A model of properties of compliance‐gaining strategies

This paper intends to induce a set of properties that unify and distinguish compliancegaining strategies and to determine whether coders can reliably classify messages on the basis of the proposed properties. The first goal was accomplished by deriving codified strategies from open‐ended responses of subjects to persuasive situations. Properties that reflected differences in the strategies were induced. The second goal had three coders content‐analyze the original responses in terms of the derived properties. Measures of unitizing and coder reliability and content validity were assessed. In addition, information concerning representational validity was presented. The approach taken in this paper provides us with an assessment of the state of affairs found in a compliance‐gaining strategy.

[1]  Roy J. Lewicki,et al.  A Three‐Factor Experimental Analysis of Promises and Threats , 1973 .

[2]  Peter L. Nacci,et al.  Reactions to Coercive and Reward Power: The Effects of Switching Influence Modes on Target Compliance , 1976 .

[3]  Linguistics and Communication Theory , 1971 .

[4]  E. Mishler,et al.  Scoring and Reliability Problems in Interaction Process Analysis: A Methodological Note , 1966 .

[5]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  The Sound Pattern of English , 1968 .

[6]  R. Wiseman,et al.  A multidimensional scaling validation of an inductively‐derived set of compliance‐gaining strategies , 1981 .

[7]  Dale Hample.  The cognitive context of argument , 1981 .

[8]  S. Schwartz.  Normative Influences on Altruism , 1977 .

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

[10]  R. Bales.  Interaction process analysis , 1976 .

[11]  Madeline E. Heilman,et al.  Threats and Promises: Reputational Consequences and Transfer of Credibility. , 1974 .

[12]  E. Weinstein,et al.  Some Dimensions of Altercasting , 1963 .

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

[14]  C. F. Hockett.  A Course in Modern Linguistics , 1959 .

[15]  Louis W. Stern,et al.  Development of a Content Analytic System for Analysis of Bargaining Communication in Marketing , 1978 .

[16]  R. Hopper.  THE TAKEN-FOR-GRANTED , 1981 .

[17]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[18]  S. Jackson,et al.  Structure of conversational argument: Pragmatic bases for the enthymeme , 1980 .

[19]  Alan L. Sillars.  THE STRANGER AND THE SPOUSE AS TARGET PERSONS FOR COMPLIANCE‐GAINING STRATEGIES: A SUBJECTIVE EXPECTED UTILITY MODEL1 , 1980 .

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

[21]  W. Gamson.  Power and discontent , 1968 .

[22]  Carol A. Kates.  Pragmatics and Semantics: An Empiricist Theory , 1980 .

[23]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[24]  R. L. Scott.  Communication as an Intentional, Social System , 1977 .

[25]  L. Bitzer.  Aristotle's Enthymeme Revisited , 1959, Landmark Essays.

[26]  O. Holsti.  Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities , 1969 .

[27]  Guest editor's introduction: Beyond threats and promises , 1974 .

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

[29]  H. Guetzkow.  Unitizing and categorizing problems in coding qualitative data , 1950 .

[30]  S. Toulmin.  The uses of argument , 1960 .

[31]  Talcott Parsons,et al.  ON THE CONCEPT OF INFLUENCE , 1963 .

[32]  Roman Jakobson,et al.  Structure of Language and Its Mathematical Aspects , 1961 .

[33]  M. Knapp,et al.  Nonverbal Communication: Issues and Appraisal , 1978 .