Combining multiple influence strategies to increase consumer compliance

In this paper, we investigate the effects and implications of utilising multiple social influence strategies simultaneously to endorse a single product or call to action. In three, studies we show that combinations of social influence strategies do not increase compliance - this is contrary to commonly held beliefs and practice. Studies 1 and 2 show that combining implementations of both the consensus and authority strategies to promote a single behaviour does not lead to an increase in the effectiveness of a persuasive attempt. In Study 3, we test these findings in an online advertising campaign and again show that a single influence strategy is more effective than the combined usage of multiple influence strategies. The paper outlines the importance of appropriately choosing and implementing social influence strategies to prevent unintended interactions between the strategies that lead to a suboptimal performance.

[1]  Zakary L. Tormala,et al.  The Effects of Minority/Majority Source Status on Attitude Certainty: A Matching Perspective , 2009, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[2]  X. Zhang,et al.  Impact of Online Consumer Reviews on Sales: The Moderating Role of Product and Consumer Characteristics , 2010 .

[3]  Noah J. Goldstein,et al.  A Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels , 2008 .

[4]  Howard L. Fromkin,et al.  Uniqueness, the human pursuit of difference , 1980 .

[5]  A. Modigliani,et al.  The Role of Interaction Sequences and the Timing of Resistance in Shaping Obedience and Defiance to Authority , 1995 .

[6]  S. West.  Increasing the attractiveness of college cafeteria food: A reactance theory perspective , 1975 .

[7]  Thomas Blass,et al.  Understanding behavior in the Milgram obedience experiment: The role of personality, situations, and their interactions. , 1991 .

[8]  Timothy C. Brock,et al.  10 – Implications of Commodity Theory for Value Change1 , 1968 .

[9]  Curtis D. Hardin,et al.  Shared reality: How social verification makes the subjective objective. , 1996 .

[10]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. , 1999 .

[11]  Debra L. Shapiro,et al.  Influence Tactics in Combination: The Interactive Effects of Soft Versus Hard Tactics and Rational Exchange , 1992 .

[12]  Ginamarie Scott,et al.  A validation study of the preference for consistency scale , 2001 .

[13]  DavisJanet,et al.  Envisioning persuasion profiles , 2011 .

[14]  Martin Eisend,et al.  Explaining The Impact Of Scarcity Appeals In Advertising: The Mediating Role of Perceptions of Susceptibility , 2008 .

[15]  Michael Lynn,et al.  Scarcity effects on desirability: mediated by assumed expensiveness? , 1989 .

[16]  Cecilia M. Falbe,et al.  CONSEQUENCES FOR MANAGERS OF USING SINGLE INFLUENCE TACTICS AND COMBINATIONS OF TACTICS , 1992 .

[17]  Janet Davis,et al.  Envisioning persuasion profiles: challenges for public policy and ethical practice , 2011, INTR.

[18]  Richard E Petty,et al.  Resistance to Persuasion and Attitude Certainty: The Moderating Role of Elaboration , 2004, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[19]  Steve Booth-Butterfield,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model: Its Impacton Persuasion Theory and Research , 2002 .

[20]  M. Lynn.  Scarcity effects on value: A quantitative review of the commodity theory literature , 1991 .

[21]  John R. Hauser,et al.  Website Morphing , 2009, Mark. Sci..

[22]  J. Inman,et al.  Framing the Deal: The Role of Restrictions in Accentuating Deal Value , 1997 .

[23]  Frank R. Kardes,et al.  The Role of the Need for Cognitive Closure in the Effectiveness of the Disrupt-Then-Reframe Influence Technique , 2007 .

[24]  H. Fromkin.  Effects of experimentally aroused feelings of undistinctiveness upon valuation of scarce and novel experiences. , 1970, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[25]  R. Cialdini.  The Science of PERSUASION. , 2001 .

[26]  Charles D. Barrett.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

[27]  H. Mills.  Marketing as a Science , 1961 .

[28]  Miles Hewstone,et al.  Social-influence processes of control and change:conformity, obedience to authority, and innovation , 2003 .

[29]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

[30]  Panos Markopoulos,et al.  Means based adaptive persuasive systems , 2011, CHI.

[31]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion , 1986, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.

[32]  H. Kelman,et al.  Crimes of obedience: Toward a social psychology of authority and responsibility. , 1990 .

[33]  A. D. Jones,et al.  Obedience to Authority , 1974 .

[34]  Dean Eckles,et al.  Selecting Effective Means to Any End: Futures and Ethics of Persuasion Profiling , 2010, PERSUASIVE.

[35]  Herbert C. Kelman,et al.  Crimes of obedience: Toward a social psychology of authority and responsibility. , 1990 .

[36]  Maurits Kaptein,et al.  Adaptive persuasive messages in an e-commerce setting: the use of persuasion profiles , 2011, ECIS.

[37]  J. Burger.  Obedience to Authority , 2011 .

[38]  Robert B. Cialdini,et al.  Don’t Throw in the Towel: Use Social Influence Research , 2005 .

[39]  R. Cialdini.  Influence: Science and Practice , 1984 .