Six Universal Influence

Principles
1) Reciprocity the need to return a favor, gift, or
service
2) Consistency with a prior commitment
3) Social Validation (Consensus) the
behavior/opinions of similar others
4) Liking the impact of those who express liking for
targets
5) Authority the role of legitimate authority figures,
expertise
6) Scarcity the value/desire for things that are rare,

Reciprocity
Restaurant servers: Give 2 candies to
customers = 14.1% increase in tips
Hand written Post-it note with survey =
2x more likely to respond; returned survey
quicker and gave more information on survey
Reuse towels (Hotels): Card that said the
hotel had already given money to an
environmental organization = 26% increase
in reuse of towels by
customers

~ Door in the Face ~

Procedure: Very large 1st request = refusal (e.g., be weekly volunteer
for juvenile detention center for 2 years, followed by a smaller request
(e.g., 2 hours taking troubled kids on a trip to the zoo).

Key Points:
Both requests must be made by the same person
Perception of a concession/negotiation
Feeling of satisfaction within target

Another example: Blood donation example

Sign up for long-term plan (No); then ... how
about once

Thats Not All

Procedure:
A) Give original cost ($1.25), then reduce (.75 cents) it
before the target responds

A) Give original cost, then add something extra before

the target responds
Principle: Reciprocity

Thats Not All in Action

Ingratiation (Use of reciprocity)

He did something that, on the face of it, seems foolish and
costly. Each month he sent every one of his more than
13,000 former customers a holiday greeting card
containing a printed message. The greeting card changed
from month to month (e.g., Happy New Year, Happy
Thanksgiving) but the message printed on the face of the
card never varied. It read, I like you. (Cialdini, 1988, p.
166).

Consistency: People are willing to comply with

requests that are consistent with their prior
commitments

~ Foot in the Door ~

Procedure: Small 1st request, followed by a larger 2nd request (e.g., Freedman &
Fraser study, 1966)
1st Request: Answer questions for few minutes over phone (series
of 8 innocuous questions dealing with household soaps, e.g., "What
brand of soap do you use in your kitchen sink?") 2nd Request:
Survey team of 5-6 men to come into their homes for 2 hours to
classify the household products they used.
1st Request: Small sign (Be A Safe Driver or Keep CA Beautiful) in
window or sign petition; 2nd Request: Large sign on lawn (Drive
Carefully)
Key Points:
Requests can be made by a different people and/or organizations
Requests can be on a different issue (e.g., Drive Safely vs. Keep California
Beautiful)
Performing the 1st request is not essential. Just agreeing to do it is sufficient

Summary of Freeman & Fraser

1966 Studies (1 and 2)
Study 1 (Household Goods)

Study 2 (Large Sign)

Consistency (continued)
Bait and Switch Technique go to buy an
advertised product but it is of poor quality or
sold out
Heightened likelihood we will buy
something (an alternative)
Low Ball Technique - Gain a
commitment at low price -- Item then
costs more than one that was agreed upon
(e.g., buying a car).
Likely to still buy item

~ Social Validation (Consensus) ~

We are more likely to comply with a
request that everyone else is doing

Some Examples:

Reuse towels in hotels: Card that says the majority of guests reuse
towels during their stay = 28% increase in customers reusing towels

Social Validation (Consensus)

Authority/Expertise
We are more likely to be swayed by a legitimate authority figure, someone
who is an expert in a given topic
Winner of the 1961 National Book Award

Slogan: Babies are our

business, our only
business
Best Costume Design: Mark Bridges,
"The Artist
Best Original Score: Ludovic Bource,
"The Artist
Best Director: Michel Hazanavicius, "The
Artist"
Best Actor: Jean Dujardin, "The Artist
Best Picture: "The Artist"

~ Liking~
We are more willing to comply with requests by friends or
those that we like (or admire)
Tupperware party example: Use of both friends and love
bombing

~ Scarcity (Perceived or Real) ~

We desire things that are rare or dwindling
Psychological Reactance Theory threat to our personal
freedom

Scarcity,
Psychological
reactance

Social
validation,
conformity

Thats Not All,

Reciprocity

Compliance in Action

Cialdini Quote
We need to begin with a systematic observation of a
phenomenon that is effective, that works on people. The we
take it to the laboratory to examine its psychological
underpinnings, why it works the way it does. Then we take
the new information into the natural environment to see if
our new insights really represent the way the thing works in
the real world. (Robert Cialdini on Full Cycle Social
Psychology)

Strategy

Example

Positive Moods

Make a request in a nice setting (e.g., over a nice

dinner); Give feedback (e.g., you got the highest IQ test
score)
Say flattering things (those earrings are beautiful,
where did you buy those great shoes?)

Ingratiation
[Reciprocity]

Principle
Reciprocity

Favors
[Reciprocity]

Offer to carry a heavy object for someone

Reciprocity

Foot-in-the-door (FITD)

Follow a small request with a much larger one

Commitment

Door-in-the-face (DITF)

Follow a very large request with a smaller, more

realistic one

Reciprocity

Thats-Not-All (TNA)
Improving the deal

Original cost of item is $2.50 but will sell it now for $

1.50; Original cost of item is $2.50 and will add another
item for free
Get a yes response to purchase a car at a given price
(e.g., $18,000), then come back with a final total
(adding in many smaller costs) of $19,500)

Low Ball

Scarcity

Gaining commitment by limiting choice (real or

perceived)
Indicating that there is only 1 item left, that time is
running out (or both)

Reciprocity

Commitment

Psychological
reactance