Discuss the use of compliance techniques (for example, low-balling, foot-inthe-door, reciprocity).

Introduction: Discuss: this command term asks for a balanced review offering evaluative comments about the issue being discussed to be clearly given and supported by relevant knowledge and appropriate evidence. Define: Compliance: the result of direct pressure to respond to a request (the textbook) Compliance Techniques: outlined by Robert Cialdini, one of the leading researchers in the psychology of persuasion, as ways in which individuals are influenced to comply with the demands or desires of others, the six factors outlined by Cialdini that influence the likelihood that people will comply with a request are authority, commitment, liking, reciprocity, scarcity, and social proof. Thesis: Compliance techniques have several uses which include marketing, advertising and as sales tactics to persuade consumers to buy products. Two of the compliance techniques concerning commitment that will be discussed are foot-inthe-door and low-balling. BODY 1: FOOT-IN-THE-DOOR Topic sentence: Foot-in-the-door technique which is used to get people to commit to something small in hopes of persuading them to agree to a larger request, the actual request has been used in fund raising and to promote environmental awareness, as seen in Dickerson et al.s 1992 field experiment. Dickerson et al. (1992): field experiment where they asked university students to conserve water during their dormitory showers Aim: investigate the effect of compliance (commitment- foot-in-the-door technique) on behavior Procedure: First of all, Dickerson asked the students to sign a poster that said take a shorter shower. If I can do it, so can you!, and to those who signed the poster, Dickerson and his group asked them to take a survey that was designed to make the students think about their own water usage and wastage. Finally, the shower times were then monitored. Results: Those who signed the poster and took the survey had an average of 3.5 minutes less showers than those who didnt do any of those Evaluation: The data obtained may be questionable as it relies partially on self-reports, the surveys, which cannot be assured that they weren t manipulated upon. In addition, due to researcher bias, or human errors in the monitoring of the shower times, the data obtained there may be questionable too. However concerning ethics, there seems to be no major ethical issues except for a bit of privacy issues where the student s shower times were monitored. This experiment was done in a university therefore the findings of this experiment cannot be generalized other cultures but only some similar to that of the university that was tested upon. The experiment was a field experiment therefore a cause and effect relationship was able to be established and it also has ecological validity for it was an field experiment. BUT, it may be that the students signed the posters because they were already committed to conserving water, even before this experiment, not necessarily because they were doing a favor or felt they had to commit to it

(bidirectional ambiguity). This technique is effective because people think of themselves as being helpful and committed therefore want to continuously behave with that commitment. Other researches show that pro-social requests are generally more likely to be accepted with this technique and it is more likely that a person will comply with the second request if it is an extension of the first one rather than a completely different one (This could be linked to the principle of people s need for self-consistency). FITD is most powerful when used accordingly to the persons self-image related to the request, meaning the request should be pertaining to the person s interests and care and willingness to support a topic, those kinds of factors BODY 2: LOW-BALLING Topic sentence: Low-balling which involves changing an offer to make it less attractive to the person whom has agreed to take the offer, as often used by salesmen to customers, is demonstrated by Cialdini et al.s experiment in 1974. Cialdini et al. (1974) Aim: Demonstrate the LB technique Method: researchers asked two groups of a class of first-year psychology students to volunteer to be a part of a study on cognition. The first group, the control group was told that the study will be starting at 7am whereas the second group was told about volunteering and the study as the first group except the second group werent specified with the time. Later, after the students from the second group had volunteered, the time was specified and they were allowed to withdraw if they wished. Results: 24% of students were willing get up early in the morning to participate from the control group whereas 56% of students volunteered from the second group. Out of the 56% of the students who volunteered, 95% of them showed up on the day of the study at 7am although they were allowed to withdraw Evaluation: The results could have been affected by the differences within the control and the non-control group, that the people in the non-control group are simply more accepting, committed people, and even without the use of the LB technique, around 56% would have volunteered and from there 95% would have attended the study. In addition, as psychology students, they may be aware of what Cialdini and the researchers were testing, so the demand characteristics could have affected the data as well. However, on the positive side, this experiment has ecological validity and it does not involve ethical problems except for minor things like slight stress on deciding whether they should withdraw or not after the time was specified. It was an experiment, therefore a cause and effect relationship can be established but the finding of this experiment cannot be generalized to the population for the participants were psychology students from university/college + there was 5% of those from the 56% that did not comply showing that compliance techniques dont work every time, to everyone. This study shows the effectiveness of LB compliance technique in that 56% of the students complied with the use of LB whereas only 24% complied without the use of LB. This technique is effective only when individuals make an initial public commitment because then, because theyve made this initial public

commitment, even when the conditions have changed, the individual feels obliged to commit to it although theyve been allowed to withdraw. Conclusion: As seen above, compliance techniques are ways in which individuals are influenced to comply with the demands and desires of others, therefore a change in behavior is observed however the individuals inner and private intentions may be kept hidden, as they comply with ones request. Used in marketing, advertising, as sales tactics to persuade customers to buy products mainly Summarize FITD and LB a bit Although researches on compliance techniques have its strengths and limitations, they have a significant impact on human behavior, as seen by its use and application to real life situations. (ibguides.com) However as seen with Cialdinis experiment, there is a small percentage of people who did not comply with the use of compliance technique. This demonstrates that the use of compliance techniques affects majority but not all.