Psychology of influence. Robert Cialdini: Psychology of influence 5 Robert Cialdini psychology of influence

02.03.2024

Robert Cialdini

Psychology of influence

(Robert B. Cialdini. Influence. Science and Practice, 4th ed., 2001)

Content

Preface

Commentary on the fourth edition of the book: science and practice

Introduction

Chapter 1. Instruments of influence

Click, buzz

Bet on stereotypical thinking

Speculators

Jujutsu

conclusions

Control questions

Critical thinking

Chapter 2. Mutual exchange. Old "Give" and "Take"

How does this rule work?

The rule of reciprocity is universal

The rule of reciprocity imposes debts

The reciprocity rule can initiate unequal exchange

Mutual concessions

Refusal-then-retreat

Mutual concessions, contrasting perceptions and the mystery of Watergate

You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Here is my blood, call again

"Sweet" side effects

Protection

Neutralization of the reciprocity rule

Smoke out the enemy

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Development of critical thinking

Chapter 3. Commitment and Consistency. Superstitions of consciousness

Buzzing around

Fast decision

Fortress of Fools

Peekaboo

Commitment is key

Hearts and Minds

Internal selection

Creating stable points of support

Fight for public goods

Protection

Signals coming from the stomach

Signals coming from the depths of the heart

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Chapter 4. Social proof. The truth is us

The principle of social proof

The power of the public

After the flood

Cause of death: uncertainty

Scientific approach

How to prevent yourself from becoming a victim

Many can help, but only one should be chosen

Imitate me, imitate

Fatal imitation

Monkey Island

Protection

Sabotage

Look up

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Chapter 5. Benevolence. Friendly Thief

How to make connections to influence people

Why do I like you? Let me list the reasons

Physical attractiveness

Similarities

Praise

Contact and interaction

Psychological processing using conditioned reflexes and associations

Doesn't Pavlov's name ring a bell?

From news and weather forecasts to sports

Protection

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Pros and cons of blind obedience

Appearance, not substance

Titles

Cloth

Attributes

Insidious sincerity

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Chapter 7. Deficit. Rule of small

What is too little is the best, and loss is the worst

Limited quantity

Time limit

Psychological resistance

Adult reactance. Love, weapons and washing powders

Censorship

Optimal conditions

Newly experienced deficiency. More expensive cookies and civil conflict

Competition due to limited resources. Stupid rage

Protection

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Chapter 8. “Instantly soluble” influence. Primitive consent in the age of automation

Primitive automatism

Modern automation

Stereotypes should be sacred

conclusions

Control questions

Critical thinking

Literature

Subject index

Name index

This book is dedicated to my son Chris, the light of my eyes.

Preface

The original (commercial) version of The Psychology of Influence was intended for the general reader, and as such I have made an attempt to make it entertaining. In the study group version, I retained the same style but also presented evidence from recent research to support my earlier statements, conclusions, and recommendations. Although I have added a significant number of interviews, quotes, and systematic personal observations in the latest version, the findings of The Psychology of Influence are based on evidence-based psychological research. Teachers and students can be sure that this book is not another example of “pop psychology”, but represents a serious scientific work. The educational version also contains new material that meets modern requirements, conclusions at the end of each chapter, as well as test questions that help you better assimilate the information.

Robert Cialdini

Psychology of influence

Robert B. Cialdini

The Psychology of Persuasion

Published by arrangement with HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

* * *

This book will help you find answers to the following questions:

The most common tricks of sellers are: see chapter 2

Successful negotiations using the “refusal - then retreat” technique - see chapter 2

How to avoid becoming a victim of the “equal exchange” rule - see chapter 2

“Chinese tactics” - the easiest way to control people - see chapter 3

How to instill in your child the desire to do the right thing - see chapter 3

Manipulation of conscience. The art of making commitments - see chapter 3

Laughter behind the scenes: the dangers of copying other people’s behavior - see chapter 4

How to ask for help correctly - see chapter 4

Who are Buyers from Mars? see chapter 4

"I like you!" How to win people's favor - see chapter 5

You have been charmed: know how to say “no” - see chapter 5

When to obey and when to rebel: a conscious attitude towards authorities - see chapter 6

Instant Impact – see chapter 7

I express my gratitude to the many people who helped me produce this book. Several colleagues read the draft manuscript and made valuable comments that significantly improved the final version. They are Gus Levine, Doug Kenrick, Art Beaman and Mark Zanna. In addition, the first draft was read by several members of my family and my friends - Richard and Gloria Cialdini, Bobette Gorden and Tad Hall. They not only supported me emotionally, but were also able to objectively evaluate the book.

A second, larger group of people made helpful suggestions on selected chapters or groups of chapters. These are Todd Anderson, Sandy Braver, Katherine Chambers, Judy Cialdini, Nancy Eisenberg, Larry Ettkin, Joanne Gersten, Jeff Goldstein, Betsy Hans, Valerie Hans, Joe Hepworth, Holly Hunt, Anne Inskeep, Barry Leshowitz, Darwin Linder, Debbie Littler, John Mowen, Igor Pavlov, Janice Posner, Trish Puryear, Marilyn Rayle, John Reich, Peter Reingen, Diana Ruble, Phyllis Sensenig, Roman Sherman and Henry Wellman.

Some people helped me at the initial stage. John Stiles was the first publisher to recognize the potential of the project. Jim Sherman, Al Goethals, John Keating, and Dan Wegner gave it positive reviews early on, which inspired both the author and the editors. William Morrow and the company's then-president, Larry Hughes, sent me a small but enthusiastic message that gave me the strength to complete the task. And last on the list, but, of course, not least, Maria Guarnaschelli - from the very beginning, she believed in my idea just like me. It was through her editing that it came to fruition and became a great book. I am immensely grateful for her insightful guidance and strong support.

In addition, I cannot help but mention Sally Carney's professionalism in preparing the manuscript, as well as the sound advice of my attorney, Robert Brandes.

Finally, no one was more supportive than Bobette Gorden, who helped me with every word while I was working on the book.

Introduction

Now I can freely admit it. All my life I've been a simpleton. For as long as I can remember, I have always become an easy prey for all sorts of merchants, fundraisers for various needs and all kinds of businessmen. True, only a few had dishonest motives. For example, representatives of some charitable organizations had the best intentions. But it is not important. Every now and then I found myself with a subscription to some unnecessary magazine or suddenly purchased tickets to a party for sanitation workers. It was probably my long-standing status as a dupe that made me want to understand the nature of compliance: what factors make one person say “yes” to another? And what methods are most effective in achieving compliance? I wanted to know why a request expressed in one way would be rejected, but the same request expressed in a slightly different way would be granted.

Current page: 1 (book has 29 pages in total) [available reading passage: 17 pages]

Robert Cialdini
Psychology of influence

Preface

The material in this version of “Psychology of Influence” can be used with great benefit in practice, and at the same time it is scientifically documented. In addition, reading this book is a real pleasure for most people. “The Psychology of Influence” once again confirms that material that often seems dry and overly scientific, if presented properly, can actually turn out to be fresh, useful and easy to digest.

Commentary on the fourth edition of the book: science and practice

Several years have passed since the publication of the first edition of The Psychology of Influence. During this period of time, something happened that, in my opinion, deserves coverage in the new publication. First, we now know much more about the mechanisms of influence than before. Psychologists have made great progress in studying the science of persuasion, the causes of compliance and change, and I have tried to reflect this progress in the pages of the book. Not only have I revised and updated the material, but I have also used feedback from people who have read previous versions of The Psychology of Influence.

Many of those who read “The Psychology of Influence” realized that at certain moments they encountered instruments of influence and in letters told me about incidents that happened to them. As a result, “Reader Reports” appear at the end of each chapter, illustrating how easily we fall prey to “compliance professionals” in our daily lives.

I am deeply grateful to the many people who helped me produce this book. Several of my colleagues read the draft manuscript and made valuable comments, thereby improving the final version. They are Gus Levine, Doug Kenrick, Art Beaman and Mark Zanna. In addition, the first draft was read by several members of my family and my friends - Richard and Gloria Cialdini, Bobetta Gorden and Ted Hall. These people not only supported me emotionally, but also gave my book the objective assessment that I simply needed.

Quite a few people have made specific, useful suggestions regarding the content of individual chapters or several chapters. These are Todd Anderson, Sandy Braver, Katherine Chambers, Judy Cialdini, Nancy Eisenberg, Larry Atkin, Joan Gersten, Jeff Goldstein, Betsy Hance, Valerie Hance, Joe Hepworth, Holly Hunt, Anne Inskip, Barry Leshowitz, Darwin Linder, Debbie Littler, John Mowen, Igor Pavlov, Janis Posner, Trish Puryear, Marilyn Rohl, John Reich, Peter Reingen, Diana Rabl, Phyllis Sensenig, Roman and Henry Wellman.

A number of people contributed to the publication of the book. John Staley was the first professional publisher to recognize the project's high potential. Jim Sherman, Al Goethels, John Keating, Dan Wagner, Dalmas Taylor, Wendy Wood, and David Watson provided early positive reviews and inspired both the author and the editors. My editors at Allyn and Bacon, Caroline Merrill and Jodi Devine, were unfailingly pleasant, helpful, and understanding. In addition, I want to thank the readers who sent reviews of the third edition of the book: Emory Griffith, Wheaton College; Robert Levin, California, Fresno; Jeffrey Levin and Louis Mora, University of Georgia; David Miller and Richard Rogers, Daytona Beach Community College. This publication benefits greatly from comments by Assaad Azzi, Yale University; Roberta M. Brady, University of Arkansas; Brian M. Cohen, University of Texas at San Antonio; Christiana B. Grendell, University of Florida; Katherine Goodwin, University of Alaska; Robert G. Lowder, Bradley University; James W. Michael Jr., Virginia Tech and University of Virginia; Eugene P. Sheehan, University of Northern Colorado; Jefferson E. Singer, Connecticut College; Sandy W. Smith, University of Michigan. I am also grateful to the highly accomplished editor Laura McKenna.

Finally, during the entire preparation of the book for publication, no one gave me such tangible help as Bobette Gorden, who supported me with every word.

I also want to thank the people who, either directly or through the instructors of the courses they took, contributed to the Readers' Reports in this publication. They are Pat Bobbs, Annie Carto, William Cooper, Alicia Friedman, William Graziano, Mark Hastings, Endayehu Candy, Danuta Lubnicka, James Michaels, Stephen Moisey, Paul R. Nail, Alan J. Resnick, Daryl Retzlaff, Jeffrey Rosenberger, Dan Swift and Carla Vasks.

I would like to invite readers of this new version to submit their reports for publication in the next edition. They can be sent to me at the following address: Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-1104, or [email protected]. Finally, if you are interested in learning more about the psychology of influence, visit influenceatwork.com.

Robert B. Cialdini

Introduction

Now I can freely admit this. All my life I've been the one who gets fooled. I have always been a favorite target for street vendors, fundraisers, and dealers of one kind or another. Not all of these people had dishonest motives. For example, representatives of some charitable agencies had the best intentions. But it does not matter. Depressingly often I found myself with unnecessary magazine subscriptions or tickets to a sanitation worker's ball. This long-term status as a simpleton probably explains my interest in studying compliance. What factors make one person say “yes” to another? And what techniques can be used to achieve such flexibility? I was interested in why a request made in a certain way is often ignored, while a similar request, formulated in a slightly different way, succeeds.

So, in my role as an experimental social psychologist, I began studying the psychology of compliance. The research initially took the form of a series of experiments, conducted largely in my laboratory with the participation of college students. I wanted to find out what psychological principles underlie compliance with a request or demand. Recently, psychologists have learned a lot about these principles - what they are and how they work. I have characterized such principles as instruments of influence. In subsequent chapters I will talk about the most important of them.

After some time, I began to understand that although experimental work is necessary, it alone is not enough. “Naked” experiments did not allow me to judge the significance of the principles I was studying in the world outside the institute building. It became clear that if I was going to deeply understand the psychology of compliance, I needed to expand my scope of research. I need to take a closer look at the “compliance professionals”—the people who constantly pressured me into giving in to them. They know what works and what doesn't; the law of survival of the fittest confirms this. Such people try at all costs to force others to give in; their success in life depends on this. Those who don't know how to get people to say yes usually fail; those who know prosper.

Of course, “compliance professionals” are not the only ones who know how to use the principles we are discussing. We all, on the one hand, use them and, on the other hand, find ourselves, to some extent, victims of them in the course of everyday interactions with neighbors, friends, lovers, and offspring. But those who are committed to trying to get compliance from others have much more than a vague and not always deep enough understanding of what works. Observing such people can provide a wealth of information about compliance. For three years, I combined my experimental research with a much more exciting program of systematic immersion in the world of “compliance professionals”—sales agents, fundraisers, recruiters, advertising executives, and others.

I made it my mission to study the techniques and strategies used widely and with great success by “compliance professionals.” My surveillance program sometimes took the form of interviews with these people, and sometimes with their natural enemies (eg, police officers, consumer rights workers). In other cases, the program included intensive study of written materials through which the techniques of interest are passed on from one generation to the next - trading textbooks, etc.

Most often, however, I have used what is called participant observation. Participant observation is a specialized approach in which the researcher plays the role of a spy. By concealing his identity and intentions, the researcher infiltrates the society of interest and becomes a member of the group he intends to study. So, when I wanted to learn about the tactics of people who worked in an organization that sold encyclopedias (or vacuum cleaners, or photographic portraits), I responded to all the advertisements that asked for training, and representatives of various companies taught me their methods. Using similar, but not identical approaches, I was able to penetrate advertising, information and other agencies and learn special techniques. Thus, most of the evidence presented in this book comes from my personal experience working in many organizations whose main goal is to get potential customers to say “yes.”

One aspect of what I learned during this three-year participant observation period was particularly enlightening. Although there are thousands of different tactics used to gain consent, most of these tactics fall into six general categories. Each of these categories corresponds to one of the fundamental psychological principles that underlie human behavior. The book describes these six main principles, one in each chapter. All principles - the principle of consistency, the principle of reciprocity, the principle of social proof, the principle of authority, the principle of benevolence, the principle of scarcity - are considered from the point of view of their application to social life and from the point of view of how they can be used by the "compliance professionals" who found on them their requests for acquisitions, monetary donations, concessions, votes, consent, etc. [It should be noted that I did not include among the six main principles the simple rule of “personal material interest” - every person wants to get as much as possible and pay as little as possible for your choice. I do not believe that the desire to maximize benefits and minimize costs is unimportant in our decision making and that compliance professionals ignore this rule. Quite the opposite: in my research, I often saw these people using (sometimes honestly, sometimes not) a coercive, “I can give you so much” approach. I prefer not to discuss the rule of self-interest separately in this book, since I regard it as an axiom that deserves recognition, but not detailed description.]

Finally, I explored exactly how each principle causes people to say “yes” without thinking. It can be assumed that the fast pace and information saturation of modern life will contribute to an increasing prevalence of “unreflective compliance” in the future. Therefore, it will be extremely important for society to understand the mechanisms of automatic influence.

Chapter 1. Instruments of influence

Civilization moves forward by increasing the number of operations that we can carry out without thinking about them.

Alfred North Whitehead

Everything should be kept as simple as possible, but not simpler.

Albert Einstein

One day I received a call from a friend who had recently opened an Indian jewelry store in Arizona. She felt dizzy from the curious news. Something amazing had just happened in her life, and she thought that I, as a psychologist, could explain a lot to her. It was about a consignment of turquoise jewelry that she was having difficulty selling. It was the peak of the tourist season, the store was constantly full of customers, the turquoise products were of good quality for the price she was asking; however, for some reason these products did not sell well. My friend tried a couple of standard trading tricks to fix the situation. She tried to draw attention to the products being described by moving the display with them closer to the center of the store, but unsuccessfully. Then she told the sellers to push hard for these items, again to no avail.

Finally, the evening before leaving on business out of town, my friend hurriedly scribbled an angry note to her main saleswoman: “x 1/2 price on all turquoise,” hoping to simply get rid of the already disgusting items, even at the cost of a loss. When she returned a few days later, she was not surprised to find that all the turquoise items had been sold. However, she was amazed to learn that because her employee read "2" instead of "1/2", the entire lot was sold for double the price!

That's when my friend called me. I knew immediately what had happened, but I told her that if she wanted to hear an explanation, she should listen to my story. This story is not really mine; it is about mother turkeys and is related to the relatively young science of ethology, which studies animals in natural conditions. Turkeys are good mothers - loving, attentive, vigilantly guarding their chicks. Turkeys spend a lot of time caring for their chicks, keeping them warm, cleaning and herding them together. But there is something strange in their behavior. Essentially, the maternal instinct is “switched on” in turkeys by one single sound: the “cheep-cheep” of young turkey chicks. Other defining characteristics of chicks, such as smell or appearance, seem to play a lesser role. If a chick makes a "cheep-cheep" sound, its mother will take care of it; if not, his mother will ignore him and may even kill him. The orientation of brood turkeys to this sound alone was illustrated by animal behavior researcher M.W. Fox (Fox, 1974). Fox described an experiment involving a mother turkey and a fake ferret. For the mother turkey, the ferret is a natural enemy, whose approach is usually met with fury, which is expressed in high-pitched screams and attacks using its beak and claws. Experimenters have found that even a stuffed ferret, drawn with a string to a brood turkey, provokes her into an immediate and frantic attack. However, when a small tape recorder was attached to the same stuffed animal, which made a “chip-chip” sound, the mother turkey not only received the approaching ferret, but also took it under her. When the mechanism was turned off, the stuffed ferret would again cause a vicious attack.

Click, buzz

How ridiculous the turkey looks in this situation: she hugs her enemy just because he makes a “cheep-cheep” sound, and mistreats or even kills one of his chickens just because he doesn’t. The turkey appears to be an automaton whose maternal instincts depend on a single sound. Ethologists say that this behavior is not unique to turkeys. Scientists have identified mechanical behavior patterns in many species.

So-called fixed action patterns can include complex sequences of actions, such as entire courtship or mating rituals. The fundamental characteristic of these models is that the actions that constitute them are repeated each time in virtually the same way and in the same order. It is almost as if these patterns were recorded on tapes inside the animals. When the situation requires courtship, the corresponding film “plays”; when the situation obliges motherhood, the film of maternal behavior begins to “play”. Click– and the corresponding recording begins to play; buzz– and a certain sequence of actions unfolds.

The most interesting thing about this is how the entries are included. For example, when a male of a species defends its territory, the signal, including a record of vigilance, aggressiveness and, if necessary, fighting behavior, is the intrusion of another male of the same species. But there is a quirk in the system. The "trigger" is not the opponent as a whole; This is some kind of his specific feature. Often this “trigger” trait seems completely insignificant at first glance. Sometimes this feature is a certain shade of color. Experiments by ethologists have shown that, for example, a male robin, acting as if in a situation where a rival robin has entered its territory, will energetically attack just a bunch of red feathers (Lack, 1943). At the same time, a male robin will actually ignore a beautiful artificial male copy of his species. without red breast feathers. Similar results were obtained in a study of another bird species ( bluethroat), for which a similar trigger is the specific blue tint of the breast feathers (Peiponen, 1960).

Thus, by using traits that serve as triggers, animals can be made to react in ways that are completely inappropriate to the situation. However, we must realize two things. First, these animals' automatic fixed action patterns work very well most of the time. For example, since only healthy, normal turkey chicks make a special “cheep-cheep” sound, it makes sense for the turkey to respond maternally only to this sound. This way the turkey will almost always do the right thing. It takes a trickster like a scientist to make her "taped" reaction look stupid. Secondly, it is necessary to understand that we also have “recorded” patterns of behavior; and although they usually benefit us, trigger traits can be used to fool us, cause recordings to be played out of time. [Although there are certain similarities between this type of automatic response in humans and animals, there are also important differences. Automatic reactions in humans are learned rather than innate; behavioral models of people are more flexible compared to similar models of highly organized animals; In addition, in humans, more factors may play a role as a trigger.]

An interesting experiment was conducted by Harvard social psychologist Ellen Langer (Langer, Blank, & Charnowitz, 1978). According to one well-known principle of human behavior, when we ask someone to do us a favor, we do better if we give a reason. People like to have reasons for what they do. Langer demonstrated the truth of this statement by asking a small favor from people waiting in line to use the library's copy machine:

- Sorry, I have five pages. Can I use the photocopier because I'm in a hurry?

The effectiveness of the request formulated in this way was very high: 94% of those whom Ellen Langer asked allowed her to jump the line. In another case, the psychologist formulated her request in this form:

- Sorry, I have five pages. Can I use the photocopier without waiting in line?

In this situation, only 60% of those she asked agreed. At first glance, it appears that the main difference between the two request formulations given was the additional information provided by the words “because I'm in a hurry.” But the third experiment showed that this is not entirely true. It seems that not the whole clarification mattered, but only the first “because”. In the third case, Langer used the connective “because” and then, without adding anything new, simply restated the obvious:

- Sorry, I have five pages. Can I use a photocopier because I need to make multiple copies?

Doug discovers that Ellen is also an ornithologist, and the courtship ritual begins...

Rice. 1.1. Click, buzz. Courtship rituals ingrained in human society are less rigid than those found in the animal world. However, researchers have found many similarities in courtship patterns across different human cultures (Buss, 1989; Kenrick & Keefe, 1992).

The result was that again, almost everyone (93%) agreed, although no real explanation, no new information was added. Just as the sound of “cheep-cheep” triggered an automatic maternal response in turkeys—even if it came from a fake ferret—the words “because” triggered an automatic compliance response in Langer’s study subjects, even though they were not always subsequently given a reason for compliance. . Click, buzz![Perhaps a common response from children to the question “why?” - “because... just because” - can be explained by the fact that children are very perceptive and aware of the extraordinary power that words seem to have over adults That's why.]

Although some of Langer's research suggests that there are many situations in which a person does not behave automatically, turning on like a tape recording, it is striking how often such automaticity does occur. For example, consider the strange behavior of those jewelry buyers who swooped in on a shipment of turquoise items only after they had been mistakenly offered at twice the original price. There is no way I can explain their behavior unless we look at it from the point of view click, buzz.

Reader's Report (School of Management Graduate Student)

My neighbor, a jeweler who owns an antique jewelry store, once told me how he was convinced from his own experience of the existence of the stereotype “expensive = good.” One of his friends was looking for a wedding gift for his bride. The jeweler just had a beautiful necklace worth $500 that he was willing to sell to his friend for $250. As soon as the friend saw the necklace, he was delighted and wanted to buy it. But when he found out that the necklace cost $250, he immediately became sad and began to confusedly refuse, explaining that he was looking for “something really worthwhile” for his bride.

The next day the jeweler finally realized what was happening. He called a friend and said that a new necklace had been brought to the store, similar to the old one, but much better. This time he set the same price - $500. A friend came, saw the necklace and thought its price was reasonable. He was about to pay for the purchase when the jeweler told him that he was halving the price as a wedding gift. The friend could not find words for joy. He bought the necklace for $250 and felt not disappointed or offended, but happy.

Author's note. Please note that in this story, as in the case of the turquoise merchants, the buyer who wanted to buy good goods ignored cheaper jewelry. I am sure that the stereotype “expensive = good” also has a flip side: “cheap = bad.” By the way, in English the adjective “cheap” means not only “inexpensive”, but also “defective”, “poor quality”.

The buyers, mostly wealthy vacationers with little knowledge of turquoise, were guided by the standard principle - the stereotype: “expensive = good.” Numerous studies show that people who are unsure of the quality of a product often use this stereotype (see Olson, 1977). To people who wanted “good” jewelry, the increasingly expensive turquoise jewelry seemed more valuable and desirable. Thus, price has become a feature that plays the role of a trigger in determining quality; A single eye-catching increase in price led to a dramatic increase in sales to quality-hungry customers. Click, buzz![The classic example is the trademark phenomenon Chivas Scotch Whiskey. Sales of this brand of whiskey increased sharply after the price for this product was set significantly higher than the prices of competing brands. Characteristically, the product itself has not changed at all (Aaker, 1991).]

Technical editor L. Egorova

Artist S. Zamatevskaya

Proofreaders S. Belyaeva, N. Viktorova

Layout L. Egorova

* * *

about the author

Robert B. Cialdini is a professor of psychology and a board member at Arizona State University, where he also directs graduate student research. He received his bachelor's, master's, and doctorate degrees in psychology from the universities of Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Columbia University, respectively. He is a former president of the Association for Personality and Social Psychology.

He attributes his enduring interest in the intricacies of social influence to his upbringing in an Italian family, but in a predominantly Polish environment, in the historically German city of Milwaukee, located in a “rural” state.

Preface

The first version of the book was intended for the general reader, so I tried to make it entertaining. In the study group version, I retained the same style but also presented evidence from recent research to support my earlier statements, conclusions, and recommendations. Although I have added a significant number of interviews, quotes, and systematic personal observations in the latest version, the findings of The Psychology of Influence are based on evidence-based psychological research. Teachers and students can be sure that this book is not just another example of “pop psychology”, but represents a serious scientific work. The educational version also contains new material that meets modern requirements, conclusions at the end of each chapter, as well as test questions to help you better understand the information.

The material in the new version of “Psychology of Influence” can be used with great benefit in practice, and at the same time it is scientifically documented. Moreover, reading this book is enjoyable for most people. “Psychology of Influence” once again confirms that material that often seems dry and overly scientific, if properly presented, can turn out to be fresh, useful and easy to digest.

Commentary on the fifth edition of the book “Psychology of Influence”

During the time that has passed since the publication of the first edition of “The Psychology of Influence”, much has happened that, in my opinion, deserves attention. We now know much more about the mechanisms of influence than before. Psychologists have made great progress in studying the science of persuasion, the causes of compliance and change, and I have tried to reflect this progress in the pages of the book. Not only have I revised and updated the material, but I have paid particular attention to information about public culture and new technologies, as well as research on cross-cultural social influence—how influence is similar or different across cultures.

In the new edition, I also used feedback from people who read previous versions of this book.

Many realized that at certain moments they were faced with leverage, and they told me about their cases in letters. You will see how easily we fall prey to compliance professionals in our daily lives in the Reader Reports at the end of the chapters.

I am deeply grateful to the people who helped me produce this book. Several of my colleagues read the draft manuscript and made valuable comments, thereby improving the final version. They are Gus Levine, Doug Kenrick, Art Beaman and Mark Zanna. In addition, the first draft was read by several members of my family and my friends - Richard and Gloria Cialdini, Bobetta Gorden and Ted Hall. They not only supported me emotionally, but also gave my book the objective assessment that I simply needed.

Quite a few people have made specific, useful suggestions regarding the content of individual or several chapters. These are Todd Anderson, Sandy Braver, Katherine Chambers, Judy Cialdini, Nancy Eisenberg, Larry Atkin, Joan Gersten, Jeff Goldstein, Betsy Hance, Valerie Hance, Joe Hepworth, Holly Hunt, Anne Inskip, Barry Leshowitz, Darwin Linder, Debbie Littler, John Mowen, Igor Pavlov, Janis Posner, Trish Puryear, Marilyn Rohl, John Reich, Peter Reingen, Diana Rabl, Phyllis Sensenig, Roman and Henry Wellman.

I am grateful to the people who contributed to the publication of the book. John Staley was the first professional publisher to recognize the project's high potential. Jim Sherman, Al Goethels, John Keating, Dan Wagner, Dalmas Taylor, Wendy Wood, and David Watson provided early positive reviews and inspired both the author and the editors. My editors at Allyn and Bacon, Caroline Merrill and Jodi Devine, were unfailingly pleasant, helpful, and understanding. In addition, I want to thank some of the readers who provided feedback: Emory Griffith (Wheaton College); Robert Levin (California, Fresno); Jeffrey Levin and Louis Mora (University of Georgia); David Miller and Richard Rogers, Daytona Beach (Community College). This publication benefits greatly from comments by Assaad Azzi (Yale University); Roberta M. Brady (University of Arkansas); Brian M. Cohen (University of Texas at San Antonio); Christian B. Grendell (University of Florida); Katherine Goodwin (University of Alaska); Robert G. Lowder (Bradley University); James W. Michael Jr. (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and University of Virginia); Eugene P. Sheehan (University of Northern Colorado); Jefferson E. Singer (Connecticut College); Sandy W. Smith (University of Michigan). I am also grateful to the highly accomplished editor Laura McKenna.

Finally, during the entire preparation of the book for publication, no one gave me such tangible help as Bobette Gorden, who supported me with every word.

I would like to invite readers of this new version to submit their reports for publication in the next edition. They can be sent to me at the following address: Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-1104 or [email protected]. Finally, if you are interested in learning more about the psychology of influence, visit influenceatwork.com.

Robert B. Cialdini

Introduction

Now I can freely admit it: all my life I have been the one who is fooled. I've always been a favorite target for street vendors, fundraisers, and assorted dealers. Not all of these people had dishonest motives. For example, representatives of some charitable agencies had the best intentions. But it does not matter. Depressingly often I found myself with unnecessary magazine subscriptions or tickets to a sanitation worker's ball. This long-term status as a simpleton probably explains my interest in studying compliance. What factors make one person say “yes” to another? And what techniques can be used to achieve such flexibility? I was interested in why a request made in a certain way is often ignored, while a similar request, formulated in a slightly different way, succeeds.

So, in my role as an experimental social psychologist, I began studying the psychology of compliance. The research initially took the form of a series of experiments, conducted largely in my laboratory with the participation of college students. I wanted to find out what psychological principles underlie compliance with a request or demand. Recently, psychologists have learned a lot about these principles - what they are and how they work. I have characterized such principles as leverage. In subsequent chapters I will talk about the most important of them.

After some time, I began to understand that although experimental work is necessary, it alone is not enough. Naked experiments did not allow me to judge the significance of the principles I was studying in the world outside the institute building. It became clear that if I was going to gain a deeper understanding of the psychology of compliance, I needed to expand my scope of research. I need to take a closer look at the “compliance professionals”—the people who constantly pressured me into giving in to them. They know what works and what doesn't; the law of survival of the fittest confirms this. Such people try at all costs to force others to give in; their success in life depends on this. Those who don't know how to get people to say yes usually fail; those who know prosper.

Of course, “compliance professionals” are not the only people who use the principles we are discussing. We all, on the one hand, use them, and on the other, we find ourselves, to some extent, their victims in the course of everyday interactions with neighbors, friends, lovers, and children. But people who try to force compliance from others have more than a vague understanding of what works. Observing them can provide a wealth of information about compliance. For three years, I combined my experimental research with a much more exciting program of systematic immersion in the world of “compliance professionals”—sales agents, fundraisers, recruiters, advertising executives, and others.

I made it my mission to study the tactics and strategies used widely and with great success by “compliance professionals.” My surveillance program sometimes took the form of interviews with these people and sometimes with their natural enemies (eg, police officers, consumer rights workers). In other cases, the program included intensive study of written materials through which the techniques of interest are passed on from one generation to the next - trading textbooks, etc.

Most often, however, I have used what is called participant observation, a special approach in which the researcher plays the role of a spy. By concealing his identity and intentions, the researcher infiltrates the society of interest and becomes a member of the group he intends to study. So, when I wanted to learn about the tactics of people who worked in an organization that sold encyclopedias (or vacuum cleaners, or photographic portraits), I responded to all the advertisements that asked for training, and representatives of various companies taught me their methods. Using similar, but not identical approaches, I was able to penetrate advertising, information and other agencies and learn special techniques. Thus, most of the evidence presented in this book comes from my personal experience working in many organizations whose main goal is to get potential customers to say “yes.”

One aspect of what I learned during this three-year participant observation period was particularly enlightening. While there are thousands of different tactics for obtaining consent, most fall into six general categories, each corresponding to one of the fundamental psychological principles underlying human behavior. The book describes these six main principles, one in each chapter. All principles - the principle of consistency, the principle of reciprocity, the principle of social proof, the principle of authority, the principle of benevolence, the principle of scarcity - are considered from the point of view of their application to social life and from the point of view of how they can be used by the "compliance professionals" who found to them their requests for acquisitions, monetary donations, concessions, votes, consent, etc. 1
It should be noted that I did not include among the six main principles the simple rule of “personal material interest” - each person wants to get as much as possible and pay as little as possible for his choices. I do not believe that the desire to maximize benefits and minimize costs is not important when making decisions and that compliance professionals ignore this rule. On the contrary: in my research, I often saw these people using (sometimes honestly, sometimes not) a coercive, “I can give you so much” approach. In this book, I choose not to examine the self-interest rule separately, because I view it as an axiom that deserves recognition, but not detailed description.

Chapter 1. Levers of influence

Society moves forward by increasing the number of transactions it can carry out without thinking about them.

Alfred North Whitehead

One day I received a call from a friend who had recently opened an Indian jewelry store in Arizona. She felt dizzy from the curious news. Something amazing had just happened in her life, and she thought that I, as a psychologist, could explain a lot to her. It was about a consignment of turquoise jewelry that she was having difficulty selling. It was peak tourist season, the store was full of customers, the turquoise pieces were of good quality for the price she was asking; however, for some reason these products did not sell well. My friend tried a couple of standard trading tricks to fix the situation. She tried to draw attention to the products being described by moving the display with them closer to the center of the store, but unsuccessfully. Then she told the sellers to “push” this product hard, again to no avail.

Finally, in the evening before leaving on business out of town, my friend hurriedly scribbled an angry note to the senior saleswoman: “? on the? the price of all turquoise,” hoping to simply get rid of the already disgusting objects, even at the cost of a loss. A few days later she returned and found that all the turquoise products had been sold, but was amazed: since her employee, instead of “?” I read “2”, the whole lot was sold for twice the price!

The focus of brood turkeys solely on sound was illustrated by animal behavior researcher M.W. Fox (Fox, 1974). He described an experiment with a turkey and an artificial ferret. For the mother turkey, the ferret is a natural enemy; when he approaches, the turkey utters piercing screams and attacks him with its beak and claws. Experimenters have found that even a stuffed ferret, pulled by a string to a hen, provokes her to an immediate and frantic attack. But when a mechanism was attached to the same stuffed animal that reproduced the “chip-chip” sound, the turkey not only accepted the approaching ferret, but also took it under her. When the sound was turned off, the stuffed ferret would attack again.

Click, buzz

How funny the turkey looks in this situation: she hugs her enemy just because he makes a “cheep-cheep” sound, and mistreats or even kills one of her offspring just because he doesn’t. The turkey appears to be an automaton whose maternal instincts depend on a single sound. Ethologists say that this behavior is not unique to turkeys. Scientists have identified mechanical behavior patterns in many species.

So-called captured action patterns may involve a complex sequence of actions; for example, entire courtship or mating rituals. The main characteristic feature of these models is that the actions that constitute them are repeated each time in virtually the same way and in the same order. It is almost as if these patterns were recorded on tapes inside the animals. When the situation requires courtship, the corresponding film is “played”; when the situation obliges motherhood, the film of maternal behavior begins to “reproduce”. Click– and the corresponding recording begins to play; buzz– and a certain sequence of actions unfolds.

The most interesting thing is how the recordings are included. For example, when a male of a species defends its territory, the signal, including a record of vigilance, aggressiveness and, if necessary, fighting behavior, is the intrusion of another male of the same species. But there is a quirk in the system. The "trigger" is not the opponent as a whole; This is some kind of his specific feature. Often, at first glance, this feature - the trigger - seems completely insignificant. Sometimes this feature is a certain shade of color. Experiments by ethologists have shown that, for example, a male robin, acting as if in a situation where a rival robin has entered its territory, will energetically attack just a bunch of red feathers (Lack, 1943). At the same time, a male robin will ignore a beautiful artificial male copy of his species without red breast feathers. Similar results were obtained in a study of another bird species, the bluethroat, for which a similar trigger is the specific blue tint of the breast feathers (Peiponen, 1960).

Thus, by using properties that serve as triggers, animals can be made to react in ways that are completely inappropriate to the situation. However, we must realize two things. First, automatic fixed action models work very well most of the time.

Doug discovers that Ellen is also an ornithologist, and the courtship ritual begins...

Rice. 1.1. Click, buzz

Courtship rituals ingrained in human society are less rigid than those in the animal world. However, researchers have found many similarities in courtship patterns across different human cultures (Buss, 1989; Kenrick & Keefe, 1992). For example, in personal advertisements around the world, women describe their physical attractiveness while men trumpet their material wealth (Buss & Kenrick, 1998)

For example, since only healthy, normal turkey chicks make a special “chip-cheep” sound, the turkey reacts maternally only to it, and therefore will almost always do the right thing. It takes a trickster like a scientist to make her "taped" reaction look stupid. Secondly, it is necessary to understand that we also have “recorded” patterns of behavior; and although they usually benefit us, trigger traits can be used to fool us into playing recordings at the wrong time. 2
Although there are certain similarities between this type of automatic response in humans and animals, there are also important differences. Automatic reactions in humans are learned rather than innate; behavioral models of people are more flexible compared to similar models of highly organized animals; In addition, in humans, a greater number of factors may play a role as a trigger.

An interesting experiment was conducted by Harvard social psychologist Ellen Langer (Langer, Blank & Charnowitz, 1978). According to one well-known principle of human behavior, when we ask someone to do us a favor, we do better if we give a reason. People like to have reasons for what they do. Langer demonstrated the truth of this statement by asking a small favor from people waiting in line to use the library's copy machine: “Sorry, I have five pages. Can I use the photocopier because I'm in a hurry?

Again, almost everyone (93%) agreed, even though no real explanations or new information were added. Just as the sound of "cheep-cheep" triggered an automatic maternal response in turkeys—even if it came from a faux ferret—the words "because" triggered an automatic compliance response in Langer's study subjects, even though they were not always subsequently given a reason for compliance. 3
Perhaps children's usual answer to the question "why?" - “because... just because” - can be explained by the fact that children are very insightful and realize what extraordinary power the word has over adults That's why.

Click, buzz!

Although Langer's research suggests that there are many situations in which a person does not automatically engage in tape-recording behavior, it is surprising how often such automaticity does occur. For example, consider the strange behavior of jewelry buyers who swooped in on a shipment of turquoise items only after they had been mistakenly offered at double the original price. There is no way I can explain their behavior unless we look at it from the point of view click, buzz.