Compliance Employing a Combined Foot-in-the-Door and Door-in-the-Face Procedure

Abstract The foot-in-the-door procedure increases compliance for a desired target request by making an easier first request. In the door-in-the-face procedure, compliance is increased by first making an extremely hard request and following this with a target request, the one actually desired. The current study combined both of these procedures and formulated a new compliance technique consisting of two initial requests to precede the target request. Three hundred and eighty subjects selected at random from the telephone directory were called to test the new compliance procedure. The results showed that compliance was significantly greater for the new combination method when compared with both other methods. The theoretical model developed to devise and explain the new method also received support.

[1]  Clive Seligman,et al.  Relationship between compliance in the foot-in-the-door paradigm and size of first request. , 1976 .

[2]  M. Goldman,et al.  Compliance Employing a Two-Feet-in-the-Door Procedure , 1981 .

[3]  David E. Smith,et al.  Compliance as Affected by Task Difficulty and Order of Tasks , 1981 .

[4]  A. Bizman,et al.  The door in the face technique: Effects of the size of the initial request , 1978 .

[5]  H. Kelley.  The processes of causal attribution. , 1973 .

[6]  R. Cialdini,et al.  Test of a concession procedure for inducing verbal, behavioral, and further compliance with a request to give blood. , 1976, The Journal of applied psychology.

[7]  R. Cialdini,et al.  Reciprocal Concessions Procedure for Inducing Compliance: The Door-in-the-Face Technique , 1975 .

[8]  S. Sherman,et al.  Effects of initial request size and timing of a second request on compliance: the foot in the door and the door in the face. , 1975, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[9]  P. Pliner,et al.  Compliance without pressure: Some further data on the foot-in-the-door technique , 1974 .

[10]  M. Goldman,et al.  Door-in-the-face procedure: Reciprocal concession, perceptual contrast, or worthy person. , 1984 .

[11]  G. H. Lunney,et al.  USING ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE WITH A DICHOTOMOUS DEPENDENT VARIABLE: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY , 1970 .

[12]  Inducing Compliance by a Two-Door-in-the-Face Procedure and a Self-Determination Request , 1981 .

[13]  The effects of contrast upon compliance with socially undesirable requests in the door-in-the-face paradigm. , 1979 .

[14]  D. Bem.  Self-Perception Theory , 1972 .

[15]  M. Goldman,et al.  Social Labeling and the Foot-in-the-Door Effect , 1982 .

[16]  J. Freedman,et al.  Compliance without pressure: the foot-in-the-door technique. , 1966, Journal of personality and social psychology.