Touch,awareness of touch,and compliance with a request

In certain situations it has been shown that touch has a positive effect on the compliance with a request expressed by a stranger. However, the difference between the effect of touch on request compliance between people who had noticed and those who had not noticed this contact has never been taken into account. In this experiment a female confederate asked 227 women to answer a questionnaire. When asking for their collaboration the forearm was or was not touched for a brief period of 1 to 2 seconds. Analysis showed that touch was associated with significantly higher compliance to the request but no difference was found between subjects who had noticed the tactual contact and subjects who had not noticed.     

Touch, compliance, and awareness of tactile contact

Many experimental studies have shown that touch increases compliance with a request; however, the difference between the effect of touch on compliance between participants who notice and those who do not notice such contact remains in question. An experiment was conducted in which a female confederate asked 368 female smokers to give her a cigarette. In the Touch condition, when making her request, the confederate slightly touched the participant on her forearm. Analysis showed the touch was associated with significantly higher compliance to the request, and a difference was evident in the Touch condition between subjects who had noticed the tactile contact and those who had not.     

Undermining Effects of the Foot-in-the-Door Technique with Extrinsic Rewards

The self-perception explanation of the foot-in-the-door technique suggests that a person who complies with a small request infers that he or she is the kind of generous individual who is more likely to comply with a larger demand. It was hypothesized that individuals who are promised a monetary reward for their compliance with a small request are not more likely to comply with a larger demand because they cannot perceive themselves as generous persons. To test this hypothesis, subjects were presented with a small request (a 5-minute telephone interview) followed, 2 or 3 days later, by a larger demand (a 25-minute telephone interview). Some of the subjects were promised a monetary reward for their compliance with a small request (pay condition) while others were not promised a reward (no-pay condition). Results showed that rate of compliance in the no-pay conditon (64.3%) was significantly higher than rate of compliance in either a no-initial-request control condition (45.0%) or the pay condition (33.3%). The difference in rate of compliance between the control condition and the pay condition was not significant.     

Increasing compliance with a request: two touches are more effective than one

Touch procedures have been shown to increase the likelihood of compliance with requests. But the effect of subsequent touches following a classical touch procedure has not been investigated. It was predicted that two touches would lead to more compliance than one touch. 180 male and 180 female bystanders were asked to fill in a short or long questionnaire by a female confederate. They were touched by the confederate either once, twice, or not at all. Results showed that there was more compliance in the two-touch than in the one-touch condition, and when the participants were touched by the confederate. These findings support the hypothesis. Moreover, whereas participants were less likely to fill in the long questionnaire in the no-touch condition, touch procedures led to more compliance whatever the questionnaire length. Also, touch was more effective when a female confederate made the request to a male participant.     

Low-ball and compliance to a request: an application in a field setting

The low-ball refers to a compliance technique in which a demand of someone to agree to a request is followed by telling the person the real cost of the request. The number of people who maintain their first decision is larger than the number in the condition in which the real cost of the request is stated prior to the initial compliance. Researches in this paradigm traditionally included a request addressed by a professor to students but was never tested between strangers. So, an experiment was carried out in which people were solicited to keep a dog (8 kg) on a lead until a male confederate returned from a visit to someone in a hospital. In low-ball condition, the confederate told the subject who agreed to the request that it would take 30 min., whereas in the control condition the confederate gave this information when stating his request. Analysis showed that low-ball technique leads people to maintain their first decision.     

When Manipulation Backfires: The Effects of Time Delay and Requester on the Foot-in-the-Door Technique

We examined the effects of 2 variables on compliance rates within the foot-in-the-door procedure. Participants who agreed to a small request were presented with a larger request either immediately after the first request or 2 days later. The second request was presented either by the same person or by a different requester. Compared to a control group receiving only the large request, participants were more likely to agree to the second request in all experimental conditions except one. When the same requester presented the second request without delay, participants were less likely than the control group to agree to the target request. This latter condition represents a situation in which typical foot-in-the-door procedures can backfire on the requester.     

I'm free but I'll comply with your request: generalization and multidimensional effects of the “evoking freedom” technique

The “evoking freedom” technique is a verbal compliance procedure that solicits someone to comply with a request by simply telling them they are free to accept or to refuse the request. The measure of the efficiency of this technique on compliance with large samples and the evaluation of its influence on various requests was tested in the first set of experiments. This technique was found to be efficient in increasing the number of people who agreed to give money to a requester, the number of smokers who agreed to give a cigarette, passersby who agreed to respond to a survey, and homeowners who agreed to buy pancakes. In the second set of experiments in which the mode of interaction between the requester and the person solicited was tested, the “evoking freedom” technique was found to be associated with greater compliance with a request addressed by mail and through face‐to‐face, phone‐to‐phone, or computer‐mediated interaction. The third set of experiments tested the effect of semantic variations of the “evoking freedom” technique and the weight of the repetition of the semantic evocation of freedom. These later experiments that used various phrases evoking the freedom to comply were found to be associated with greater compliance. Moreover, a double evocation of freedom was associated with even greater compliance than a single evocation. The importance of this technique for commitment communication is discussed.     

Behavioural conversion in a compliance paradigm: A replication and a refinement

While a compliance strategy induced almost all subjects to agree to forego first a lunch and then a dinner and the following breakfast, simply observing an accomplice break his commitment to forego lunch was enough to produce a significant reduction in subjects' commitment to forego two meals, even though the effect was not immediate. This pattern of influence, similar to a ‘behavioural conversion’, appeared if the accomplice had first agreed to the initial request and only later refused to continue, but not if he refused to make the commitment at the outset.     

The effect of the two feet-in-the-door technique on tobacco deprivation

The ‘Foot-in-the-door’ (FITD) is a well-known compliance technique that increases compliance with a request. Many investigations on this paradigm have generally used prosocial requests to test the effect of the technique. A new evaluation of the effect of the FITD technique was carried out on tobacco deprivation. A two feet-in-the-door technique in which the target request was preceded by two small target requests was used to encourage students to stop smoking for 24 h. The results were compared with two single foot-in-the- door procedures in which the final request was only preceded by one small request, as well as with a control condition using only a 24 h stop-smoking request. Results showed that the single FITD and the two feet-in-the-door procedures were effective to increase verbal compliance (accepting to stop smoking) but only the two feet-in-the-door technique significantly increased behavioural compliance (not smoking for 24 h) with the request.     

Another evaluation of touch and helping behavior

Although positive effect of touch on compliance has been widely reported, new evaluation was made with an unusual request. 80 male bus drivers were solicited by a male or a female confederate to take the bus despite having too little money for the fare. Bus drivers were briefly touched by the confederate during solicitation. Analysis showed that bus drivers who were touched accepted the request more favorably but only when made by a female.     

Self-Inference and the Foot-in-the-Door Technique Quantity of Behavior and Attitudinal Mediation

The purpose of this investigation was to test two aspects of the self-perception theory account of the foot-in-the-door (FITD) phenomenon. The first aspect tested was the claim that the greater the quantity of behavior associated with the initial request, the greater the likelihood of compliance with the later request. Quantity of behavior was operation-alized as (a) request size and (b) active versus passive execution, that is, whether the target person actually carried out the request or simply agreed to do so. The second aspect tested was the claim that changes in self-perception mediate the FITD effect. A field experiment was conducted to address these concerns. The results showed that a self-inference explanation is viable; however, a strict self-perception account fails because neither request size nor execution showed any correspondence to attitudinal measures or to compliance with the second request. Implications for a self-inference explanation are discussed.     

Request solicitation and semantic evocation of freedom: an evaluation in a computer-mediated communication context

The "But you are free of..." technique is a compliance procedure which solicits someone to comply with a request by simply telling him that he is free to accept or to refuse the request. This semantic evocation leads to increased compliance with the request. A new evaluation of the generality of this technique was tested in an experiment in which subjects received an anonymous electronic mail which asked them to consult the site of a humanitarian association for children. Analysis showed that, when the semantic evocation of freedom is included in the message, a higher compliance rate was observed than in a situation in which this evocation was omitted.     

Effects of a favor and liking on compliance

A laboratory experiment was conducted to examine the effects of a favor and of liking on compliance with a request for assistance from a confederate. Liking for the confederate was manipulated, and male subjects then received a soft drink from the confederate, from the experimenter, or received no favor. Compliance with the confederate's request to purchase some raffle tickets was measured, as was liking for the confederate. The results showed that the favor increased liking for the confederate and compliance with his request, but the effect of manipulated liking was weak. Detailed ratings of the confederate as well as correlational data suggested that the relationship between favors and compliance is mediated, not by liking for the favor-doer, but by normative pressure to reciprocate.     

The Applicability of the Door-in-the Face Technique when Established Behavioral Customs Exist

The applicability of the door-in-the-face technique was tested in a monetary donation context where established behavioral standards exist, and where the target person has standards by which to judge the legitimacy of the solicitor's demand. Based on the proposition that exaggerated initial requests might discredit the solicitor and thereby halt the give-and-take process, it was expected that (a) with legitimate initial requests, the probability of compliance with a request would be greater when preceded by a larger request than if presented alone; and that (b) with illegitimate initial requests, the probability of compliance with a second request would be smaller when preceded by a larger request than if presented alone. On the national collection day for the Association for the Rehabilitation of the Mentally Handicapped, 400 subjects were asked to contribute IL 10, 15, or 20. In the experimental groups, these amounts were preceded with requests for larger sums which were judged previously by a pretest to be considered legitimate or illegitimate. In the control groups, subjects were asked to contribute the same amounts, but no larger amounts were first requested. The replicability of the door-in-the-face technique has been proven with requests for which established customs exist. However, the technique was only effective with legitimate initial requests. With initial requests that were previously judged as unreasonable, the technique had a "boomerang effect" and suppressed compliance.     

Perceived Symbols of Authority and Their Influence on Compliance1

There are many variables that influence compliance. With regard to individuals making requests of others, Bickman (1974) found that the apparel of the person making the request significantly influenced whether another person complied with the request. This study evaluates other factors such as sex, age, and altruism in compliance. Subjects were involved in a replication of Bickman's dime and parking meter study. Results showed that the dress of the perceived authority not only affected the number of subjects who complied but also the type of compliance, the type of noncompliance, and the latency between request and compliance. Also, older subjects complied significantly more often than younger subjects in the role authority condition.     

Effects of initial request size and timing of a second request on compliance: the foot in the door and the door in the face.

A field experiment tested four separate procedures for influencing compliance to the second of two requests. Two factors--size of initial request and timing of the second request--were included in a 2 X 2 factorial design. Subjects were induced either to comply with a small initial request or to refuse a large initial request. They then received a moderate request either immediately (no delay) or 7--10 days later (delay). Compliance to the second request was the dependent measure. The results in the two delay conditions and the small-request--no delay condition supported a self-perception position in that the induction of one kind of behavior (compliance or noncompliance) carried over to affect subsequent behavior similarly. The large-request--no dealy condition supported a bargaining explanation, as initial refusal to comply led to an increase in subsequent compliance. Possible processes that could account for these results are discussed.     

THE CLASS SPECIFIC EFFECTS OF COMPLIANCE TRAINING WITH “DO” AND “DON'T” REQUESTS: ANALOGUE ANALYSIS AND CLASSROOM APPLICATION

Two experiments are reported in which the relationship between compliance with “do” and “don't” requests was examined with developmentally disabled children. In Experiment 1, a multiple baseline design across subjects with counterbalanced treatment conditions was used to evaluate a compliance training program composed of four phases: (a) baseline, during which no consequences were delivered for compliance, (b) reinforcement for compliance with one targeted “do” request, (c) reinforcement for compliance with one targeted “don't” request, and (d) follow-up with reinforcement on a variable ratio schedule for compliance with any “do” or “don't” request. Results of probes conducted before and after training within each condition indicated that generalized compliance occurred only with requests of the same type as the target exemplar (“do” or “don't”). In Experiment 2, these results were replicated in a classroom setting. Following collection of baseline probe data on student compliance, a teacher training program was successfully implemented to increase reinforcement of compliance first with one “do” and subsequently with one “don't” request of a target student. Results of multiple baseline probes across “do” and “don't” requests indicated that the teacher generalized and maintained reinforcement of compliance with other requests of the same type and to other students, with a resulting increase in student compliance with the type of requests reinforced. The impact of treatment on both teacher and student behavior was socially validated via consumer ratings. Implications of these findings with respect to response class formation and compliance training programs are discussed.     

Understanding the foot‐in‐the‐door effect as a pseudo‐effect from the perspective of the Campbell paradigm

Compliance with a small request (a metaphorical foot‐in‐the‐door) promotes compliance with a subsequent big request. Whereas some explanations expect a drop in the behavioural costs of the big request, others suspect that the effect comes from boosting the underlying attitude. However, evidence for both explanations is equivocal and circumstantial, at best. Drawing on what Kaiser et al. (2010) call the Campbell paradigm, we present an integrative account: Compliance with any request demands a corresponding attitude to counterbalance the costs of the request. In our research, 229 participants were randomly assigned to either a foot‐in‐the‐door (i.e., initially asked to sign a pro‐environmental petition) or a control condition. Small‐request‐compliant participants were more likely than control participants to also comply with the big request and to continue filling out environmental‐issues‐related questionnaires. However, this foot‐in‐the‐door effect occurred without diminishing behavioural costs or increasing attitude levels. Accordingly, the greater likelihood of small‐request‐compliant participants to also comply with the big request can be parsimoniously explained by baseline variability in people's attitude levels that manifests in their compliance with the initial request. We conclude that several of the foot‐in‐the‐door effects reported in the literature carry the risk of representing mere pseudo‐effects.     

Effects of profanity,touch, and sex of the counselor on perceptions of the counselor and behavioral compliance: Implications for rational-emotive therapists

The present study investigated the effects of profanity, touch, and sex of the counselor on perceptions of the counselor and on behavioral compliance. Ninety six undergraduate psychology students attended a self help presentation on principles of mental health, according to rational-emotive theory. At the end of each presentation the counselor recommended that the subject pick up a book request card (initial compliance) and mail it away (delayed compliance) in order to receive a free copy ofA New Guide To Rational Living. The subjects were also asked to rate their preceptions of the counselor on the dimensions of expertness, attractiveness, and trustworthiness. The results indicated that the use of profanity led to significantly lower perceptions of trustworthiness and a significantly lower level of delayed compliance. Female counselors were rated as more expert, attractive, and trustworthy as compared with male counselors. There was no effect of touch on any of the dependent measures. Implications of these findings for the rational emotive therapist are discussed.This study is based upon a doctoral dissertation completed by the first author, under the direction of the second author.We would like to thank Jean Cirillo who prepared an initial version of the rational emotive, mental health lecture used in this study.Mindy Phillips Ph.D. is a school psychologist in the Farmingdale, N.Y. public schools. She completed her doctoral degree, including her training in RET, at Hofstra University.Howard Kassinove, Ph.D. is Professor of Psychology and Director for Clinical Psychology at Hofstra University in New York. He is a Fellow of the Institute for Rational-Emotive Therapy and holds the ABPP diploma in Clinical Psychology.     

Recruiting Teen Smokers in Shopping Malls to a Smoking-Cessation Program Using the Foot-in-the-Door Technique

Persuading teen smokers to volunteer for smoking-cessation programs is a challenging yet understudied problem. As a method of dealing with this problem, we used and tested a foot-in-the-door (FITD) approach. Teen smokers were intercepted at malls and were assigned randomly to request compliance with a small behavior request of either (a) answering a few questions (light FITD) or (b) answering the same questions and a few additional ones, plus watching a short video about the effects of nicotine (heavy FITD). Participants were then called back by telephone several weeks later and asked to comply with a large behavior request of joining a cessation program that involved the use of self-help materials and telephone counseling. Although no differences were found in responses from the light and heavy groups, consent to enter the program was obtained from 12% of the pooled qualified intercepts and their parents (for those under 18 years). This recruitment rate was considered good, given that this is one of the only reported studies that recruited teen smokers from the general population to cessation programs.