Salespeople, politicians, friends and family all have a stake in

getting you to agree to their requests. Social psychology

has determine d the basic principles that govern getting to
“yes”

The Science of

Hello there.

I hope you’ve enjoyed the magazine so far. No w I’d like to let you in on somethin g of great
importanc e to you personally. Have you ever been tricked into saying yes? Ever felt trapped
into buying somethin g you did- n’t really want or contributin g to some sus- picious-soundin g
cause? And have you ever wished you understoo d why you acted in this way so that you
could withstan d these clever ploys in the future?

Yes? Then clearly this article is just right for you.
powerfu l psychological pressures that get you to
new, imp roved research show- ing exactly how
delay, just settle in and get the informatio n that,
by Robert B. Cialdini
It contains valuable informatio n on the most
say yes to requests. And it’s chock-ful l of
and why these techniques work. So don’t
after all, you’ve al- ready agreed you want.

he scientific study of the process of social influence has been under way for well over half a centur y, beginning in
earnest with the propaganda , public informatio n and persuasio n program s of World

T
War II. Since that time, numerou s social scientists have inves- tigated the ways in which one individua l can influence anoth-
er’s attitude s and actions. For the past 30 years, I have partic- ipated in that endeavo r, concentratin g primarily on the major
factors that bring about a specific form of behavio r change — complianc e with a request. Six basic tendencies of human be-
havior come into play in generating a positive response: re- ciprocation , consistency, social validation , liking, authority and
scarcity. As these six tendencies help to govern our busi- ness dealings, our societal involvement s and our persona l re-
lationships , knowledg e of the rules of persuasio n can truly be though t of as empowerment.

Reciprocation

hen the Disabled American Veterans organization mails out requests for contributions , the appeal suc-

W
ceeds only about 18 percent of the time. But when the mailing includes a set of free personalize d address labels, the success
rate almost doubles, to 35 percent. To understan d the effect of the unsolicite d gift, we must recognize the reach and power of
an essential rule of human conduct : the code of reciprocit y.
All societies subscribe to a norm that obligates individu- als to repay in kind what they have received. Evolutionar y se-
lection pressure has probabl y entrenche d the behavio r in so- cial animals such as ourselves. The demand s of reciprocity
begin to explain the boost in donation s to the veterans group. Receiving a gift — unsolicite d and perhap s even unwanted —

76 Scientifi c America n February 2001 The Science of Persuasion

 convinced significant number s of potentia l donors to return the favor.
Charitabl e organization s are far from alone in taking this approach : food stores offer free samples, exterminator s offer
free in-home inspections , health clubs offer free workouts. Customer s are thus exposed to the produc t or service, but they
are also indebted . Consumer s are not the only ones who fall under the sway of reciprocit y. Pharmaceutica l companies spend
millions of dollars every year to suppor t medical re- searchers and to provide gifts to individua l physician s— activ- ities that
may subtly influence researchers’ findings and phy- sicians’ recommendations . A 1998 study in the New England Journal of
Medicine found that only 37 percent of research- ers who publishe d conclusion s critical of the safety of calci- um channel
blockers had received prior drug company sup- port. Among researcher s whose conclusion s supporte d the drugs’ safety,
however, the numbe r of those who had received free trips, research funding or employmen t skyrockete d—to
STEVEN ADAMS AP Photo

100 percent.
Reciprocit y includes more than gifts and favors; it also applies to concessions that people make to one anothe r. For
example, assume that you reject my large request, and I then make a concession to you by retreatin g to a smaller request.
You may very well then reciprocat e with a concession of your own: agreement with my lesser request. In the mid-1970 s my
colleagues and I conducte d an experimen t that clearly illus- trates the dynamics of reciproca l concessions . We stoppe d a
rando m sample of passersby on public walkway s and asked if they would voluntee r to chaperon e juvenile detentio n cen- ter
inmates on a day trip to the zoo. As expected, very few complied, only 17 percent.
For anothe r rando m sample of passersby, however, we
FREE SAMPLES carry a subtle price tag; they psychologically in- debt the consumer to reciprocate. Here shoppers get complimen-
tary tastes of a new product, green ketchup. The samples prime the consumer to return the favor with a purchase. The novel col- or
may also make the product seem scarce, an attractive attribute.

began with an even larger request: to serve as an unpaid counselo r at the center for two hours per week for the next two
years. Everyone in this second sampling rejected the ex- treme appeal. At that point we offered them a concession. “If you
can’t do that, ” we asked, “woul d you chaperon e a group of juvenile detentio n center inmates on a day trip to the zoo?”
Our concession powerfull y stimulate d return conces- sions. The complianc e rate nearly tripled, to 50 percent, com- pared
with the straightforwar d zoo-tri p request.
 Consistency

n 1998 Gordo n Sinclair, the owner of a well-know n Chica- go restaurant , was struggling with a problem that afflicts

I
all restaurateurs . Patrons frequentl y reserve a table but, with- out notice, fail to appea r. Sinclair solved the problem by ask-
ing his receptionis t to change two words of what she said to callers requesting reservations . The change droppe d his no-
call, no-sho w rate from 30 to 10 percent immediatel y.
The two words were effective because they commissioned the force of anothe r potent human motivation : the desire to be,
and to appea r, consistent . The receptionis t merely modi- fied her request from “Please call if you have to change your
plans ” to “Will you please call if you have to change your plans?” At that point, she politely paused and waited for a

ww w.sciam.co m Scientifi c America n February 2001 77

 response. The wait was pivotal because it induced customer s to fill the pause with a public commitment . And public
commitments , even seemingly minor ones, direct future action.
In anothe r example, Joseph Schwarz- wald of Bar-Ilan University in Israel and his co-worker s nearly doubled mone- tary
contribution s for the handicapped in certain neighborhoods . The key fac- tor: two weeks before asking for contri- butions , they
got residents to sign a pe- tition supportin g the handicapped , thus making a public commitmen t to that same cause.

Social Validation

n a wintry mornin g in the late

O
1960s, a man stoppe d on a busy New York City sidewalk and gazed skywar d for 60 seconds, at nothin g in particula r. He
did so as part of an ex- perimen t by City University of New York social psychologist s Stanley Mil- gram, Leonard Bickman
and Lawrence Berkowitz that was designed to find out what effect this action would have on passersby. Most simply detoure d or
brushe d by; 4 percent joined the man in looking up. The experimen t was then repeate d with a slight change. With the
modification , large number s of pedes- trians were induced to come to a halt, crowd together and peer upward.
The single alteratio n in the experi- ment incorporate d the phenomeno n of social validation . One fundamental way that
we decide what to do in a sit- uation is to look to what others are do- ing or have done there. If many individ-

PUBLIC COMMITMENT of signing a petition influences the signer to behave con- sistently with that position in the future.
uals have decided in favor of a particula r idea, we are more likely to follow, because we perceive the idea to be more correct,
more valid.
Milgram , Bickman and Berkowitz introduce d the influence of social validatio n into their street experi- ment simply by
having five men rathe r than one look up at nothing. With the larger initial set of upward gazers, the percentag e of New
Yorkers who followed suit more than quadru- pled, to 18 percent. Bigger initial sets of planted up-looker s generate d an even
greater response: a starter group of 15 led 40 percent of passersby to join in, nearly stoppin g traffic within one minute.
Taking advantag e of social valida- tion, requester s can stimulate our com- pliance by demonstratin g (or merely implying)
that others just like us have already complied. For example, a study found that a fund-raise r who showed homeowner s a list of
neighbor s who had donate d to a local charity significantly increased the frequency of contributions; the longer the list, the greater the
effect. Marketers , therefore , go out of their way to inform us when their produc t is the largest-selling or fastest-growin g of its
kind, and television commercial s reg- ularly depict crowds rushing to stores to acquire the advertise d item.
Less obvious, however, are the cir- cumstance s under which social valida- tion can backfire to produce the opposite of what a
requester intends. An exam- ple is the understandabl e but poten- tially misguided tendency of health edu- cators to call attentio n
to a problem by depicting it as regrettabl y frequent . In- formatio n campaigns stress that alco- hol and drug use is intolerabl y
high, that adolescent suicide rates are alarm-
SOCIAL VALIDATION takes advantage of peer pressure to drive human behavior. Poorly applied, however,
it can also under- mine attempts to curtail deleterious activities, by pointing out their ubiq- uity: If everyone’s doing
it, why shouldn’t I?

ing and that polluter s are spoiling the environment . Althoug h the claims are both true and well intentioned , the cre- ators
of these campaigns have missed something basic about the compliance process. Within the statemen t “Loo k at all the
people who are doing this unde- sirable thing” lurks the powerful and undercuttin g message “Loo k at all the people who
are doing this undesirable thing. ” Research shows that, as a con- sequence, many such program s boom- erang, generating
even more of the un- desirable behavio r.
For instance, a suicide intervention progra m administere d to New Jersey teenagers informed them of the high numbe r
of teenage suicides. Health re- searcher David Shaffer and his col- leagues at Columbi a University found that participant s
became significantly more likely to see suicide as a potential solution to their problems . Of greater effectiveness are
campaigns that hon- estly depict the unwante d activity as damagin g despite the fact that relatively few individual s engage in
it.

Liking

A
LUIS M. ALVAREZ AP Photo

“ ffinity,” “rapport ” and “affection”

all describe a feeling of connection
between people. But the simple word “liking ” most faithfully captures the concept and has become the standard
designatio n in the social science litera- ture. People prefer to say yes to those

The Science of Persuasion

 FAMILIAR FACES sell products. Friends
(who are already liked) are powerful
sales- people, as Tupperware
Corporation dis- covered. Strangers can
co-opt the trappings of friendship to
encourage compliance.
TUPPERWARE (1958) AP Photo

they like. Consider the worldwid e suc- cess of the Tupperwar e Corporatio n and its “home party ” program . Throug h the in-
home demonstratio n get-togethe r, the company arrange s for its customer s to buy from a liked friend, the host, rather than
from an unknow n salesperson . So favorabl e has been the effect on pro- ceeds that, accordin g to company liter- ature, a
Tupperwar e party begins some- where in the world every 2.7 seconds. In fact, 75 percent of all Tupperware parties today
occur outside the individ- ualistic U.S., in countries where group social bonding is even more important than it is here.
Of course, most commercia l transac- tions take place beyond the homes of friends. Under these much more typical
circumstances , those who wish to com- mission the power of liking employ tac- tics clustered aroun d certain factors that
research has shown to work.
Physical attractivenes s can be such a tool. In a 1993 study conducte d by Pe- ter H. Reingen of Arizona State Univer- sity
and Jerome B. Kernan of the Uni- versity of Cincinnati , good-looking fund-raiser s for the American Heart

In 1994 psychologist s R. Kelly Aune of the University of Hawai i at Mano a and Michael D. Basil of the University of Denver
reporte d research in which so- licitors canvassed a college campus ask- ing for contribution s to a charity. When the phrase
“I’m a student , too” was added to the requests, donation s more than doubled.
Compliment s also stimulate liking, and direct salespeople are traine d in the use of praise. Indeed, even inaccurate praise
may be effective. Research at the University of Nort h Carolin a at Chapel

example, often strive to be perceived by their prospect s as cooperatin g partners. Automobil e sales manager s frequently cast
themselves as “villains ” so the sales- person can “do battle ” on the custom- er’s behalf. The gambit naturall y leads to a
desirable form of liking by the cus- tomer for the salesperson , which pro- motes sales.

Authority

R
ecall the man who used social vali- dation to get large number s of
Associatio n generate d nearly twice as
Hill found that compliment s produced
passersby
to stop and stare at the sky.
many donation s (42 versus 23 percent) as did other requesters . In the 1970s researcher s Michael G. Efran and E.W.J.
Patterso n of the University of Toronto found that voters in Canadia n federal elections gave physically attractiv e can-
didates several times as many votes as unattractiv e ones. Yet such voters in- sisted that their choices would never be
influenced by something as superficial as appearance.
Similarity also can expedite a rap- port. Salespeople often search for, or out- right fabricate , a connectio n between
themselves and their customers : “Well, no kidding, you’re from Minneapolis ? I went to school in Minnesota! ” Fund- raisers
do the same, with good results.
just as much liking for the flatterer when they were untru e as when they were genuine.
Cooperatio n is anothe r factor that has been shown to enhance positive feelings and behavio r. Salespeople, for
He might achieve the opposit e effect and spur stationar y strangers into mo- tion by assuming the mantle of authori- ty. In
1955 University of Texas at Aus- tin researcher s Monro e Lefkowitz, Robert R. Blake and Jane S. Mouton
RIC FIELD AP Photo

BEHOLD THE POWER of authority.

Certainly not lost on the National Rifle
Association is that the authority inherent
in such heroic figures as Moses, El Cid
and Ben-Hur is linked to the actor who
portrayed them, Charlton Heston.

ww w.sciam.com
 LIMITED OFFER of toys available for a
short time often creates a figurative
feeding frenzy at local fast-food
establishments. Scarcity can be
manufactured to make a commodity
appear more desirable.

discovered that a man could increase by

350 percent the numbe r of pedestrians who would follow him across the street against the light by changing one simple thing.
Instead of casual dress, he donned markers of authority : a suit and tie.
Those toutin g their experience, ex- pertise or scientific credential s may be trying to harness the power of authori- ty:
“Babies are our business, our only business, ” “Fou r out of five doctors rec- ommend, ” and so on. (The author’s bi- ography
at the end of this article in part serves such a purpose. ) There is nothing wrong with such claims when they are real, because
we usually want the opin- ions of true authorities . Their insights help us choose quickly and well.
The problem comes when we are sub- jected to phony claims. If we fail to think, as is often the case when confronte d by
authorit y symbols, we can easily be steered in the wrong directio n by ersatz experts —those who merely present the aura
of legitimacy. That Texas jaywalk- er in a suit and tie was no more an au- thority on crossing the street than the rest of the
pedestrian s who nonetheless followed him. A highly successful ad campaig n in the 1970s featured actor Robert Young
proclaimin g the health benefits of decaffeinate d coffee. Young seems to have been able to dispense this medical opinio n
effectively because he represented , at the time, the nation ’s most famous physician. That Marcus Welby, M.D., was only a
characte r on a TV show was less importan t than the appearanc e of authorit y.

Scarcity

hile at Florida State University in the 1970s, psychologis t Stephen

W
West noted an odd occurrenc e after surveying students about the campus cafeteria cuisine: ratings of the food rose
significantly from the week before, even thoug h there had been no change in the menu, food quality or prepara- tion.
Instead the shift resulted from an announcemen t that because of a fire, cafeteria meals would not be available for several
weeks.
This accoun t highlights the effect of perceived scarcity on human judgment. A great deal of evidence shows that

items and opportunitie s become more desirable to us as they become less avail- able. For this reason, marketer s trum- pet the
unique benefits or the one-of-a- kind characte r of their offerings. It is also for this reason that they consistently engage in
“limited time only” promo- tions or put us into competitio n with one anothe r using sales campaigns based on “limited
suppl y.”
Less widely recognized is that scarci- ty affects the value not only of com- modities but of informatio n as well. In-
formatio n that is exclusive is more per- suasive. Take as evidence the dissertation data of a former student of mine, Am- ram
Knishinsk y, who owns a company that import s beef into the U.S. and sells it to supermarkets . To examine the ef- fects of
scarcity and exclusivity on com- pliance, he instructe d his telephon e sales- people to call a randoml y selected sam- ple of
customer s and to make a standard request of them to purchas e beef. He also instructe d the salespeople to do the same with a
second rando m sample of customer s but to add that a shortag e of Australia n beef was anticipated , which was true, because
of certain weather condition s there. The added informa- tion that Australia n beef was soon to be scarce more than
doubled purchases. Finally, he had his staff call a third sample of customers , to tell them (1) about the impending
shortag e of Aus- tralia n beef and (2) that this informa- tion came from his company’s exclusive sources in the Australia n
National Weathe r Service. These customer s in- creased their orders by more than 600 percent. They were influenced by
a

scarcity double whammy : not only was the beef scarce, but the informatio n that the beef was scarce was itself scarce.

Knowledge Is Power

I
think it noteworth y that many of the data presente d in this article have come from studies of the practices of
persuasio n professionals —the market- ers, advertisers , salespeople, fund-rais- ers and their comrade s whose financial well-
being depends on their ability to get others to say yes. A kind of natural selection operates on these people, as those who
use unsuccessful tactics soon go out of business. In contrast , those using procedure s that work well will survive, flourish
and pass on these suc- cessful strategies [see “The Power of Memes, ” by Susan Blackmore; Scien- tifi c American ,
Octobe r 2000]. Thus, over time, the most effective principles of social influence will appear in the repertoire s of long-
standin g persuasion professions . My own work indicates that those principles embody the six fundamenta l human
tendencies exam- ined in this article: reciprocation , con- sistency, social validation , liking, au-
PETER BARRERAS AP Photo

thority and scarcit y.

From an evolutionar y point of view, each of the behavior s presente d would appear to have been selected for in ani- mals,
such as ourselves, that must find the best ways to survive while living in social groups. And in the vast majority of cases, these
principles counsel us cor- rectly. It usually makes great sense to repay favors, behave consistentl y, fol- low the lead of
similar others, favor the

80 Scientifi c America n February 2001

The Science of Persuasion
 Influence across Cultu res

D
o the six key factors in the social influ- ence process ope rate similarly across national boundaries ? Yes, but
with a wrinkle. The citizens of the world are human, after all, and susceptibl e to the fundamenta l tenden- cies that
characterize all member s of our species. Cultural norms, tradition s and expe- riences can, however, modify the
weight
brough t to bear by each factor.
Consider the results of a report publishe d this year by Stanford University’s Michael W. Morris, Joel M. Podolny and Sheira Ariel, who
studie d empl oyees of Citibank, a multinationa l financial corpora- tion. The resea rcher s sele cted four societies for examination : the
U.S., China, Spain and Germany. They surveyed Citibank branches within each country and measu red empl oyees’ willingness to com-
ply voluntarily with a reques t from a co-worker for assistan ce with a task. Although multiple key factors could come into play, the main
reason empl oyees felt obliga ted to comply differed in the four na- tions. Each of thes e reasons incorpo rated a different fundamental
principle of social influen ce.
Employees in the U.S. took a recip rocation-base d approach to the decision to comply. They asked the question , “What has this
perso n done for me recently?” and felt obliga ted to volun teer if

they owed the reques ter a favor. Chinese empl oyees responde d primarily to authori- ty, in the form of loyalties
to those of high status within their small group. They asked, “Is this reques ter conne cted to someon e in my unit,
especially someon e who is high- ranking?” If the answer was yes, they felt re- quired to yield.
Spanish Citibank personne l base d the de- cision mostly on liking/friendshi p. They were
willing to help on the basis of friendship norms that encourage faithfulness to one’s friends, regardless of position or status. They
asked, “Is this reques ter conne cted to my friends?” If the answer was yes, they were especially likely to want to compl y.
German empl oyees were most compelle d by consis tency, offer- ing assistan ce in order to be consis tent with the rules of the organ-
ization. They decide d whethe r to comply by asking, “According to official regulation s and categorie s, am I suppose d to assist this re-
quester?” If the answer was yes, they felt a strong obligatio n to grant the request.
In sum, althoug h all huma n societies seem to play by the same set of influence rules, the weights assigne d to the various rules can
differ across cultures. Persuasive appeal s to audien ces in distin ct cultures nee d to take such differences into account . — R.B.C.

requests of those we like, heed legiti- mate authoritie s and value scarce re- sources. Consequentl y, influence agents who use
these principles honestly do us a favor. If an advertisin g agency, for in- stance, focused an ad campaig n on the genuine weight
of authoritative , scien- tific evidence favoring its client’s head- ache product , all the right people would profit—the agency, the
manufacture r and the audience. Not so, however, if the agency, finding no particula r scientific merit in the pain reliever,
“smuggles” the authorit y principle into the situa- tion throug h ads featuring actors wear- ing lab coats.
Are we then doomed to be helplessly manipulate d by these principles? No. By understandin g persuasio n techniques, we can
begin to recognize strategies and thus truly analyze requests and offer- ings. Our task must be to hold persua-
sion professional s accountabl e for the use of the six powerful motivator s and to purchas e their product s and services, suppor t
their political proposal s or do- nate to their causes only when they have acted truthfull y in the process.
If we make this vital distinctio n in our dealings with practitioner s of the persua- sive arts, we will rarely allow ourselves be tricked
into assent. Instead we will give ourselves a much better option : to be informed into saying yes. Moreove r, as long as we apply the
same distinction to our own attempt s to influence others, we can legitimately commission the six principles. In seeking to persuad e
by pointing to the presence of genuine ex- pertise, growing social validation , perti- nent commitment s or real opportunities for
cooperation , and so on, we serve the interests of both parties and enhance the quality of the social fabric in the bargain.
Surely, someon e with your splendid intellect can see the unique benefits of this article. And because you look like a helpful
person who would want to share such useful information , let me make a request. Woul d you buy this issue of the
magazine for 10 of your friends? Well, if you can’t do that, would you show it to just one friend? Wait, don’t answer yet.
Because I genuinely like you, I’m going to thro w in—at abso- lutely no extra cost—a set of references that you can consult to
learn more about this little-know n topic.
No w, will you voice your commit- ment to help? ... Please recognize that I am pausing politely here. But while I’m waiting,
I want you to feel totally as- sured that many others just like you will certainly consent. And I love that shirt you’re
wearing. SA

The Author
DUSAN PETRICIC

ROBERT B. CIALDINI is Regents’ Professor of Psychology at Arizona State University, where he has also been named Distinguishe d
Graduate Research Professor. He has been elected president of the Society of Per- sonality and Social Psychology. Cialdini’s book Influence,
which was the result of a three-year study of the reasons why people comply with requests in everyday settings, has appeare d in numerou s
editions and been published in nine languages. He attribute s his long-standin g inter- est in the intricacies of influence to the fact that he was
raised in an en- tirely Italian family, in a predominantl y Polish neighborhood , in a his- torically German city (Milwaukee) , in an otherwise rural
state.
Further Information
Psycholog y of Attitud e Chang e and Socia l Influence. Phillip G. Zimbard o and Michael R. Leippe. Temple University Press, 1991.
Bargainin g for Advan tage . G. Richard Shell. Viking, 1999. Age of Propagan da: The Eve ryday Use an d Abuse of Pe rsua- sion .
Anthony J. Pratkanis . W. H. Freeman and Compan y, 2000. Influence : Scienc e and Pr actice . Fourth edition. Robert B. Cialdini. Allyn &
Bacon, 2001.
For regularly update d informatio n about the social influence process, visit ww w.influenceatwork.com

ww w.sciam.co m Scientifi c America n February 2001 81