Theories of Persuasion Week 4
Theories of Persuasion Week 4 CMS 332K
Popular in Theories of Persuasion
Popular in Communication Studies
This 6 page Class Notes was uploaded by Cimmi Alvarez on Wednesday September 14, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to CMS 332K at University of Texas at Austin taught by Matthew McGlone in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 3 views. For similar materials see Theories of Persuasion in Communication Studies at University of Texas at Austin.
Reviews for Theories of Persuasion Week 4
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 09/14/16
Week 4 Process of persuasion So engrained in us by social behavior Exploit this social behavior to influence our behavior Reciprocity The process of give and take Types of Reciprocity Direct reciprocity: Quid pro quo A helps B; B helps A Ways we talk about it You scratch my back Ill scratch yours And eye for an eye Indirect Reciprocity- at least 3 individuals involved; Upstream A helps B; Then B helps C Paying it forward (based on recent positive experience) Downstream A helps B; Then C helps A Karma; what goes around comes around, reputation based reciprocity Norm of Positive Direct Reciprocity: Return all favors in kind or degree Norm- rule of normal conduct PDR norm is a cultural universal Violates PDR norm has aversive social consequences labeled - “free loader,” “selfish ass-hole,” “mooch” If observed by others feel the need to obey social norms Power of Reciprocity Kunz and Woolcott (1971) Sent out Christmas cards to 600 complete strangers all over the U.S. High or low quality cards Hand written notes and/ or pictures of family Wanted to know who would send them back - 201 replies- comparable in quality and format to original cards photos for photos; notes for notes How to Exploit the PDR norm Exploit- use the norm to your advantage Do a “favor” positive action, for someone who didn’t ask for it. Just start Make the desired form of reciprocation ( purchase, donation) obvious to the favor recipient Avoid direct requests to return the favor. Don’t say: Will you pay me for cleaning your windshield? Say: Can you help me out? Fuller Brush Men 1930s traveling salesmen door to door sales of brushes- dusting, brooms, mops, toilet brushes offered “special gift” (cheap brush) to gain entry into the house 2 foot in the door See this in various forms Blood drives, donations, Sign a reciprocity tactic is being used- a “free” gift Tupperware Party (‘50s-70s) Brownie Wise, pioneer of “direct marketing” “party guests” (customers) provided with gift (small container) and refreshments Tupper tried to sell his stuff through regular advertising - radio and print adds; he almost went bankrupt Brownie wise approached Tupper about how to sell his product Her innovation was to stop marketing to men sell to women. Marketing not great toward women at this time instead have representatives that throw parties for women. Give them a free gift while there and sell them the Tupperware there. Used free gift to get the party attendees to buy more Tupperware Similar Roadanne and Fields, Mary Kay, herbal wrap, DIRECT MARKETTING Hare Krishna’s (‘60s-80s) Limited sect of Hinduism Would approach people at airports and put a flower on you and say “a gift from the mission of hare Krishna” Reciprocity you didn’t want yet you still feel obligated to reciprocate Door in the Face Technique (Rejection then Retreat) Make a large (but reasonable) request to target. 3 After request is rejected, make a smaller request. Type of perceptual contrast. $10 seems like very little money compared to $50. Concession: I’m lowering my imposition on you. Because I made a concession now it is time for you to make a concession Fake favor: I’m giving back $40 of the $50 I originally asked for DITF: creating a “big” favor out of thin air Miller, Seligman, Clarke, and Bush Trying to get people to work at a health center Direct request group Approach students asking them to do volunteer work for 2 hours at the local community health center Agreement rate about 29% Show up rate 50% DITF Group First made a large request. Commit to doing 2 hours a week at the local community health center for the next two years. Agreement rate 0% Second request to do 2 hours’ volunteer work at the local community health center Agreement rate 76% Show up rate 85% More people show up in the DITF The person changed their behavior so now I have to change mine Cialdini and Ascani (76) Do DITF victims resent being manipulated 4 Direct Request Group Donate pint of blood Agreement 26% DITF Group Donate pint of blood very 6 weeks for a minimum of 3 years? Would you be willing to donate a single pint of blood? Agreement 48% After donation ask people can we contact you in the future? If felt manipulated would say no Direct 43% yes DITF- 84% yes Benton, Kelly, and Liebling (72) UCLA negotiation game Represent a company and would meet with rep from company B and would negotiate how to spend money from a government grant Opponent (confederate) Extreme fixed demand Moderate fixed demand Extreme demand, then retreat to moderate (DITF) The DITF technique resulted in participants reporting high satisfaction and responsibility in the negotiation The participants got some ownership, they changed their position based on the participant. Create an appearance of working with them. “That’s not all” Technique Ron Proeil- Ronco: That’s not all! 5 Not just getting the rotisserie for this price I’m going to throw in other items saying he’s giving them to you for “free” Tim Shaw-Demtel: But wait- there’s more! Like DITF, but concession performed before rejection Burger bake sale study Control Condition: Package (1 cupcake, 2 cookies) for 75 cents That’s not all condition: 1 cupcake for 75 cents, then throw in 2 cookies Experimental condition almost doubled the control condition 6