Discuss the use of compliance techniques (e.g. reciprocity principle, door in face
technique, goal gradients, foot in door technique, low balling).
Compliance, defined as the result of direct pressure to respond to a request, plays a
huge role in social influence, most specifically in the behavior of an individual
whilst in a group. Robert Cialdini (2002) first outlined compliance techniques, or
ways in which individuals are influenced to comply with the demands or desires to
others. This essay will discuss the use of compliance techniques in behavior
through examining several studies, and although they possess several strengths and
limitations, these studies support that compliance techniques significantly affect
behavior. (good you clearly show the reader how you will answer the question)
The Reciprocity Principle is the social norm that dictates that we feel compelled to
repay another person for a positive or kind act. For example, storekeepers
normally offer their customers small gifts because once accepted, the customer
feels a certain level of need and guilt to buy something from the shop. In fact,
Lynn and McCall (1998) found that when restaurant customers are left a sweet
with their bill, they are more likely to leave a larger tip. In an extension of this
study, it was found that the customers’ evaluation of the waiters’ performance
directly linked to how much money they left as a tip. This study possesses high
ecological validity and makes effective use of evaluations, interviews, and
restaurant data, There are also limitations to this study, however, as since it is not
an experiment, cause and effect relationship cannot be established. In addition,
confounding variables such as the customers’ mood or the waiters’ knowledge of
who the big tippers are may have affected the experiment. Regardless, this
supports the reciprocity principle as people feel obliged to leave a larger tip for
waiters who served them better. Thus, this also shows how compliance techniques
may influence a person’s behavior. (good – compliance technique, study plus
evaluation & connecting back to the question)
The Door in the Face Technique occurs when individuals compromise on certain
decisions, and thus those involved feel compelled to acknowledge this shift with
some sort of proper behavior. Cialdini et al. (1975) aimed to determine whether
this was true. They asked researchers to stop university students on campus and
ask them questions regarding their willingness to chaperone a group of juvenile
delinquents on a day trip to the zoo. When this was asked, 17% refused to
volunteer. When students were first asked to work two hours per week for the next
two years, on the other hand, no students agreed to volunteer. However, when
students who were asked this second question were then followed up with the first
request, 50% of students agreed to serve as chaperones. This shows that
compromise, as used in this case, certainly affects how a person reacts towards a
specific request. Some limitations of this study, however, include the effect of
social desirability on how the participants responded. Also, the sample was
unrepresentative since it only involved university students. Nevertheless, it does
show how a compliance technique such the Door in the Face may influence a
person’s behavior. (good)
Commitment is the idea that individuals will strive to be consistent with previous
behavior. This is associated directly with goal gradients, as proposed by Kurt
Lewin (1951), which postulates that the longer people commit themselves to
something, the less likely they are to abandon the goal. An example of this is
waiting in line for a movie that you’ve been dying to see, even though it snakes all
the way past the movie theater. Once you’ve been waiting for three hours, people
don’t want to give up for the fear that the line will begin moving after they’ve left
it, and all their efforts will go to waste.
The Foot in the Door Technique employs the idea of getting people to commit to
something not-so-grand, but following this up with asking them to do something
larger. Dickerson et al. (1992) aimed to determine whether they could get
university students to conserve water by using the Foot in the Door Technique.
They did this by asking students in the University of Santa Cruz, California, to sign
a poster that said, “Take shorter showers. If I can do it, so can you!” In addition,
they were asked to take a survey that helped them reflect on their own water
wastage. Afterward, shower times were monitored. It was found that those
students who had signed the poster shortened their shower times in comparison to
those across the dormitories. This showed that the Foot in the Door technique
influenced these students to take shorter showers. However, several issues are
raised regarding the nature of the methodology. Students may have signed the
poster because they were already committed to the cause. Also, since this was not
an experiment, there is no way to determine whether the signing of the posters or
the survey actually caused the decrease in shower times. The study does not take
into account environmental factors such as the weather, the availability of water,
etc. Nevertheless, it does show how a compliance technique such the Foot in the
Door Technique may influence a person’s behavior. (good)
Low Balling is a technique using the idea of making an initial offer attractive
enough, but not entirely appealing, and then following this up with a second offer
that is neither too over-the-top or grossly unacceptable. Cialdini et al. (1974), for
example, tested this by asking a first group of students to volunteer for a study that
would meet at 7am. When posed with such an offer, only 24% were willing to
participate. The second group was asked the same favor, but were not told the
time. As a result 56% agreed to participate, and once they were told that it would
be at 7am and that they could pull out if they wished, nobody wanted to go back on
their promise. This study showed how low balling is, indeed, a compliance
technique that may alter people’s behavior towards something. Though some
limitations include a non-representative sample size and the idea of social
desirability (people may not have wanted to disappoint the researchers by pulling
out), the study clearly showed that a compliance technique such Low Balling may
influence a person’s behavior.
In conclusion, compliance techniques seem to hold a certain reign over how people
behave and respond to certain situations and requests. Though the studies
supporting such compliance techniques definitely have their limitations, they still
show how much our behavior can be influenced by the use of some of these
techniques. This, in turn, helps us better understand social influences, and why
exactly people behave the way they do in a group setting.
--Ok …….. you clearly grasp how to structure these LAQs and your essay is well
written. Since you have this basis, try to challenge yourself further by thinking
critically about the research/theory, and thinking about whether there are any
other explanations for this phenomenon? – I want to encourage you to continue to
think critically and think of some really pertinent and original/insightful evaluative
points that might relate to this research that will put you right up there into the
top end of the mark bands. Grade = 17/22