesas being more at risk and said they were more likely to get tested than those presented with statistical information on that health risk(deWit, Das, & Vet, 2008).
Test Yourself
Click on each question below to reveal the answer.
· What are the key elements to making a fear appeal persuasive?
· Are messages that have happy messages persuasive?
Framing
Messages can vary in whether they emphasize gains or losses. A message that focuses on benefits is described as being gain framed. Ifyou were buying a vehicle, for example, the message that buying this car will keep you safe in a crash with all of its safety featuresemphasizes the things you would gain. A message that focuses on losses is loss framed. For example, a salesperson might suggest that ifyou do not buy this car with all of its safety features, your likelihood of experiencing major injury in a crash is increased. By emphasizingwhat you would lose, the message becomes loss framed. Framing can influence responses to persuasive messages.
When dealing with prevention behaviors, such as exercising, gain-framed messages tend to be more effective. When encouraging detectionbehaviors, such as going to the doctor for a cancer screening, loss-framed messages tend to be more effective (Ferrer, Klein, Zajac, Land, &Ling, 2012; Rothman, Bartels, Wlaschin, & Salovey, 2006). When people are faced with a message and experiencing an emotion like fear,loss-framed messages are more persuasive. Fear is an emotion that leads to behavioral inhibition, or movement away from action. Angerand happiness are part of the behavioral approach system, motivating movement toward action. When people are angry or happy gain-framed messages are more persuasive (Gerend & Maner, 2011; Yan, Dillard, & Shen, 2012).
Social Psychology Applied
00:00
00:00
The findings of social psychology regarding theway messages are framed can influence publicpolicy and personal conviction.
Critical Thinking Questions
· What are some other ways that the research ofsocial psychologists can influence public policy?
· How does framing encourage someone to engagein prosocial behavior?
Gain-framed messages create more positive emotions than loss-framedemotions. However, researchers have also found that, while being in a positivemood due to a gain-framed message leads to persuasion, being in a negativemood as a result of a loss-framed message may motivate people to dosomething about the threat (Van'T Riet, Ruiter, Werrij, Candel, & De Vries, 2010).Being happy because you realize from the infomercial all you might gain frombuying this exercise equipment might persuade you that purchasing theequipment is a good idea. Or, being sad because you realize from the infomercialall the terrible things that could happen if you do not buy the equipment andbegin exercising may actually get you to pick up the phone and make an order.
When presenting a persuasive message, it is important for the communicator toavoid making the audience defensive. Affirming what others believe andvalidating their concerns can increase message scrutiny and lead to a change inbehavior (Correll, Spencer, & Zanna, 2004). When students' concerns aboutavailability of recycling containers were validated ("we know it's a long walk but. . ."), and they were encouraged to use the containers that were available, evenif it was inconvenient, their recycling behavior increased and lasted longer(Werner, Stoll, Birch, & White, 2002). Reactance, the tendency to reassert one'sfreedom in the face of demands from others, can be reduced by affirming whatthat person believes. Acknowledging concerns works by reducing criticism of apersuasive message, opening the individual up to consideration of the message(Werner, White, Byerly, & Stoll, 2009).
Another way to frame messages is by focusing on the long-term or the short-term consequences of an action, called temporal framing. A message encouraging colonoscopies might emphasize the peace of mind onewould feel knowing that any potentially cancerous polyps have been removed. By focusing on current feelings or consequences, suchmessages use a short-term framing of a message. A colonoscopy message that uses a long-term frame might emphasize how removal ofpotentially cancerous polyps could provide years of life without colon cancer. When a message is about a health risk and focuses onshort-term consequences, the risks of not engaging in the behavior are perceived as being more concrete (Chandran & Menon, 2004).Temporal framing can influence the persuasiveness of gain-framed messages. College students receiving gain-framed messages thatemphasized short-term consequences of drinking showed less drinking than those who received loss-framed messages emphasizing short-term consequences or those that described long-term consequences (Gerend & Cullen, 2008). Some people are more sensitive to short-term consequences of their actions and are, therefore, more persuaded by temporal frames that emphasize immediate consequences ofactions (Orbell & Hagger, 2006; Orbell & Kyriakaki, 2008).
Test Yourself
Click on each question below to reveal the answer.
One-Sided and Two-Sided Messages
Is presenting both sides of an argument advantageous or does it weaken the message? For example, if a car salesperson wanted toconvince someone to buy an electric car, would just presenting the positive features of the car be best, or should the salesperson pointout both the positive and negatives of owning an electric car? A communicator must also decide whether to simply describe the alternateposition or also refute it. Should the electric-car salesperson simply mention the drawbacks of owning such a vehicle (the fully chargedvehicle goes only 100 miles), or also explain why those drawbacks are not of great concern (most trips people take are well under thisdistance)?
For the most part, two-sided messages are more persuasive when they provide a refutation of the option the communicator is arguingagainst. If both sides are simply offered, with no refutation, one-sided messages are more persuasive (Allen, 1991; Buehl, Alexander,Murphy, & Sperl, 2001). In the exercise equipment infomercial, this means that the communicator should discuss the drawbacks ofowning one's own equipment and those drawbacks should be refuted. Owning one's own equipment, for example, means taking care of itand storing it, but, the fitness expert might argue, this equipment takes almost no care and can easily be stored in the corner of a room.
When in court, defense lawyers must decide whether to present potentially incriminating evidence the prosecution might reveal.Presenting information that is potentially harmful before the prosecution does can allow the defense to take away some of the shockvalue that information might otherwise have. The name of this tactic is stealing thunder. Within the courtroom, stealing thunderincreases the credibility of the defense and changes the way jurors think about the incriminating evidence (Dolnik, Case & Williams,2003; Williams, Bourgeois, & Croyle, 1993). By presenting evidence that might otherwise be condemning, the defense shows that it hasdone its research and is aware of the circumstances. By presenting the evidence, the defense is then able to take it apart for the jurors,showing them why it is not condemning. This helps sway the opinion of the jurors, who might have otherwise formed a different opinionif the prosecution had framed the evidence. This tactic has been found to be more effective when jurors are trying to make quickdecisions or are distracted or overwhelmed by the evidence. When jurors carefully consider the evidence, it has less of an effect (Howard,Brewer, & Williams, 2006).
Test Yourself
Click on the question below to reveal the answer.
· Are one-sided or two-sided messages more persuasive?
Generally, messages are most persuasive when they are first encountered. Over time the effect of a message gradually declines. Forinstance, you might be quite motivated to exercise after your doctor tells you about the importance of exercise. A few months later,however, you find your gym clothes collecting dust in the corner. However, in some instances messages become more persuasive withtime, a phenomenon known as the sleeper effect (Peterson & Thurstone, 1933/1970). For the sleeper effect to occur, individuals need tospend enough time thinking about the message that the message remains in memory (Priester, Wegner, Petty, & Fabrigar, 1999). Peoplemay discount a message when they first encounter it, but over time, forget their reasons for doing so, leading to their persuasion(Kumkale & Albarracin, 2004). If an unreliable source tells you a story you may at first discount the story because of theuntrustworthiness of the source. After some time, however, you may remember the story but forget who told it to you, making the storymore persuasive a month after it was told to you. Some of the power of narratives may be due to the sleeper effect. The impression madeby a narrative is retained, and any reasons for discounting it (it was just a fictional story) may be lost with time (Appel & Richter, 2007).
Test Yourself
Click on each question below to reveal the answer.
· If your arguments are weak should you use a narrative appeal or a rational appeal?
· Are messages you initially discount ever persuasive?
7.3 To Whom—Characteristics of the Audience
The audience of a persuasive message is vitally important. Characteristics of the audience may impact how a message is received. Peoplefrom different cultures think about and respond to messages differently. Individuals of different ages and levels of self-esteem may alsodiffer in how easily they are persuaded. In this section, we will explore how the characteristics of the audience affect reception of amessage.
Culture
A large-scale difference in audiences for persuasive messages is the cultural background of the audience. In Chapter 3, different ways ofviewing the self were discussed. People from Western cultures, like the United States, most often view themselves as independent andunique individuals; they are part of an independent culture. People from many Asian cultures, such as Korea, have a more interdependentview of themselves; they are part of an interdependent culture. In interdependent cultures, people see themselves as enmeshed within asocial context, with the sense of self arising out of social roles and relationships.
iStockphoto/Thinkstock; Ryan McVay/Lifesize/Thinkstock
Western values usually emphasize independence and uniqueness, while Asian values oftenfocus more on social roles and ingroups.
Persuasive messages follow this pattern across cultures. For example, persuasive messages in the United States focus more on uniquenessand individual preferences. In Korea, advertisements and other persuasive messages are more likely to focus on harmony with others,particularly family or other ingroups (Han & Shavitt, 1994). For example, an advertisement in Korea might describe a product aspromoting family unity or the happiness of others. Recent research has shown that this difference can vary depending on generationwithin a culture. Affluent Generation X consumers in China were more persuaded than older Chinese consumers by an advertisement fora car that emphasized uniqueness, an independent culture value (Zhang, 2010). These advertisements described the car as allowing oneto break away from the pack rather than being a car a family could depend on. With greater exposure to Western values, these youngpeople in China were more persuaded by advertisers who emphasized values of uniqueness rather than family.
Age
Between ages of 3 and 5, children develop the ability to understand that what is in their mind is different from what is in the minds ofothers, a concept called theory of mind. They also come to understand that others can be persuaded. As long as children believe thatothers think exactly as they do and know what they know, there is no need to persuade (Slaughter, Peterson, & Moore, 2013). Whenchildren learn they can persuade others they also realize that others may be trying to persuade them. Because of this, children under theage of 5 do not recognize that advertisers are attempting to persuade them (McAlister & Cornwell, 2009).
In looking at persuasion for younger, middle-aged, and older adults, a paradox emerges. Younger adults tend to have fluid attitudes thatsolidify and remain the same through middle and older adulthood. For example, although young adults may dramatically change theirpolitical attitudes, once established these attitudes tend to remain the same after young adulthood (Alwin, Cohen, & Newcomb, 1991;Culter & Kaufman, 1975; Krosnick & Alwin, 1989). However, in a research setting, participants of different ages show approximately equalpropensity for persuasion, sometimes even more so for older adults (Wang & Chen, 2006). Why might attitudes remain the same over alifetime, but show evidence of malleability in a laboratory setting?
Over their lifespan, people seem to be equally likely to change their attitudes. What many young adults have that most middle-aged andolder adults do not have is a lot of new life experiences. When middle-aged and older adults experience new things, they are as likely tochange as younger adults (Tyler & Schuller, 1991). What, then, seems to be driving the greater flexibility in young adulthood is not agebut experience. Older adults may be slightly more vulnerable to persuasion in laboratory persuasion tasks. This increased susceptibilitycan be traced to a decline in processing capacity with age. Older adults do not have quite as much working memory capacity as youngeradults, and therefore, tend to be more persuaded by simple cues, like the number of arguments there are for a particular option (Wang &Chen, 2006).
Test Yourself
Click on each question below to reveal the answer.
· Do older adults and middle-aged adults have the same capacity to be persuaded as younger adults?
Self-Esteem
Individuals' level of self-esteem can influence how easy it is to persuade them. When it comes to differences among people, WilliamMcGuire (1968), an early researcher of persuasion, proposed that persuasion depended on both receptivity and yielding. Receptivitymeans that one has the ability and willingness to pay attention and understand a message. Yielding means that the individual changes hisor her mind as a result of the message. In order for a message to be considered persuasive, the individual must both be receptive to themessage, and yield to it.
When evaluating the effect of self-esteem on persuasion, both receptivity and yielding are important (Rhodes & Wood, 1992). Individualswith low self-esteem who do not trust their own opinion are likely to yield to what others say. But those with low self-esteem lackreceptivity: they are less likely to pay attention and remember a message. On the other end of the spectrum, receptivity is high amongthose with high self-esteem. Individuals with high self-esteem are likely to pay attention to and remember a message. Those with highself-esteem, however, are confident in their own judgments and therefore, less persuaded by what others say. Those with moderate self-esteem are likely to have the combination of receptivity and yielding that makes persuasion likely. While research findings support thisclaim, there are many variables that interact with self-esteem; given the right circumstances, individuals with high or low self-esteem aremore persuadable (Sanaktekin & Sunar, 2008).
Test Yourself
Click on the question below to reveal the answer.
· How do receptivity and yielding relate to self-esteem?
Elaboration Likelihood Model
One model that brings together persuader, message, and audience variables is the elaboration likelihood model (Petty & Cacioppo,1986). According to this model, people differ in their motivation and ability to process a persuasive message (see Figure 7.3). Whenpeople are motivated and able to process a message, they will take more time to think about and evaluate the message. "Elaboration"refers to this engagement with the message. Those high on the spectrum of being willing and able to process a message will use whatresearchers have named the central route to persuasion. When using the central route, individuals spend time and energy thinkingabout a message, evaluating the strength of the persuasive arguments. If messages are strong, people are likely to respond with positiveattitude change, leading to behavior that is reflective of that change (Wu & Shaffer, 1987). Stronger attitudes tend to last longer and areless likely to be changed when attacked (Haugtvedt & Petty, 1992; Wu & Shaffer, 1987). But when arguments in a message are weak,those taking this route to persuasion may reject the message.
Figure 7.3: The elaboration likelihood model
According to the elaboration likelihood model, level of processing depends onmotivation and ability to process the message.
Based on Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
We tend to elaborate when a message is relevant to us and we have the time and energy to process it (Petty & Brock, 1981; Petty, Wells,& Brock, 1976). For example, if a commercial for exercise equipment were shown during a television show you were watching, you mightlisten closely if you were thinking about buying such equipment and you had the time to listen. If you had a gym membership and werehappy with your exercise routine, you might largely ignore the message. Our elaboration of a message can also depend on how much wefeel the need to evaluate aspects of our lives in general. Need for cognition is a term researchers use to describe differences betweenindividuals concerning their desire to engage in, and tendency to enjoy, thinking (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982). In a scale to assess need forcognition, research participants are asked about their agreement with statements such as "I really enjoy a task that involves coming upwith new solutions to problems" or "I would prefer a task that is intellectual, difficult, and important over one that is somewhatimportant but does not require much thought." (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982, p.120). Whether or not something is personally relevant, peoplewho are high in need for cognition tend to take the central route to persuasion (Cacioppo, Petty, & Morris, 1983).
Social Psychology in Depth: Word of Mouth and Persuasion
When making decisions about products to buy, restaurants to visit, or movies to see, we often ask our friends and relatives.A friend who raves about a new movie is probably more likely to get you to the theater than an advertisement on television.This passing of information about products or services through informal social networks is known as "word of mouth."Traditionally, word of mouth has its strongest impact when a relationship is close and the message is rich or vivid (Brown &Reingen, 1987; Kisielius & Sternthal, 1984; Sweeney, Soutar, & Mazzarol, 2008).
A new frontier for persuasion through word of mouth is the Internet. Websites like Amazon.com offer customer reviews ofthe products they sell. These reviews, known as "electronic word of mouth" or "e-word" of mouth, can significantly affectpopularity and sales (Ye, Law, Gu, & Chen, 2011; Zhang, Ye, Law, & Li, 2010). E-word of mouth is different from traditionalword of mouth because many of the comments or reviews one might read about a product or service are from strangers,not friends or relatives.
Online shoppers tend to use certain clues to evaluate e-word of mouth. While considering the e-word of mouth for aproduct, shoppers look at the agreement among evaluations. If all reviewers are in agreement, all positive or all negative,that may sway a shopper (Chiou & Cheng, 2003). If the reviews for a camera you were considering purchasing wereuniformly negative, would you buy the camera? Probably not. One bad review among many, however, will not necessarilyscare off a shopper. A set of perfect reviews may be seen as suspicious, too good to be true (Doh & Hwang, 2009). Overall,the greater the ratio of positive to negative reviews, the more positive the attitude of the shopper and the greater theintention to buy the product (Doh & Hwang, 2009).
Online reviews of products may be evaluated differently depending on the shopper. Online shoppers high in need forcognition were more persuaded by reviews that were understandable, objective, and supported by relevant facts than bythose that were of lower quality. The quality of the review has no impact on persuasion for those with low need forcognition (Lin, Lee, & Horng, 2011). A large number of reviews is more convincing to those low in need for cognition butdoes not affect persuasibility for those high in need for cognition (Lin et al., 2011). Individuals who are largely unfamiliarwith a product are also more swayed by the number of reviews for a product. Expertise of reviewers, not number ofreviews, is more important to those who know more (SanJose-Cabezudo, Gutierrez-Arranz, & Gutierrez-Cillan, 2009).
The way individuals engage in e-word of mouth may be different in different countries. In a study of discussion boards inthe United States and China, Chinese participants were more concerned about the country of origin, as opposed to thequality, of the products they were investigating. Researchers also found greater information seeking but less informationprovision by the Chinese than the U.S. participants (Fong & Burton, 2008).
Prior knowledge of a subject can influence people in a similar way. If you knew a great deal about exercise equipment, you would have aneasier time processing the infomercial. In this instance, you would likely perceive a message with strong arguments as more convincingand quickly dismiss one with weak arguments or only an attractive communicator to recommend it (Wood & Kallgren, 1988). As withneed for cognition, even when a topic is not personally relevant, someone with prior knowledge is still more likely to use the centralroute to persuasion (Chebat, Charlebois, & Gelinas-Chebat, 2001). Even if you are not presently in the market for exercise equipment, ifyou stumble across an advertisement for such equipment and have knowledge about equipment, you are likely to pay attention.
When people are less motivated or do not have the time or energy to process a message, they use the peripheral route to persuasion.With this route, individuals use other cues to evaluate the persuasive arguments. Some cues include: the number of arguments presented,the supposed credibility of the source, and how many other people seem to be persuaded (Maheswaran & Chaiken, 1991; O'Keefe, 2002;Petty, Caciopppo, & Schumann, 1983). For example, an online shopper using the peripheral route might be persuaded by the number ofreviews for a product rather than the quality of those reviews (Sher & Lee, 2009). We are more likely to take the peripheral route topersuasion when our level of self-control is depleted due to prior use (Fennis, Janssen, & Vohs, 2009). For example, if you studied hard fora test, using all of your self-control to keep working through class material, an advertisement with an attractive communicator would bemore persuasive to you, regardless of the strength of that communicator's arguments. Recall from Chapter 2 that ego depletion creates aproblem for later volitional acts. The peripheral route is used when we do not have the time or energy to consider a persuasive messagecarefully—when the ego is depleted.
The persuasive message itself can influence what route we would take. Personalization in websites is one way online retailers havesought to influence the buying public (Tam & Ho, 2005). Many companies that sell products online now keep track of where consumerslook on their sites, what they click on, and what they eventually buy. With all of that information, the retailer is able to make suggestionsfor an individual site visitor or for the general shopper who visits and shows interest in a product. You may have visited a website that,after you purchase or even just click on a few products, offers suggestions of other products you might be interested in; that site is usingpersonalization strategies. Because personalization makes messages relevant to individuals, according to the elaboration likelihood modelit should lead to greater central route processing, and, when a product is good, potentially more purchasing of that product.
Test Yourself
Click on each question below to reveal the answer.
· What is the relationship between need for cognition and the two different routes to persuasion?
7.4 How—Persuasion Techniques
Watching a series of infomercials or a shopping channel, you may have noticed that some phrases keep coming up. Most offers are "for alimited time only." The shopping channel may show you how many of the products are left and count them down until they are all gone.Some infomercials ask you to send no money now or offer you a full refund if you are not completely satisfied. Others offer the productand then let you know that if you order now you could get a free gift. All of these advertisements are based on persuasion techniquesresearched by social psychologists and others.
In this section, we will discuss several persuasive techniques. The foot-in-the-door technique begins with a small request, and then movesto a larger request. With the lowball technique, a request is made and accepted before the full cost is revealed. The legitimization-of-paltry-favors technique validates small contributions. Later in this section we will look at persuasion techniques involving reciprocity,large initial requests, scarcity, and changing the focus of attention.
Foot-in-the-Door Technique
If you have ever bought a car, you may have found yourself visiting a lot of dealerships or used-car lots. At a dealership you might beasked to sit in a new car or offered a test drive.
In doing all of this the salesperson might say that there is no obligation, but is that really true? With the foot-in-the-door technique, asmall request is made and agreed to, followed by a larger request. The salesperson might first ask if you would like to take a test drive,and only after the test drive ask if you would like to discuss financing options. Because people have said yes to the first request (testdrive) they are more likely to say yes to the second request (discussing options and potentially moving to buy the car). The secondrequest is really the target for the salesperson (Freedman & Fraser, 1966). Depending on the situation, this technique has been known tobring 15% to 25% compliance with the second request (Dillard, 1991).
Expand Your Knowledge: Influence by Cialdini
Persuasion researcher Robert Cialdini has spent decadesstudying influence. His books are very accessible, andmay be particularly interesting if you are planning towork in business or sales. His books are titled Influence:Science and Practice, Influence: The Psychology ofPersuasion, and Yes!: 50 Scientifically Proven Ways to BePersuasive.
Cialdini's website: http://www.influenceatwork.com/.
Use of the foot-in-the-door technique requires a delicate balancing act.The first request needs to be small enough to be accepted, but thelarger the first request, the more likely individuals will say yes to thesecond request (Seligman, Bush, & Kirsch, 1976). One explanation forthe foot-in-the-door technique's success is related to self-perceptiontheory. Self-perception theory involves attitude formation; when wewant to know what our attitudes are, we look at our behavior. Withfoot-in-the-door, the same process might be happening as people lookto their initial behavior (agreeing to a small request) to determinewhat they should do for another behavior (agreeing to the larger, targetrequest) (Burger, 1999; Burger & Caldwell, 2003). Foot-in-the-doortechnique is also applied outside of commercial purposes. Whenindividuals visit a website for a charitable organization, those whoagree to sign a petition are more likely to donate money than thosewho are not asked to sign (Gueguen & Jacob, 2001). In another study, researchers found that young women were more likely to agree tohave coffee with a young man if they were first asked to give him directions or light his cigarette (Gueguen, Marchand, Pascual, & Lourel,2008).
Lowball Technique
Seeing a commercial on a website for a laptop at a low price, you click on the ad. You are in the market for a new laptop computer so youknow this price is a good one. You quickly decide on this computer and, excited about your potential purchase, begin the orderingprocess. Partway through providing your name, address, credit card information, you realize that the color you had wanted was going tobe $30 extra. Then you are offered a lengthened power cord that will be able to reach more outlets, as opposed to the shorter one thatcomes with the laptop, for an additional $45.99. Then you are offered antivirus software for only $39. By the time you pay the addedshipping and processing fee, you have spent almost $150 more on the laptop than you originally intended.
This is an example of the lowball technique. An initial, reasonable request is made, but after the person agrees, additional items areadded that make the overall request less reasonable. Because individuals have already made a commitment to the item (e.g., thecomputer) they are reluctant to walk away. If they had known about all of the costs initially, however, it is unlikely they would haveagreed (Cialdini, Cacioppo, Bassett, & Miller, 1978; Gueguen, Pascual, & Dagot, 2002). This tactic also frequently occurs outside of sales.Someone might ask you to hang up posters for an upcoming event as a favor. If you agreed, and then later found out you also needed topick up the bulky, heavy posters from a location 10 minutes away, and transport them to where you are to hang them up, you might stilldo it, even though you might not have had you known all the details in the first place (Burger & Petty, 1981).
Unlike foot-in-the-door, with lowball the initial request is the target request. The initial request is small, or at least reasonable, and it isonly when the full cost is revealed that individuals realize the large commitment they have made. With this technique, the persuaderneeds to be careful to offer the initial product at a price people will be interested in and then make the additional requests reasonableenough so that the agreement continues as the deal becomes less of a deal. Comparing the foot-in-the-door and the lowball technique,researchers have found that the lowball technique seems to work better at persuading people to comply than the foot-in-the-doortechnique (Joule, 1987).
Legitimization-of-Paltry-Favors
A neighbor child comes to your door, collecting money for a well-known charity. Your budget is tight and you already gave elsewhere, soyou are about to respond with a polite no when the child says, "Even a penny will help." You have a penny, right in your pocket, so youcan't really say no to the request. But you do not feel right about contributing just a penny. Reaching into your wallet, you pull out acouple of dollars and hand them over. Congratulations, you have just been persuaded by the technique called legitimization-of–paltry-favors.
As the name implies, the legitimization-of-paltry-favors technique catches us by making a very small contribution acceptable (Andrews,Carpenter, Shaw, & Boster, 2008). It is difficult to refuse when even a very small amount is described as legitimate. But few would give apaltry amount even if it is acceptable, so we give more than just that penny. Notice that a penny was not suggested, but legitimized. Withthis technique, it should be clear that while a very small amount is okay, it is certainly not desired. Such a technique tends to increase thenumber of people who give while not affecting the amount each individual gives (Cialdini & Schroeder, 1976).
Test Yourself
Click on each question below to reveal the answer.
Reciprocity
Wandering through the supermarket, you come upon a small table that is offering free samples of granola bars. You are hungry and thesamples look good, so you take one. Smiling you thank the person offering the samples, and you reach for a box of the bars. Consideringthat granola bars were not on your shopping list and you may not have known this brand even existed before your encounter with thesample, why would you buy this product?
Corbis/SuperStock
After sampling free food at a supermarket, you may feel inclinedto purchase that food in reciprocation of the free sample. Thesupermarket has persuaded you to buy via reciprocity.
The technique being used here is reciprocity. Reciprocity is considered arule of social behavior that appears to be present in most cultures, if notall. When others do something for us, we feel obligated to do somethingfor them (Gouldner, 1960; Wright, 1994). Communicators use our naturaltendency toward reciprocity to get us to do what we otherwise might not.When provided with something we did not ask for, we tend toreciprocate, at times giving more in return than was invested in theoriginal gift. In one study published in the 1970s, some researchparticipants were given a 10-cent soda. Later in the study, when theparticipants were asked to buy 25-cent raffle tickets, the ones who hadbeen given the soda were more likely to buy the raffle tickets than thosewho had not been given a soda (Regan, 1971). In another example ofreciprocity, researchers have found that food servers who provide theircustomers with mints or candy get increased tips (Lynn & McCall, 2000).Although reciprocity will be slightly higher in a public context, we stilltend to reciprocate, even when our behavior is private (Whatley, Webster,Smith, & Rhodes, 1999).
Even an offer of reciprocity that is refused is helpful. In a field study in France, researchers asked smokers on the street for a cigarette.When the researchers offered a small amount of money in exchange the money was usually refused, but the smokers were more likely togive up a cigarette (Guéguen & Pascual, 2003). Reciprocity is so natural for humans that those who are persuaded do not alwaysrecognize reciprocity as the reason for their change in attitude or behavior (Cialdini, Green, & Rusch, 1992).
Test Yourself
Click on the question below to reveal the answer.
· If someone gives you a free sample, are you more likely to buy the product?
Social Psychology in Depth: Resistance to Persuasion
Persuasive messages are designed to change our minds but we are not without defense. In the battle for our wallets andour minds, resistance to persuasion plays a part. One way in which we resist persuasive messages is through arguing ourown point of view, called counterarguing. Hearing a message you do not agree with, you come up with a number ofarguments why your position is right and the alternate position is wrong. Such an activity will have an effect on your initialattitude. When people counterargue successfully, they become more certain of their initial attitude, particularly when theother message comes from an expert source (Tormala & Petty, 2004a; Tormala & Petty, 2004b). However, when peoplebelieve they have done a poor job at counterarguing, they may actually become less certain of their attitudes. The attitudesthemselves may not change, but they are now more vulnerable to future attacks and are less likely to predict behavior(Tormala, Clarkson, & Petty, 2006).
At times we resist persuasion not because of well-thought-out arguments but simply because we are reacting tomanipulation. Reactance is our response to threatened freedom; we do the opposite of what someone wants us to dobecause we want to reassert our right to make our own decisions. If a high-pressure salesperson is advocating a particularproduct, we may choose another because we want to assert our freedom to make our own choices. We generally think ofreactance as a simple knee-jerk reaction to a threat to freedom, but reactance can also lead us to the kind of counterarguingdescribed in the first paragraph (Silvia, 2006).
While we can and do resist persuasive messages, our view of our vulnerability to persuasion is distorted. We believe we areless vulnerable to persuasion than others (Douglas & Sutton, 2004). While we tend to judge the vulnerability of othersaccurately, we judge ourselves as being less vulnerable to persuasion than we really are. When our attitudes do change, weunderestimate the degree of change (Bem & McConnell, 1970; Markus, 1986). For example, if a salesperson convinced us tobuy a product, we might say we were leaning toward that choice already even if we were not.
When it comes to resistance to persuasion, our vulnerability is higher when we have exerted self-control. Previousexperiences that have resulted in ego depletion, such as controlling our emotions, making decisions, or engaging in anundesired task, make us more vulnerable to persuasive messages. With depleted resources we are less able to counterargue(Burkley, 2008; Wheeler, Brinol, & Hermann, 2007). The reverse also appears to be true: Engaging in resistance topersuasion makes us less able to engage in tasks requiring our self-control (Burkley, 2008).
Door-in-the-Face Technique
As you watch an infomercial for exercise equipment, the advertiser shows four different machines and the price for each. As youcontemplate the expense of such equipment, you quickly reject the idea of ever owning exercise equipment. A request to buy fourdifferent machines is too much. But wait, the advertiser says, you can afford exercise equipment. The advertiser then displays a machinethat will do everything the first four machines can and is small and relatively inexpensive. Relieved that there is a product you can afford,you pick up the phone to order one of your own.
Unlike foot-in-the-door, where a small request is followed by a larger request, the target request, the door-in-the-face technique beginswith a large request. When the message recipient says no to the first request, the persuader follows with a second, more reasonablerequest, the actual target of the communication. In the original study on the technique, college students were asked if they would bewilling to counsel juvenile delinquents for 2 hours a week for 2 years. The students declined. Then, those students and others were askedif they would be willing to take the juveniles to the zoo for a day. Of the students who had not been previously asked to make a 2-yearcommitment, about 17% agreed to chaperone the kids. Of the students who had been asked and refused the 2-year commitment, 50%agreed to the chaperoning (Cialdini et al., 1975).
One explanation for why this technique works has to do with the discomfort we feel when we refuse someone's request. In the secondrequest the persuader makes a concession, so we feel as though we should make a reciprocal concession (Turner, Tamborini, Limon, &Zuckerman-Hyman, 2007). Wanting the students' help with juveniles for 2 years, the persuader appears to be making a concession withjust a day at the zoo. Wanting to do nothing, the students make a concession from nothing to a day at the zoo. Further research has foundthat emphasizing the concession made by the person making the request increases persuasion or feelings of obligation (Abrahams & Bell,1994; Ebster & Neumayr, 2008). Perhaps because of this, compliance is highest when requests are close to one another in time (ideallywithin the same interaction), and are made by the same individual (Cann, Sherman, & Elkes, 1975; Guéguen, Jacob, & Meineri, 2011;O'Keefe & Hale, 2001). It seems the person needs to see a clear connection between the first request and the second request in order tofeel a need for reciprocal concession.
As with the foot-in-the-door technique, there needs to be a balance between the levels of demand of the requests. In the initial study onthe technique, the first request was a very demanding request that everyone was expected to refuse (counseling juveniles 2 hours perweek for 2 years). When moderate initial requests are used, compliance actually declines in some studies (Even-Chen, Yinon, & Bizman,1978). In a meta-analysis of studies on the technique, researchers found that the technique works better in gaining verbal agreementrather than persuading people to behave differently (Feeley, Anker, & Aloe, 2012).
Studies comparing the amount of persuasion found for the door-in-the-face technique in contrast with the foot-in-the-door technique findthat the door-in-the-face technique tends to be more effective (Pascual & Guéguen, 2005; Rodafinos, Vucevic, & Sideridis, 2005). Forexample, in one study researchers were able to get children to do more academic work by using the door-in-the-face technique than theygot when they used the foot-in-the-door technique, or simply asking the children to do the work (Chan & Au, 2011). In another study,when comparing the foot-in-the-door, door-in-the-face, and the lowball technique, the door-in-the-face technique once again came out ontop. The door-in-the-face technique resulted in the most donated money in comparison with the other two techniques (Wang, Brownstein,& Katzey, 1989).
That's-not-all Technique
On late-night television you might find an infomercial that explains an exercise machine and the wonderful things it does. After offeringthe product and telling you the price, the announcer says, "and that's not all" and offers some deluxe exercise towels that you will getwith your purchase. When sellers offer a product and, before the customer can respond, offer something else with the sale or offer tolower the price, they are using the that's-not-all technique.
This technique might be effective due to reciprocity. The seller is seen as willing to negotiate the sale of his or her product, so the buyershould reciprocate that flexibility by buying. Another factor may be a concept known as anchoring. The initial price for the individualpiece is seen as the anchor. When the price is lowered or additional things are added, the consumer sees this as a good deal. If originallyoffered the entire package at the lower price, consumers take that as the anchor and do not view it as a good deal (Burger, 1986).
The that's-not-all technique seems to work best when the initial request is reasonable (Burger, Reed, DeCesare, Rauner, & Rozolis, 1999).This means that when using the technique, sellers need to be careful in setting the initial price. A high initial price can shock people intoconsidering whether they really need the product or really need to spend that much money. High initial prices tend to lead to greaterrefusal when the that's-not-all technique is used. Adding additional items to the initial offering may not alleviate that initial shock(Pollock, Smith, Knowles, & Bruce, 1998).
Test Yourself
Click on each question below to reveal the answer.
· Why does an initial refusal with the door-in-the-face technique lead to later persuasion?
· How does the that's-not-all technique work?
Scarcity
Often advertisements for products will emphasize the fact that the item is only available for a limited time. Deals available on the dayafter Thanksgiving are sometimes only available for a few hours after the store has opened. Why do advertisers limit the time frame forsuch bargains? Overall, people do not like it when their freedom to act is restricted. When products may not be available for long, wetend to buy those products so we can access them if we want. This type of behavior is called reactance. Reactance is acting in a way thatprotects one's freedom. Although we may have never intended to buy a certain product in the first place, if we think it will no longer beavailable we may purchase it. Researchers have found evidence of reactance in a wide variety of circumstances. When we feel like othersare restricting our freedom in a parking lot by waiting for our parking space, we may actually stay in the space longer than if no one waswaiting (Ruback & Juieng, 1997).
Limited-time offers are not the only type of offers for which we have this reaction. We may also buy when we believe there are only a fewof the product in existence, in other words, when the number of items is restricted. Any advertisement that refers to the product as beinga limited edition or in short supply leads us to a similar reaction. This reaction may rely in part on our need for uniqueness (Lynn, 1991).We do not want to look like or have the same things as everyone else, so we buy rare products to express our individuality. Whencommercials offer a product for a limited time or describe the limited number available, the advertisers are using scarcity.
When products are seen as available for only a limited time, it is possible that respondents actually increase their scrutiny of thepersuasive message. Knowing the product may only be available briefly provides motivation to think about the merits of the message(Brannon & Brock, 2001). Scarcity works particularly well in romantic contexts (such as when watching a romantic movie) but canbackfire when in the context of fearful events (such as when watching a scary movie). Romantic situations remind us how scarceopportunities can be; after all, how often does Mr. or Ms. Right come along? In these situations you want to stand out from the crowd soyou can be noticed by that potential significant other or impress the partner you have. When we are thinking of romance, therefore, acommercial that tells us to get one of the few products available is more likely to be persuasive (Griskevicius et al., 2009).
Test Yourself
Click on the question below to reveal the answer.
Pique Technique
Within some contexts, we automatically refuse anyone's attempts to persuade us. When encountering a panhandler, for example, themajority of people walk on by and do not give any money. Two techniques involve disrupting that automatic tendency toward refusal,making compliance more likely—the pique technique and the disrupt-then-reframe technique. The pique technique works by disruptingattention with an odd request. Rather than asking passersby if they could spare some change, a panhandler might ask if the person couldspare 37 cents. Imagine your own response to such a request. Though you might have simply kept going the odd request makes you stopand perhaps ask why the person wants exactly 37 cents. In research on the technique, unique requests resulted in an almost 60%increase in compliance (Santos, Leve, & Pratkanis, 1994).
Does the reason for wanting 37 cents matter? When a person asking for 37 cents gave either a specific reason ("that's all I need to haveenough for the bus fare"), or a vague reason ("I need to buy something"), the amount of compliance with the request did not change.Although people did give more money when they asked a question rather than if the requester just used the pique technique, whetherthere was a specific reason given or a vague reason the average amount of money given was essentially the same (Burger, Hornisher,Martin, Newman, & Pringle, 2007). It seems that the actual reason does not matter, only that the passerby was intrigued enough to askabout the request.
Disrupt-Then-Reframe Technique
Another technique relying on disrupting the general tendency to refuse requests is the disrupt-then-reframe technique. With thistechnique, a request is made in an unusual way and then the requester reframes that request. For example, in door-to-door sales ofChristmas cards, women described that they were selling the cards to raise money for a school for the developmentally disabled. If peoplesaid they wanted to know the price of the cards the woman said "They're 300 pennies. . . that's $3. It's a bargain." The odd way of statingthe price, 300 pennies, changed the way people thought about the request, and then, by stating such a price is a bargain, the 300-pennyprice was reframed (Davis & Knowles, 1999).
One hypothesis for how this works is that the unusual request interrupts usual thinking processing so people do not have a readyresponse. The reframing then provides them with an easy response. "It's a bargain" gives people something to latch on to while they aretrying to process what 300 pennies really means and whether 300 pennies for a few Christmas cards is a good or a bad deal. Althoughthe technique works in both requests related to charity and in sales settings, it is more effective in charity related contexts (Carpenter &Boster, 2009; Fennis, Das, & Pruyn, 2006).
Test Yourself
Click on the question below to reveal the answer.
· How does a communicator pique attention using the pique technique?
|
able 7.1 Persuasion techniques: Definitions and examples |
||
|
Technique |
Definition |
Example |
|
Foot-in-the-door |
An initial small request is madeand accepted. A large request, thetarget request, is then made. |
You are asked to sign a petition to support blooddonation. After you sign, you are asked to donateblood. |
|
Lowball |
An initial request, the targetrequest, is made, but only laterare the full costs are revealed. |
You are asked to volunteer 20 minutes of your time.Only later is it revealed that the time will involveblood donation, with accompanying needles andslight pain. |
|
Legitimization-of-paltry-favors |
Small favors are described asacceptable, although not desired. |
A small donation to support blood drives, just 25cents, is acceptable, although a larger donationwould be appreciated. |
|
Reciprocity |
A request is made after a gift hasbeen given. |
After receiving a cookie you are asked if you wouldbe willing to donate blood. |
|
Door-in-the-face |
A large request is made andrefused. Then the target requestis made. |
You are asked if you could volunteer 2 hours a weekfor the next year. When you refuse, you are asked ifyou could spend just a half hour now donatingblood. |
|
That's-not-all |
A large request is made, butbefore the individual can refuseadditional incentives are added. |
You are asked to donate blood, but before you say noyou are told you will get a cookie and a sticker andyour name will be published in the paper. |
|
Scarcity |
Products or opportunities arepresented as being limited innumber or as only available for alimited time. |
The blood bank tells you the special post-donationcookies are only available today for the first 20people who give blood. |
|
Pique |
Attention is disrupted by an oddlyframed request. |
You are asked if you want to save the lives of threechildren today. |
|
Disrupt-then-reframe |
An unusual request is made andthen framed in a positive way. |
When asked to give blood you are told it will onlytake 3,600 seconds, a very short time to give. |
Conclusion
In evaluating persuasion we need to take into account where the message comes from, what the message contains, and the intendedaudience. All of these factors interact with one another, so a particular communicator may be quite persuasive using a certain type ofmessage with a certain audience but less persuasive when conditions change. Persuaders have a large and varied bag of tricks. Eachpersuasion technique can affect behavior or attitudes when used carefully and correctly.