The impact of relational consequences and intimacy on the selection of interpersonal persuasion tactics: A reanalysis

This study investigated the effects of situational variables on the likelihood of use of four types of compliance‐gaining strategies: justification, exchange, manipulation and personal rejection. Subjects rated the strategies on the probability that they would actually use them to gain compliance in each of four situations that varied systematically in intimacy and relational consequences. Both situational variables were found to he significant predictors of strategy preference. Message strategy selection was concluded to be based upon an assessment of the relative risk associated with the implementation of a given strategy and on the basis of the relative importance of three communicative goals: (1) whether strategy implementation would lead to successful compliance; (2) whether strategy implementation would result in relational harm; and, (3) whether strategy implementation would result in poor management of the agent's image. Recommendations for future research were noted.

[1]  W. Dixon.  BMD : biomedical computer programs , 1967 .

[2]  Peter R. Monge,et al.  Multivariate techniques in human communication research , 1980 .

[3]  David R. Seibold,et al.  Compliance‐gaining message strategies: A typology and some findings concerning effects of situational differences , 1977 .

[4]  R. Christie,et al.  Studies in Machiavellianism , 1970 .

[5]  G. Marwell,et al.  Dimensions of Compliance-Gaining Behavior: An Empirical Analysis , 1967 .

[6]  Ruth Anne Clark,et al.  TOPOI and rhetorical competence , 1979 .

[7]  R. Emerson.  Power-Dependence Relations , 1962, Power in Modern Societies.

[8]  Michael Burgoon,et al.  Persuasion Research: Review and Commentary , 1978 .

[9]  M. Fitzpatrick,et al.  You always hurt the one you love: Strategies and tactics in interpersonal conflict , 1979 .

[10]  M. Cody,et al.  Situational Influences on the Selection of Strategies to Resist Compliance-Gaining Attempts. , 1980 .

[11]  M. Knapp,et al.  Telling It Like It Isn't: A Review of Theory and Research on Deceptive Communications. , 1979 .

[12]  T. Falbo.  Multidimensional scaling of power strategies. , 1977 .

[13]  Paula Johnson.  Women and Power: Toward a Theory of Effectiveness , 1976 .

[14]  Michael E. Roloff,et al.  The Situational Use of Pro- and Antisocial Compliance-Gaining Strategies by High and Low Machiavellians , 1978 .

[15]  G. Miller,et al.  Between people: A new analysis of interpersonal communication , 1975 .

[16]  William J. Jordan,et al.  A multidimensional scaling of three sets of compliance‐gaining strategies , 1980 .

[17]  J. Singer.  The Use of Manipulative Strategies: Machiavellianism and Attractiveness , 1964 .

[18]  P. Blau.  Exchange and Power in Social Life , 1964 .

[19]  Arthur P. Bochner.  State Of The Art: On Taking Ourselves Seriously: An Analysis of Some Persistent Problems and Promising Directions in Interpersonal Research. , 1978 .

[20]  Edward E. Jones,et al.  Ingratiation : a social psychological analysis , 1966 .

[21]  J. R. French,et al.  The bases of social power. , 1959 .

[22]  H. Michener,et al.  Liking as a determinant of power tactic preference. , 1972 .

[23]  M. Cody,et al.  Perceptions of compliance‐gaining situations: A dimensional analysis , 1980 .

[24]  R. Clark.  The impact of self interest and desire for liking on the selection of communicative strategies , 1979 .

[25]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[26]  C. Fischer.  The Effect of Threats in an Incomplete Information Game , 1969 .

[27]  A REASSESSMENT OF STATISTICAL POWER ANALYSIS IN HUMAN COMMUNICATION RESEARCH , 1979 .

[28]  Dale Hample,et al.  Purposes and effects of lying , 1980 .