Instructions are attached
Instructions of assignment: 1. Watch both videos and complete a 1 ½ page argumentation on each video. It can be done in a word file or PDF file. Link of videos: a. https://youtu.be/Fi0YR3Bl6uk b. https://youtu.be/Qe73tRTksf0 2. Read the article attached and create a 1 ½ page argumentation. the SCIENCE of Persuasion the SCIENCE of Persuasion Author(s): Robert B. Cialdini Source: Scientific American Mind , Vol. 14, No. 1 (2004), pp. 70-77 Published by: Scientific American, a division of Nature America, Inc. Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/24939368 JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms Scientific American, a division of Nature America, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Scientific American Mind This content downloaded from �������������216.220.176.6 on Thu, 17 Jun 2021 21:15:35 UTC������������� All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/24939368 70 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN MIND PersuasionSCIENCEof the By Robert B. Cialdini Social psychology has determined the basic principles that govern getting to “yes” Hello there. I hope you’ve enjoyed the magazine so far. Now I’d like to let you in on something of great impor- tance to you personally. Have you ever been tricked into saying yes? Ever felt trapped into buying some- thing you didn’t really want or contributing to some suspicious-sounding cause? And have you ever wished you understood why you acted in this way so that you could withstand these clever ploys in the future? Yes? Then clearly this article is just right for you. It contains valuable information on the most pow- erful psychological pressures that get you to say yes to requests. And it’s chock-full of NEW, IMPROVED research showing exactly how and why these techniques work. So don’t delay, just settle in and get the information that, after all, you’ve already agreed you want. The scientific study of the process ofsocial influence has been under wayfor well over half a century, begin- ning in earnest with the propaganda, public in- formation and persuasion programs of World War II. Since that time, numerous social scien- tists have investigated the ways in which one in- dividual can influence another’s attitudes and ac- tions. For the past 30 years, I have participated in that endeavor, concentrating primarily on the major factors that bring about a specific form of behavior change—compliance with a request. Six basic tendencies of human behavior come into play in generating a positive response: recip- rocation, consistency, social validation, liking, authority and scarcity. As these six tendencies help to govern our business dealings, our soci- etal involvements and our personal relation- ships, knowledge of the rules of persuasion can truly be thought of as empowerment. Reciprocation When the Disabled American Veterans orga- nization mails out requests for contributions, the appeal succeeds only about 18 percent of the time. But when the mailing includes a set of free per- sonalized address labels, the success rate almost doubles, to 35 percent. To understand the effect of COPYRIGHT 2003 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, INC. This content downloaded from �������������216.220.176.6 on Thu, 17 Jun 2021 21:15:35 UTC������������� All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms the unsolicited gift, we must recognize the reach and power of an essential rule of human conduct: the code of reciprocity. All societies subscribe to a norm that obligates individuals to repay in kind what they have re- ceived. Evolutionary selection pressure has prob- ably entrenched the behavior in social animals such as ourselves. The demands of reciprocity be- gin to explain the boost in donations to the veter- ans group. Receiving a gift—unsolicited and per- haps even unwanted—convinced significant num- bers of potential donors to return the favor. Charitable organizations are far from alone in taking this approach: food stores offer free sam- ples, exterminators offer free in-home inspections, health clubs offer free workouts. Customers are thus exposed to the product or service, but they are also indebted. Consumers are not the only ones who fall under the sway of reciprocity. Phar- maceutical companies spend millions of dollars every year to support medical researchers and to provide gifts to individual physicians—activities that may subtly influence investigators’ findings and physicians’ recommendations. A 1998 study in the New England Journal of Medicine found that only 37 percent of researchers who published conclusions critical of the safety of calcium chan- nel blockers had previously received drug compa- ny support. Among those whose conclusions at- tested to the drugs’ safety, however, the number of www.sciam.com 71 S T E V E N A D A M S A P P h o to /T ri b u n e -R e vi e w Free samples carry a subtle price tag; they psychologically indebt the consumer to reciprocate. Here shoppers get complimentary tastes of a new product, green ketchup. COPYRIGHT 2003 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, INC. This content downloaded from �������������216.220.176.6 on Thu, 17 Jun 2021 21:15:35 UTC������������� All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms those who had received free trips, research fund- ing or employment skyrocketed—to 100 percent. Reciprocity includes more than gifts and favors; it also applies to concessions that people make to one another. For example, assume that you reject my large request, and I then make a concession to you by retreating to a smaller request. You may very well then reciprocate with a concession of your own: agreement with my lesser request. In the mid- 1970s my colleagues and I conducted an experi- ment that clearly illustrates the dynamics of recip- rocal concessions. We stopped a random sample of passersby on public walkways and asked them if they would volunteer to chaperone juvenile deten- tion center inmates on a day trip to the zoo. As ex- pected, very few complied, only 17 percent. For another random sample of passersby, however, we began with an even larger request: to serve as an unpaid counselor at the center for two hours per week for the next two years. Everyone in this second sampling rejected the extreme ap- peal. At that point we offered them a concession. “If you can’t do that,” we asked, “would you chaperone a group of juvenile detention center in- mates on a day trip to the zoo?” Our concession powerfully stimulated return concessions. The compliance rate nearly tripled, to 50 percent, com- pared with the straightforward zoo-trip request. Consistency In 1998 Gordon Sinclair, the owner of a well- known Chicago restaurant, was struggling with a problem that afflicts all restaurateurs. Patrons fre- quently reserve a table but, without notice, fail to appear. Sinclair solved the problem by asking his receptionist to change two words of what she said to callers requesting reservations. The change dropped his no-call, no-show rate from 30 to 10 percent immediately. The two words were effective because they commissioned the force of another potent human motivation: the desire to be, and to appear, con- sistent. The receptionist merely modified her re- quest from “Please call if you have to change your plans” to “Will you please call if you have to change your plans?” At that point, she politely paused and waited for a response. The wait was pivotal because it induced customers to fill the pause with a public commitment. And public com- mitments, even seemingly minor ones, direct fu- ture action. In another example, Joseph Schwarzwald of 72 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN MIND L U IS M . A L V A R E Z A P P h o to Public commitment of signing a petition influences the signer to behave consistently with that position in the future. FAST FACTS Persuasive Techniques 1>> Six basic tendencies of human behavior come intoplay in generating a positive response to a request: reciprocation, consistency, social validation, liking, authority and scarcity. 2>> Knowledge of these tendencies can empower con-sumers and citizens to make better-informed deci- sions about, for example, whether to purchase a product or vote for legislation. 3>> The six key factors are at work in various areas aroundthe world as well, but cultural norms and traditions can modify the weight brought to bear by each factor. COPYRIGHT 2003 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, INC. This content downloaded from �������������216.220.176.6 on Thu, 17 Jun 2021 21:15:35 UTC������������� All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Bar-Ilan University in Israel and his co-workers nearly doubled monetary contributions for the handicapped in certain neighborhoods. The key factor: two weeks before asking for contributions, they got residents to sign a petition supporting the handicapped, thus making a public commitment to that same cause. Social Validation On a wintry morning in the late 1960s, a man stopped on a busy New York City sidewalk and gazed skyward for 60 seconds, at nothing in par- ticular. He did so as part of an experiment by City University of New York social psychologists Stan- ley Milgram, Leonard Bickman and Lawrence Berkowitz that was designed to find out what ef- fect this action would have on passersby. Most simply detoured or brushed by; 4 percent joined the man in looking up. The experiment was then repeated with a slight change. With the modifica- tion, large numbers of pedestrians were induced to come to a halt, crowd together and peer upward. The single alteration in the experiment incor- porated the phenomenon of social validation. One fundamental way that we decide what to do in a situation is to look to what others are doing or have done there. If many individuals have decided in favor of a particular idea, we are more likely to follow, because we perceive the idea to be more correct, more valid. Milgram, Bickman and Berkowitz introduced the influence of social validation into their street experiment simply by having five men rather than one look up at nothing. With the larger initial set of upward gazers, the percentage of New York- ers who followed suit more than quadrupled, to 18 percent. Bigger initial sets of planted up-look- ers generated an even greater response: a starter group of 15 led 40 percent of passersby to join in, nearly stopping traffic within one minute. Taking advantage of social validation, re- questers can stimulate our compliance by demon- strating (or merely implying) that others just like us have already complied. For example, a study found that a fund-raiser who showed homeown- ers a list of neighbors