RESISTANCE & PERSUASION
READING
MATERIALS
PREPARED BY
Emma van Aken
, The Importance of Resistance to Persuasion
Knowles, E. S., & Linn, J. A. (2004)
Resistance: the noncompliance with a directive, a desire to counteract someone else's attempt to limit one's choices,
unwillingness to achieve insight about the real nature of one's thoughts or feelings, avoidance of unpleasant or dangerous
feelings.
Dictionary definitions of resistance
The act of resisting, opposing, withstanding, etc. > references resistance as a behavioral outcome, the act of withstanding
influence.
Power or capacity to resist > motivational aspects of resistance, as a power or oppositional force.
Opposition of some force ... to another or others > motivational aspects of resistance, as a power or oppositional force.
A force that retards, hinders, or opposes motion > motivational aspects of resistance, as a power or oppositional force.
The core of resistance
It it is a reaction against change.
McGuire defined resistance to persuasion as the ability to withstand a persuasive attack.
Outcome and motive of resistance
Outcome: the outcome of not being moved by pressures to change.
Motive: the motivation to oppose and counter pressures to change.
A motivation to oppose would promote the outcome of not changing. However, the two definitions are also not completely
overlapping.
Attitudes in resistance
Affective: I don’t like it.
Cognitive: I don’t believe it.
Behavioral: I won’t do it.
Source of resistance
Is sometimes attributed more to the person, and sometimes it is attributed more to the situation.
Reactance, as used by Brehm (1966), is caused by external threats to one's freedom of choice.
Two factors that determine amount of resistance: freedom that is threatened and nature of the threat (e.g. direct will create
more resistance).
Faces of the nature of resistance
Reactance: the influence attempt is an integral element of resistance, initiated only when the influence is directly perceived
and when it threatens a person's choice alternatives. emphasizes the affective ("I don't like it!") and motivational ("I won't
do it!") sides of resistance.
Distrust: becoming guarded and wary when faced with a proposal, offer, or message to change, wondering what the motive
and true facts behind the proposal are, underlies both affective ("I don't like it!") and cognitive ("I don't believe it!")
reactions to influence.
Scrutiny: being aware that you are the target makes you more carefully and thoughtfully to every aspect of the situation,
puts emphasis on the proposal itself, strengths of an argument are appreciated and accepted, weaknesses of an argument
are exposed, evaluated, and countered, illustrates primarily the cognitive element ("I don't believe it!").
Inertia: is not reactant to the proposer or the proposal, and it doesn't necessarily lead to greater scrutiny, distrust, or
reactance, focuses more on staying put than on resisting change, attempts to keep the attitude system in balance.
, Resistance to persuasion as self-regulation: Ego-depletion and its effects on attitude change processes.
Wheeler, S. C., Briñol, P., & Hermann, A. D. (2007)
Motivation to resist
Correct attitudes
Restore freedom
Maintain psychological consistency
Maintain sense of control
Ego-depletion: a state in which one’s self-regulatory resources are diminished, and this diminishment is proposed to occur
because acts of self-regulation and volition draw upon a single, limited intrapsychic resource.
Resistance and ego-depletion
Resisting persuasion is another type of task that could draw on limited self-regulatory resources, and therefore, resistance
processes could be impaired by preceding self-regulation.
Resisting activities require the individual to engage in active control processes to defend the pre-existing attitude from
attack.
When individuals are ego-depleted, their attitudes could be biased in an upward, acquiescent direction.
Self-regulation failure can increase acquiescence; individuals often “give in” to easier courses of action when their self-
regulatory resources are depleted.
Individuals who engaged in a task designed to reduce their self-regulatory resources reported more positive attitudes
toward a counterattitudinal policy than those not so depleted.
Acts of Benevolence: A Limited-Resource Account of Compliance with Charitable Requests
Fennis, B. M., Janssen, L., & Vohs, K. D. (2009)
Social influence techniques
Foot-in-the-door: a compliance tactic that assumes agreeing to a small request increases the likelihood of agreeing to a
second, larger request, the FITD tactic is most effective when the initial request is highly involving which initial requests
entail either (a) active self-presentation or (b) demanding cognitive operations, or both - processes that are known to elicit
selfregulatory resource depletion.
Door-in-the-face: attempts to convince the respondent to comply by making a large request that the respondent will most
likely turn down, much like a metaphorical slamming of a door in the persuader's face. The respondent is then more likely
to agree to a second, more reasonable request.
Lowball: a procedure for enhancing compliance by first obtaining agreement to a request and then revealing the hidden
costs of this request.
Disrupt-then-reframe: a technique that is intended to distract attention from the potential costs or limitations of a product,
service, or proposal, individuals are more likely to comply with a request when they are momentarily confused in some
way (e.g., an unusual statement) and subsequently presented with a compelling argument.
Mindlessness
Consumers are prone to employ simple heuristics that increase compliance rates.
Principle of consistency: propensity to behave congruently across situations (FITD-technique).
Principle of reciprocity: felt obligation to return a favor (DOTF-technique).
Self-regulation failure brought about by self-regulatory resource depletion.
Responding to the initial requests of an influence attempt drains the self’s finite regulatory resources.
