Compliance Gaining
Common strategies and tactics
What is compliance gaining?
Focus is on intentional
efforts to get people to do
what you want
Emphasis is on behavioral
conformity, not necessarily
belief or attitude change
Marwell & Schmidt’s typology
How a parent might try to
get a teenager to study
1. Promise: If you comply, I will
reward you. For example, you offer to
increase Dick’s allowance if he studies
more.
2. Threat: If you do not comply, I will
punish you. For example, you threaten
to forbid Dick to use the car if he
doesn’t start studying more.
3. Expertise (positive): If you comply,
you will be rewarded because of the
“nature of things.” For example, you
tell Dick that if he gets good grades he
will be able to get into college and get a
good job.
4. Expertise (negative): If you do not
comply, you will be punished because of
the “nature of things.” For example,
you tell dick that if he does not get
good grades he will not be able to get
into a good college or get a good job.
5. Liking: Act friendly and helpful to
get the person in a “good frame of
mind” so that he/she will comply with
the request. For example, you try to
be as friendly and pleasant as possible
to put Dick in a good mood before
asking him to study.
6. Pregiving: Reward the person
before requesting his/her compliance.
For example, you raise Dick’s allowance
and tell him you now expect him to
study.
7. Aversive Stimulation: Continuously
punish the person, making cessation
contingent on his/her compliance. For
example, you forbid Dick the use of
the car and tell him he will not be able
to drive until he studies more.
8. Debt: You owe me compliance
because of past favors. For example,
you point out that you have sacrificed
and saved to pay for Dick’s education
and that he owes it to you to get good
enough grades to get into a good
college.
Marwell & Schmidt--continued
9. Moral Appeal: You are immoral if
you do not comply. You tell Dick that it
is morally wrong for anyone not to get
as good grades as possible and that he
should study more.
10. Self-Feeling (positive): You will
feel better about yourself if you
comply. For example, you tell Dick that
he will feel proud if he gets himself to
study more.
11. Self-Feeling (negative): You will
feel worse about yourself if you do not
comply. For example, you tell Dick that
he will feel ashamed of himself if he
gets bad grades.
12. Altercasting (positive): A person
with “good” qualities would comply. For
example, you tell Dick since he is a
mature and intelligent person he
naturally will want to study more and
get good grades.
13. Altercasting (negative): Only a
person with “bad” qualities would not
comply. For example, you tell Dick
that he should study because only
someone very childish does not study.
14. Altruism: I need your compliance
very badly, so do it for me. For
example, you tell Dick that you really
want very badly for him to get into a
good college and that you wish he would
study more as a personal favor to you.
15. Esteem (positive): People you
value will think better of you if you
comply. For example, you tell Dick that
the whole family will be very proud of
him if he gets good grades.
16. Esteem (negative): People you
value will think the worse of you if you
do not comply. For example, you tell
dick that the whole family will be very
disappointed in him if he gets poor
grades.
Kellermmann (2004) examined
50 plus strategies
Accuse
Acknowledge
Advise
Apologize
Approve
Argue
Ask
Assert
Assure
Attack
Blame
Boast
Challenge
Claim
Comment
Complain
Compliment
Confess
Confirm
Criticize
Demand
Disagree
Disclose
Excuse
Explain
Forbid
Forgive
Give
Hint
Insist
Inform
Insult
Joke
Justify
Offer
Order
Permit
Plead
Point out
Praise
Prohibit
Promise
Protest
Question
Remark
Report
Reprimand
Request
Ridicule
Suggest
Summarize
Tell
Thank
Threaten
Vow
Warn
1. Reciprocity
“norm of reciprocity” as a cultural
universal
creating perceptions of obligation
and indebtedness
Buying someone a drink at a bar
Campaign donations and political
lobbying
Police interrogation: befriending
the suspect
Reciprocity in interpersonal
contexts
dating behavior and sexual compliance gaining
Morr & Mongeau (2004): “men have higher
sexual expectations than women and sexual
expectations are heightened when alcohol
is available.”
reciprocity can create uninvited debts and
trigger unfair exchanges
2. Commitment and
consistency
Cognitive inconsistency is
psychologically uncomfortable
People want to appear to be
consistent
not appearing wishy-washy, twofaced
Initiation rituals
fraternities
Marine “blood-pinning” ceremony
Gangs
Public commitments are more binding
Consistency in interpersonal
contexts
consistency and peer pressure
consistency and organizational
culture
May be important to activate
someone’s attitudes to initiate
consistency
Cognitive dissonance
guilt appeals, buyer’s
remorse
inducing hypocrisy
broken promises
words versus deeds
social contracts
example: “True Love
Waits” program
3. Social proof
“canned” laughter on sitcoms
drinking and spring break
flashing for beads during Mardi
Gras
the bystander phenomenon
Darley (1970) students participating
in a conference call were less likely to
help in a group of five (30%) versus a
group of 2 (62%) versus alone (85%)
when one of the callers feigned a
seizure.
Social modeling of behavior
social modeling and the
media
MTV’s “Jackass” show
Smoking rates in cinema are
higher than for the public at
large in R rated movies, and
for male characters
(Omidvari, et al 2005).
Unsafe sex: (Gunasekera &
Chapman, 2005): 98% of
movies with sex scenes make
no mention of safe sex
4. Liking, the “friendly thief”
Liking as an indirect influence strategy
Relies on the “peripheral route” to
persuasion (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986)
Liking is a pervasive tool of influence
Operates in friendships, the workplace,
with strangers, in social groups (school,
church. etc.), and in sales/commerce.
Liking operates in
numerous ways
Attractiveness can facilitate liking
Perceived similarity can facilitate liking
Immediacy can facilitate liking
Ingratiation can facilitate liking
Humor can facilitate liking
Favors can facilitate liking
Attractiveness and liking
Why is attractiveness so persuasive?
Socialization processes: equating beauty
with good, ugly with evil
“halo effect”: physical attractiveness is
generalized to other personality traits
liking: we admire, and want to be admired
by, attractive people
Caveat: attractiveness is less
influential when “central processing” is
used
advantages of
attractiveness
Attractive people are judged as happier, more
intelligent, friendlier, stronger, kinder, and better
at communicating (Knapp, 1992)
Attractive defendants are more likely to receive
lenient sentences (Castellow, Wuensch, & Moore,
1991)
Strangers are more likely to lend assistance to
attractive people (Benson, Karabenic, & Lerner,
1976)
Teachers perceive attractive students to be more
intelligent (Ritts, Patterson, & Tubbs, 1992)
Similarity and liking
Byrne (1971) we tend to like people
who are similar to us
Similarities may involve beliefs,
personality traits, demographic
characteristics, lifestyles,
appearances
DePaulo (1992) persuaders can build
rapport buy mirroring another’s
nonverbal behavior
Ingratiation and liking
Other enhancement
Compliments, flattery, charm
Variation: Use of a 3rd party to deliver the
compliment
Opinion conformity
Agreeing, reinforcing, “Yes” man approach
Variation: initially disagree, then yield
Self presentation
Bragging, posturing, name dropping
Studies on ingratiation’s
effectiveness
DeLuga: ingratiators gained a 5% edge
over non-ingratiators in garnering
positive workplace evaluations
Gordon (1996) ingratiatory behavior has a
positive, modest effect on targets’
judgments and evaluations
Immediacy can facilitate
liking
Immediacy: actions that convey warmth,
closeness, friendliness, and involvement
(Anderson, 1999)
Common verbal immediacy behaviors
Calling someone by name, verbal reinforcement
(“good point,” “great idea!”), expressing verbal
interest (“tell me about your vacation!”)
Common nonverbal immediacy behaviors
closer proximity, smiling, nodding in agreement,
eye contact, touch
5. Ethos: the power of
authorities
Roughly 1 in 4 commercials
relies on a celebrity endorser
10% of advertising expenses go
to pay celebrity endorsers
(Agrawal & Kamamura, 1995)
Berger (2000) claims
Americans live in a
“celebritocracy”
Yet only 3% of those surveyed
admitted they would buy a
product based on a celebrities
say so
Blind obedience: deferring
to authorities
Abu Ghraib: low ranking soldiers
followed the orders of outside
contractors
Milgram (1974) 65% of subjects
followed orders to shock another
person repeatedly
Hofling et al. (1966) the
Astrogen experiment; 95% of
hospital nurses complied with an
improper directive
Cult leaders (Jim Jones, David
Coresh, Marshal Applewhite)
6. Scarcity
Psychological reactance theory (Brehm,
1966, Brehm & Brehm, 1981)
cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1953)
and lost opportunities
Stock market investing and the herd
mentality
Con artists, scams
Strategies relying on the
scarcity principle
Limited numbers; “limited edition,” “while
supplies last,” “limit 1 per customer”
Collectibles, memorabilia and scarcity
limited time, “limited time offer,” sales
“windows”
Businesses that cater to time’s scarcity
Lenscrafters, 1 hour photo, Jiffy Lube,
drive through services, drive-through
tellers