| Psychologists Robert Cialdini and David Schroeder (1976) tested the foot-in-the-door concept in an experiment with solicitors for contributions to the American Cancer Society. They reasoned that if they could get people to contribute anything, they might get them to contribute more. Thus, they had two teams of solicitors (each team consisting of a male and female college student) use a standard request ("I'm collecting money for the American Cancer Society. Would you be willing to help by giving a donation?"). Another two teams used the same approach, but added the phrase "Even a penny will help" at the end. Forty-two people were canvassed with each approach.
Which approach was more effective? With the standard approach, 12 out of 42 people donated, while with the "Even a penny will help" approach, the teams received 21 contributions out of 42 tries. Clearly, the small-favor approach worked to increase contributions. But if the contributions were smaller (since even pennies were acceptable), then it still might not be as effective as the regular pitch. The standard approach earned a total of $18.55, while the penny approach earned a total of $30.34. Cialdini and Schroeder suggested that saying "Even a penny would help" was the equivalent of asking for a small favor, and once a person had made the decision to help, he or she would actually contribute a larger amount to avoid appearing cheap. A similar compliance tactic is the pique technique, studied by Santos, Leve, and Pratkanis (1994). They tested the hypothesis that piquing someone's interest may encourage compliance. In their research study, women stood on street corners and asked passersby for money. In the control conditions, when the women asked "Can you spare any change?" 44 percent of passersby complied. When they asked "Can you spare a quarter?" the compliance rate increased to 64 percent. The unusual pique conditions, however, produced the highest compliance rates. When they asked "Can you spare 17 cents?" or "Can you spare 37 cents?" about 75 percent of people made a contribution. Santos and colleagues stated that the pique condition caught people off guard and forced them to focus on the request. |
| Copyright ©2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the McGraw-Hill Higher Education is one of the many fine businesses of The McGraw-Hill Companies. Please visit our Technical support website at http://mhhe.com/support. |
 |