H1 – WEAPONS OF INFLUENCE
Fixed-action patterns: regular, blindly mechanical patterns of action. These action patterns are stimulated by
trigger features. Langer: e.g. people are more likely to help others when they provide a reason, or simply the
word ‘because’. Also, people who are unsure of an item’s quality, often use stereotypes; ‘expensive = good’.
Automatic, stereotyped behavior is prevalent in much human action, because it is often an efficient form of
behaving or simply necessary. We live in a complex, rapidly moving environment, so we need shortcuts.
Although our behavior will not always be appropriate for the situation, we accept the imperfections, since there
is really no other choice.
Judgmental heuristics: allow simplified thinking. E.g. expensive = good; an expert must be right; authorities are
on top; etc. Approaches when reacting to situations:
̶ Click, whirr responding: automatic responding.
̶ Controlled responding: responding on the basis of a thorough analysis of all the information.
People are more likely to respond in a controlled way when they have both the desire and ability to analyze it
carefully. Otherwise, they are likely to use the easier click, whirr approach. People who don’t know about their
automatic behavior patterns are very vulnerable for those who do know about them.
Contrast principle: e.g. first offering an expensive item and then a cheap item, to make the price seem even
lower. Or e.g. first showing an undesirable (set-up) house and then a nice house to potential buyers.
H2 – RECIPROCATION
Rule of reciprocation: one of our most influential weapons; we feel obligated to repay what another person has
provided us. This was a really beneficial belief in the evolutionary history; giving, receiving and trading.
However, the span of these obligations is not unlimited, especially in case of small favors. The desire to repay
seems to fade as time goes by, except for a remarkably memorable gift. The same counts for evil things: we
reap what we sow.
Reciprocation as a commercial weapon
To use reciprocation as an influential weapon, we need to grant people a gift or favor first, so they feel obligated
to do something back. Example: experimenter Joe tried to sell tickets to people. He first granted a favor to some
and did nothing for others. Relatively more people bought tickets from Joe, if he granted them a favor first.
Also, the rule of reciprocity is so strong that it overrules other laws/rules. Generally, the more someone likes
Joe, the more tickets they will buy. However, when Joe granted a favor first, likeableness made no difference
anymore in the amount of bought tickets. So, someone you normally dislike is still capable of exploiting you in
returning favors for them, if they grant you a favor first.
The rule of reciprocation also ensures the effectiveness of free samples: e.g. buying more at Douglas after
always receiving parfum samples.
Reciprocation is effective because people want to do something back, but also because of a guilt feeling. E.g.
when someone hands you a certain gift, you cannot decline it, because they already paid for it. Therefore you
feel (uninvited) guilt. There is a strong cultural pressure to reciprocate a gift, even an unwanted one, however
there is no such pressure to purchase an unwanted commercial product.
Another feature of the reciprocity rule that allows it to be exploited for, is using it for unequal exchanges. We
often want to overrule the other and do something bigger back, because we do not want to be disliked by
others. However, this produces a lot of stress. E.g. women who receive a drink from a man often feel obligated
to do something sexual with them afterwards.
Door-in-the-face technique
Rejection-then-retreat technique: also called door-in-the-face. Suppose person A wants person B to agree to a
certain request. To increase the chances, person A first makes a larger request, that will be turned down. Then,
they make the smaller (actual) request, which person B Is more likely to agree with now.
, Rejection-then-retreat technique is effective, because of:
̶ An obligated feeling to meet in the middle
̶ Perceptual contrast: after hearing the first request, the second request seems more doable
However, this technique may be followed by negative consequences, such as:
̶ The victim of the strategy might decide not to live up to the agreement eventually.
̶ The victim of the strategy might distrust the requester in the future.
However, this is often not the case. This strategy often proved superior.
The rejection-then-retreat technique can also evoke positive, side effects. A person who accepts a small second
request, might volunteer to perform further requests in the future, because of a sense of:
̶ Responsibility
̶ Satisfaction
As a receiver, it is hard to reject this technique, since it is too strong to overpower when activated. Therefore,
you must prevent its activation. So, if someone presents you a gift, say ‘Keep it’. Or: after someone granted you
a gift or favor, first seriously examine it or think about it. If it appears to be a sales strategy, you do not feel
guilty when not returning a favor.
H3 – COMMITMENT AND CONSISTENCY
Once people make a choice, they will encounter (inter)personal pressures to behave consistently with that
commitment. We simply desire to be consistent with what we have already done, so we convince yourselves we
have made the right decision.
The desire for consistency is a central motivator of behavior. It is a strong weapon of social influence, often
causing us to act in ways that are clearly contrary to our own best interest. Inconsistency is commonly thought
to be an undesirable personality trait; you seem confused, two-faced or even mentally ill. On the other side,
consistency is associated with intellectual strength, logic, rationality and honesty.
Consistency is convenient, because:
̶ It offers a shortcut: once you made up your mind, you don’t have to think about it anymore, you don’t
have to weigh the pros and cons, etc.
̶ By thinking consistent, you avoid the things you would rather not realize. It is a safe hiding place.
Commitment and consistency go hand in hand. The click that activates the whirr of powerful consistency, is
commitment. So, professionals use certain commitment strategies to trap people, such as:
̶ Commitment on paper (e.g. written declarations)
̶ Vocal commitment (e.g. via a call)
Foot-in-the-door technique
Salesmen often start with a little request, followed by a larger one. These are expected to flow naturally from
the commitment. E.g. first letting people sign a petition ‘I am a safe driver’ and afterwards asking them to put
up a billboard with ‘DRIVE SAFE’ in their garden. After the small request prior, relatively more people said yes to
the billboard, since they wanted to be consistent with their newly formed self-images and attitudes. So, actually
the experts use small commitments to manipulate a person’s self-image, until it is where they want it to be.
Not all commitments affect self-image however, there are certain conditions that must be present. The
commitment should be:
1. Active Active commitment > passive commitment
2. Public People do not want to change their beliefs publicly, so they stick to them
3. Effortful The more effort is put in, the greater influence on attitudes and beliefs
4. Freely chosen We accept inner responsibility for behavior when we freely chose to do it
The best evidence of people’s true feelings and beliefs comes from their actions and less from their words. So,
observers who try to decide what people are like, look at behavior. Also, actively writing out a form saying you
want to participate in something is more effective than not writing out a form saying you don’t want to.
