Dialogue Involvement as a Social Influence Technique

When a request is preceded by a casual dialogue, the approached person is more likely to comply than when the same request follows a monologue. This effect appeared to be strong and replicable in a series of field studies. Across experiments, the issues discussed in conversations between the confederates and the participants and the nature of the critical request varied, suggesting that the effect is generalized. In social situations, the two basic modes of communication (dialogue and monologue) are characteristic of different types of interactions. Dialogue is characteristic of encounters with one’s friends and acquaintances, whereas monologue is more prevalent in contacts with strangers. As a result of social learning, a dialogue makes us prone to treat a stranger as someone we know and thus become more eager to comply with her or his requests. Although the results obtained in the studies are consisted with this model, alternative explanations and limitations of the research also are discussed.

[1]  Franklin J. Boster,et al.  The Relative Effectiveness of a Direct Request Message and a Pregiving Message on Friends and Strangers , 1995 .

[2]  C. Batson The Altruism Question: Toward A Social-psychological Answer , 1991 .

[3]  Robert B. Cialdini,et al.  Increasing compliance by legitimizing paltry contributions: When even a penny helps. , 1976 .

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

[5]  M S Clark,et al.  Moods and compliance. , 1988, The British journal of social psychology.

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

[7]  J. M. Olson,et al.  Involvement and persuasion: Evidence for different types of involvement , 1995 .

[8]  M. Knapp,et al.  Couples' personal idioms: exploring intimate talk. , 1981, The Journal of communication.

[9]  John E. Hunter,et al.  Sequential-request persuasive strategies: Meta-analysis of foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face. , 1984 .

[10]  M. Argyle,et al.  The Rules of Friendship , 1984 .

[11]  J. Dillard The Current Status of Research on Sequential-Request Compliance Techniques , 1991 .

[12]  E. Langer,et al.  Staring and approach: An interpretation of the stare as a nonspecific activator. , 1976 .

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

[14]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  Involvement and Persuasion: Tradition Versus Integration , 1990 .

[15]  Joseph P. Forgas,et al.  Asking Nicely? The Effects of Mood on Responding to More or Less Polite Requests , 1998 .

[16]  Curtis P. Haugtvedt,et al.  Ego-Involvement and Persuasion: An Appreciative Look at the Sherif’s Contribution to the Study of Self-Relevance and Attitude Change , 1992 .

[17]  M. Knapp,et al.  Interpersonal communication and human relationships , 1995 .

[18]  A. Pratkanis,et al.  Hey Buddy, Can You Spare Seventeen Cents? Mindful Persuasion and the Pique Technique1 , 1994 .

[19]  Lalita A. Manrai,et al.  Acquiring Resources from Intimates When Obligation Substitutes for Persuasion , 1988 .

[20]  Shinobu Kitayama,et al.  Automaticity in Conversations: A Reexamination of the Mindlessness Hypothesis , 1988 .

[21]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Attitudes and attitude change. , 1997, Annual review of psychology.

[22]  Michael D. Basil,et al.  A Relational Obligations Approach to the Foot‐In‐The‐Mouth Effect , 1994 .

[23]  D. O’Keefe,et al.  A Guilt-Based Explanation of the Door-in-the-Face Influence Strategy , 1997 .

[24]  Book Review: Self-Inference Processes: The Ontario Symposium , 1992 .

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

[26]  D. Doliński The mystery of the Polish soul. B. W. Johnson's effect à rebours , 1996 .

[27]  P. Ellsworth,et al.  Eye contact and gaze aversion in an aggressive encounter. , 1973, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[28]  Blair T. Johnson,et al.  Effects of involvement on persuasion: a meta-analysis , 1989 .

[29]  R. Glen Hass,et al.  Temporal delay, type of forewarning, and resistance to influence , 1975 .

[30]  E. Langer,et al.  The Mindlessness of Ostensibly Thoughtful Action: The Role of "Placebic" Information in Interpersonal Interaction , 1978 .

[31]  Daniel J. Howard The Influence of Verbal Responses to Common Greetings on Compliance Behavior: The Foot‐In‐The‐Mouth Effect , 1990 .