Influence — Robert Cialdini on the Psychology of Persuasion

AuthorAthenarium / Posted on

Influence - The Psychology of Persuasion - Robert Cialdini

Cialdini’s study of compliance, influence and persuasion

Experimental psychologist Robert Cialdini wrote a very famous book in 1984: Influence, The Psychology of Persuasion. Through interviews, sales manuals and participant observation, he studied the art of compliance, factors that make people say yes to one another. Ideas like fixed-action patterns, the contrast effect and the principle of reciprocity help to explain the psychology of persuasion. While Cialdini’s classic is cited frequently in psychology, economics and marketing, we thought it valuable to revisit the principles of his work. It also happens to be one of Charlie Munger’s favourite books on behavioural psychology and standard thinking errors. In this post, we’ll look at some of Cialdini’s main ideas, including the factors that lead to influence, compliance and persuasion.

Fixed-action patterns

Firstly, Cialdini contends that individuals, groups and entire communities engage in what he calls fixed-action patterns. These patterns describe behaviours that occur in regular or predictable patterns. We rely on such shortcuts to simplify our decision making in an increasingly complex society. But this sometimes leads to silly choices.

It also leaves us malleable to savvy ‘compliance practitioners’. These are people that understand our patterns and triggers, and know how to use it to their advantage (e.g. sales persons). The common example in retail is the use of ‘sales’ and ‘specials’ to trigger an automatic response from customers.

Contrast effect

One example of this is in practice is the contrast effect. It describes our tendency to view one item differently as we compare it to another. That is, we tend to base our judgements on relative measures, as opposed to absolute ones. Real estate agents use the contrast principle to great effect. A common strategy for agents is to show prospective buyers the most expensive or dilapidated property first. The agents will then show the intended property for sale, which is both attractive and moderately priced. This contrast and order is intended to increase the perceeived value of the latter property.

Principles of compliance

Through his studies, observations and experiments, Cialdini found several principles that have a tendency to trigger our sometimes mindless and automatic behaviours:

  1. Reciprocation
  2. Liking
  3. Scarcity
  4. Consistency and commitment
  5. Social proof
  6. Authority

1. Reciprocation

Cialdini’s first principle is his observation that people like to repay or reciprocate with charity, kindness or benefits that others have given them in kind. This social rule of reciprocation governs much of our social obligations. The classic example here is gift-giving during festive seasons. While such behaviours have helped our social economy to flourish over time, we can also observe its misuse in fields like business and politics.

Social indebtedness

Cialdini describes how compliance practitioners create social obligations via gifts, favours, logrolling and free samples to engender reciprocity from their targets. Since people dislike the emotional feeling of social indebtedness, they become more susceptible to the requests of their compliance practitioner. In some cases, the benefits of such reciprocal concessions and exchanges fall largely in the schemer’s favour.

Reject then retreat

Reciprocation can manifest in many ways. For example, Cialidini highlights the ‘rejection-then-retreat’ technique. Here, the compliance practitioner makes a large request which the requestee rejects. The practitioner then responds with a more reasonable (but originally intended) request. The concession, contrast principle, and tendency for reciprocation makes the requestee more likely to comply.

The first request

Furthermore, Cialdini notes how great negotiators and salespersons understand the importance of the very first request. It must be large but not too large as to be perceived as incredulous or trickery. The requestee must view the concession as genuine as to engage both the rule of reciprocity and the contrast principle. Interestingly, Cialdini observes this combination of concession and contrast to generate higher satisfaction rates in requestees that accept the final proposal.

Our social economy

A healthy society relies on the reciprocity and generosity of its individuals and communities. Hence, it’s a little dangerous for us to reject all forms of reciprocation in fear of exploitation. Instead, the challenge for us, as Cialdini puts it, is to distinguish between genuine reciprocation with those that are not.

2. Liking

Another obvious but important factor to keep in mind is the effect of liking. Cialdini cites a study on Tupperware parties, which found the quality of social bonds to have twice as much impact on purchases than product preferences itself. He notes how factors like similarity, familiarity, physical attractiveness, reciprocity and compliments can contribute to our likeness. Whether right or wrong, these factors constitute a halo effect; simple heuristics we use to judge the people, ideas and products we interact with.

Association

The author also discusses the impact of associations on likeness. For example, he describes how people are more likely to dislike weather reporters in counties with higher rates of bad weather. Cialdini highlights how associations can be an unconscious input into the identity and narratives we build for ourselves and others. This in turn becomes a powerful social driver of behaviour and preferences. It also helps to explain why some people are fanatical about sports or have strong judgements about the fashion choices of others.

3. Scarcity

The next factor in Cialdini’s mental model is the effect of scarcity. He describes how the risk of potential loss can weigh heavily on our decision making. We appear to derive social and emotional joy from possessing scarce commodities. And these automatic behaviours stem from our tendency to associate scarcity with high demand and high value.

Urgency and exclusivity

Marketers use this to great effect in the form of limited numbers, deadlines, exclusivity and waitlisting tactics. Their goal is to generate urgency, and to engage customer decision making on an emotional basis, as opposed to an economic one. We attach similar associations to information as well. Word-of-mouth can weigh strongly on our opinions, as a result of liking and ‘exclusive’ information.

Scarcity plus rivalry

Hence, it is important to check the valuations we attach to goods and services. Cialdini describes how even CEOs involved in large acquisitions succumb to the fear of missing out, and overpay for deals as a consequence. The author cautions against transactions that combine scarcity with intense rivalry. It can trigger strong emotional responses from people. Great investors like Warren Buffett avoid open-outcry auctions for these reasons.

4. Consistency and commitment

Another important social influence in our innate bias for consistency. The author cites a study that found bettors to become more confident in their bets immediately after their bets are placed. Cialdini attributes this to personal and social pressures that influence us to act in ways that remain consistent with our prior commitments. We dislike doubt and uncertainty, and have a tendency to create narratives that are emotionally palatable for ourselves. We see this in the way people rationalise their decisions, no matter how costly or poor the decision pans out to be.

Foot in the door

Compliance practitioners take advantage of this bias for consistency by eliciting small commitments from us. For example, Cialdini describes the salesperson’s foot-in-the-door technique, where they encourage shoppers to spend more by getting them to commit to a small purchase first. This commitment gives some customers the excuse to buy more at higher prices or quantities. But the effect works in reverse too. The shopper who makes one big purchase (commitment), is more susceptible to purchase additional items and add-ons. This is a common tactic in automotive and software markets. The contrast principle can amplify this effect. Commitments can elicit a whole range of behaviours.

Give it then take it

Likewise, some car salespersons will throw a lowball offer to incentivise an early commitment before retracting the benefits they promised. Because of the initial commitment, some buyers find it hard to reject the new offer. Cialdini refers to this as ‘give-it-and-take-it-away-later’ method. These techniques are particularly persuasive when the buyer is under stress and pressure to make a decision.

Self-narrative preservation

Similarly, the person who makes a written public commitment to some action or behaviour will often feel greater pressure to carry it out relative to the person who does not. The greater the financial or psychological cost of commitment, the greater our desire for consistency. Annie Duke describes this tendency for self-narrative preservation in her book Thinking in Bets. In these situations, people are also more likely to engage in motivated reasoning, where they perceive only the evidence that helps them to maintain their preferred narrative.

Activating System 2

Cialdini notes that it is not easy to combat against our bias for consistency and commitment. As Daniel Kahneman would say, we should engage in ‘System 2’ thinking to evaluate the legitimacy and benefits of the commitments we make. Likewise, Cialdini recommends we ask ourselves whether we would make the same commitments again if we could do it over. It helps to regonise when costs are sunk, and to distinguish between the economic and emotional costs of a decision. We should also check if we are building inconsistent justifications to rationalise the choices we’ve made.

5. Social proof

While social proof is another well understood idea, it remains a very important idea to keep in mind. It describes how people determine the correctness of an idea or behaviour on the basis of how other people think or act. Herding can make us vulnerable to incomplete information, falsified evidence and exploitation.

Pluralistic ignorance

We tend to seek out the herd when we face high degrees of uncertainty and ambiguity. But this can also give rise to what Cialdini describes as pluralistic ignorance. When the environment is uncertain, each individual is looking to everyone else for insight and guidance. In these cases, social proof may offer little informational benefit to us.

The author also makes an important distinction here between physical evidence and social evidence. As history and current affairs have shown, we don’t always update our beliefs when new physical evidence emerges. This is more common when the social evidence and peer pressures against it are powerful.

6. Authority

Like social proof, authority offers individuals and societies a shortcut for decision making. Their influence comes from a position of greater experience, superior information and/or legal legitimacy. However, Cialdini describes how compliance practitioners can exploit our deference to authority through careful use of symbols. Common associations of authority that are easy to fabricate include job titles, fashion attire and trappings (e.g. cars, jewellery, equipment, etc.). Just like social proof and liking, we need to check for evidence of authority as opposed to the associations of authority.

Irrational exuberance

When expectations narrow and/or become highly uncertain, individuals tend to mimic one another. It is then not unsurprising to see behaviours tip into extremes. Economist Robert Shiller details this phenomenon in financial markets in his book Irrational Exuberance. He describes how a natural Ponzi process emerged during the Dot-com bubble, where the combination of new era thinking, authority (e.g. expert opinion), social proof (e.g. neighbour behaviour & media opinion) and scarcity (e.g. fear of missing out) caused investors to purchase internet stocks in mass.

The challenge for every individual is to be alert to the negative consequences of authority, social proof and perceived scarcity. Here, both Cialdini and Shiller offer similar advice. They suggest we question whether the herd or experts have superior information to us. They often operate with the same amount of incomplete information as we are. And again, where we can, we should evaluate the legitmacy of fads, products or investments that have the crowd enamoured.

The automatic age

We are most vulnerable to compliance practitioners that know how to combine reciprocation, commitment, consistency, social proof, authority, liking and/or scarcity to great effect. Charlie Munger once described this as the Lollapalooza effect. This is where the amalgamation of biases, acting in the same direction, creates a powerful grip on our tendencies, beliefs and behaviours. While we do not have the capacity to guard against every influence at every instant, some awareness can help to safeguard the quality of our decision making. This is most important when we are feeling stressed, uncertain or tired, where we are more likely to make emotional decisions or take shortcuts.

Further reading

References

  • Cialdini, Robert (1984). Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. More videos and keynotes available at < https://www.robertcialdinibf.com/>
  • Duke, A. (2018). Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don’t Have All the Facts. More articles available at < https://www.annieduke.com/ >
  • Shiller, R. (2000). Irrational Exuberance. More details available at <http://www.econ.yale.edu/~shiller/>
  • Gladwell, M (2000). The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make A Big Difference. More at <https://www.gladwellbooks.com/>