Roberta Cialdini influence. Robert Cialdini, “The Psychology of Influence”

Robert Cialdini

Psychology of influence

Robert B. Cialdini

The Psychology of Persuasion

Published by arrangement with HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

* * *

This book will help you find answers to the following questions:

The most common tricks of sellers are: see chapter 2

Successful negotiations using the “refuse-then-retreat” technique - see chapter 2

How to avoid becoming a victim of the “equal exchange” rule - see chapter 2

“Chinese tactics” - the easiest way to control people - see chapter 3

How to instill in your child the desire to do the right thing - see chapter 3

Manipulation of conscience. The art of making commitments - see chapter 3

Laughter behind the scenes: the dangers of copying other people’s behavior - see chapter 4

How to ask for help correctly - see chapter 4

Who are Buyers from Mars? see chapter 4

"I like you!" How to win people's favor - see chapter 5

You have been charmed: know how to say “no” - see chapter 5

When to obey and when to rebel: a conscious attitude towards authorities - see chapter 6

Instant Impact – see chapter 7

I express my gratitude to the many people who helped me produce this book. Several colleagues read the draft manuscript and made valuable comments that significantly improved the final version. They are Gus Levine, Doug Kenrick, Art Beaman and Mark Zanna. In addition, the first draft was read by several members of my family and my friends - Richard and Gloria Cialdini, Bobette Gorden and Tad Hall. They not only supported me emotionally, but were also able to objectively evaluate the book.

A second, larger group of people made helpful suggestions on selected chapters or groups of chapters. These are Todd Anderson, Sandy Braver, Katherine Chambers, Judy Cialdini, Nancy Eisenberg, Larry Ettkin, Joanne Gersten, Jeff Goldstein, Betsy Hans, Valerie Hans, Joe Hepworth, Holly Hunt, Anne Inskeep, Barry Leshowitz, Darwin Linder, Debbie Littler, John Mowen, Igor Pavlov, Janice Posner, Trish Puryear, Marilyn Rayle, John Reich, Peter Reingen, Diana Ruble, Phyllis Sensenig, Roman Sherman and Henry Wellman.

Some people helped me at the initial stage. John Stiles was the first publisher to recognize the potential of the project. Jim Sherman, Al Goethals, John Keating, and Dan Wegner gave it positive reviews early on, which inspired both the author and the editors. William Morrow and the company's then-president, Larry Hughes, sent me a small but enthusiastic message that gave me the strength to complete the task. And last on the list, but, of course, not least, Maria Guarnaschelli - from the very beginning, she believed in my idea just like me. It was through her editing that it came to fruition and became a great book. I am immensely grateful for her insightful guidance and strong support.

In addition, I cannot help but mention Sally Carney's professionalism in preparing the manuscript, as well as the sound advice of my attorney, Robert Brandes.

Finally, no one was more supportive than Bobette Gorden, who helped me with every word while I was working on the book.

Introduction

Now I can freely admit it. All my life I've been a simpleton. For as long as I can remember, I have always become an easy prey for all sorts of merchants, fundraisers for various needs and all kinds of businessmen. True, only a few had dishonest motives. For example, representatives of some charitable organizations had the best intentions. But it is not important. Every now and then I found myself with a subscription to some unnecessary magazine or suddenly purchased tickets to a party for sanitation workers. It was probably my long-standing status as a dupe that made me want to understand the nature of compliance: what factors make one person say “yes” to another? And what methods are most effective in achieving compliance? I wanted to know why a request expressed in one way would be rejected, but the same request expressed in a slightly different way would be granted.

Robert Cialdini

Psychology of influence

(Robert B. Cialdini. Influence. Science and Practice, 4th ed., 2001)

Content

Preface

Commentary on the fourth edition of the book: science and practice

Introduction

Chapter 1. Instruments of influence

Click, buzz

Bet on stereotypical thinking

Speculators

Jujutsu

conclusions

Control questions

Critical thinking

Chapter 2. Mutual exchange. Old "Give" and "Take"

How does this rule work?

The rule of reciprocity is universal

The rule of reciprocity imposes debts

The reciprocity rule can initiate unequal exchange

Mutual concessions

Refusal-then-retreat

Mutual concessions, contrasting perceptions and the mystery of Watergate

You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Here is my blood, call again

"Sweet" side effects

Protection

Neutralization of the reciprocity rule

Smoke out the enemy

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Development of critical thinking

Chapter 3. Commitment and Consistency. Superstitions of consciousness

Buzzing around

Fast decision

Fortress of Fools

Peekaboo

Commitment is key

Hearts and Minds

Internal selection

Creating stable points of support

Fight for public goods

Protection

Signals coming from the stomach

Signals coming from the depths of the heart

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Chapter 4. Social proof. The truth is us

The principle of social proof

The power of the public

After the flood

Cause of death: uncertainty

Scientific approach

How to prevent yourself from becoming a victim

Many can help, but only one should be chosen

Imitate me, imitate

Fatal imitation

Monkey Island

Protection

Sabotage

Look up

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Chapter 5. Benevolence. Friendly Thief

How to make connections to influence people

Why do I like you? Let me list the reasons

Physical attractiveness

Similarities

Praise

Contact and interaction

Psychological processing using conditioned reflexes and associations

Doesn't Pavlov's name ring a bell?

From news and weather forecasts to sports

Protection

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Pros and cons of blind obedience

Appearance, not substance

Titles

Cloth

Attributes

Insidious sincerity

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Chapter 7. Deficit. Rule of small

What is too little is the best, and loss is the worst

Limited quantity

Time limit

Psychological resistance

Adult reactance. Love, weapons and washing powders

Censorship

Optimal conditions

Newly experienced deficiency. More expensive cookies and civil conflict

Competition due to limited resources. Stupid rage

Protection

conclusions

Control questions

Perfect mastery of the material

Critical thinking

Chapter 8. “Instantly soluble” influence. Primitive consent in the age of automation

Primitive automatism

Modern automation

Stereotypes should be sacred

conclusions

Control questions

Critical thinking

Literature

Subject index

Name index

This book is dedicated to my son Chris, the light of my eyes.

Preface

The original (commercial) version of The Psychology of Influence was intended for the general reader, and as such I have made an attempt to make it entertaining. In the study group version, I retained the same style but also presented evidence from recent research to support my earlier statements, conclusions, and recommendations. Although I have added a significant number of interviews, quotes, and systematic personal observations in the latest version, the findings of The Psychology of Influence are based on evidence-based psychological research. Teachers and students can be sure that this book is not another example of “pop psychology”, but represents a serious scientific work. The educational version also contains new material that meets modern requirements, conclusions at the end of each chapter, as well as test questions that help you better assimilate the information.

The material in this version of “Psychology of Influence” can be used with great benefit in practice, and at the same time it is scientifically documented. In addition, reading this book is a real pleasure for most people. “The Psychology of Influence” once again confirms that material that often seems dry and overly scientific, if presented properly, can actually turn out to be fresh, useful and easy to digest.

In the modern world, it is impossible to think through the details of every decision, and we use psychological shortcuts and stereotypes, and they serve us well.

Animal behavior may seem ridiculously simple to us.

Example: Sometimes a mother turkey refuses young turkey chicks or even attacks them if the chicks do not make a characteristic sound. And the stuffed ferret, the turkey’s sworn enemy, making these sounds, will be mistaken by the hen for her own chick. Sound is a cue that allows a mother turkey to quickly identify her chicks.

Advertisers, salespeople, and scammers (compliance professionals) can trick us into using our stereotypes against our own interests; subordinate to your demands, for the benefit of your interests. Popular stereotype “price means quality”: People usually believe that expensive products are of higher quality. Often this stereotype turns out to be true, but the seller can use it against us.

Example. Gift shops sell unpopular gems, raising their prices rather than lowering them.

It is necessary to protect yourself from manipulators who impose erroneous stereotypes.

People feel an urgent need for mutual exchange

The rule of “mutual exchange” - we feel an obligation to give back to other people what they gave to us. This tendency is the basis of any society. It allowed our ancestors to share resources on a mutual basis. We feel psychologically burdened by not returning someone's favor.

As a society, we treat those who do not reciprocate with contempt. We call them beggars or ungrateful individuals and are afraid of being in their place. Experiments have shown that people are so eager to get rid of the burden of debt that they will give back even more than they received.

Example. The researcher bought the subjects a cheap Coca-Cola as an unsolicited favor. Then he asked them to buy lottery tickets from him. Most subjects reciprocated by purchasing tickets for 50 cents each. When the researcher did not buy the subjects a Coca-Cola, the number of tickets purchased was halved. He made people feel a sense of duty by buying them Coca-Cola and prescribed his own method of reciprocity for them.

Members of the Krishna Society successfully used this tactic when they gave flowers to passers-by on the street. Even people annoyed by this often made donations to satisfy their need to reciprocate the flower.

You cannot withhold all pleasantries in order to repel attempts to exploit the reciprocity rule. Instead, look for the fundamental basis of the offers: whether they are a genuine courtesy or an offensive manipulative tactic. And only then reciprocate accordingly.

Refusal-then-retreat is an insidious tactic that leads to mutual concessions and the operation of the principle of contrast

We feel obligated to respond to concessions in negotiations as well.

Example. The Boy Scout first asks you to buy a lottery ticket for five dollars, but then backs down and only asks you to buy a candy bar for one dollar. You'll likely buy a chocolate bar to reciprocate the Boy Scout's "concession," even if you don't need the chocolate. The Scout used a strategy called "refuse-then-retreat" - a powerful tool in achieving mutual concession.

The principle of contrast: two objects are presented to us one after another, the difference between the second and the first increases (a chocolate seems disproportionately cheap after a lottery ticket).

Example. The strategy of refusal-then-retreat led to the collapse of presidential rule. In 1972, President Richard Nixon's re-election seemed imminent, but G. Gordon Liddy managed to convince the Committee to Re-elect the President to give him $250,000 to rob the offices of the Democratic National Committee. He first proposed a one-million-dollar scheme involving kidnapping, theft and "prime girls." After that, a $250,000 scheme involving only burglary didn't seem so bad. The scandal that arose after the capture of the robbers forced Nixon to resign.

When opportunities are limited, we crave them even more.

Scarcity: Opportunities appear more valuable if their availability is limited. This is because people hate missing out on opportunities. This is well known to advertisers.

The study found that when subjects learned that meat was on sale for a limited time, they bought three times more than if there was no time limit. This effect was enhanced when people were told that only a few people knew about the sale. The message caused customers to purchase six times more meat than customers who didn't know about the promotion!

Conditions for exposure to deficiency:

We want more of something if its availability has decreased significantly recently. Revolutions happen when living conditions deteriorate sharply, not when they are consistently bad. Sudden deterioration increases people's desire for something better.
Competition. In auctions, relationships, or real estate transactions, the thought of losing something or losing to a rival turns us from hesitant to overzealous. Real estate agents remind us that several other applicants are also interested in the house/apartment being viewed, regardless of whether this is true.

Consider whether you want this product because of its utility (taste or function) or simply because you want it unreasonably.

Prohibited items and information are considered more desirable

People want what they can't get. When Dade County, Florida, made it illegal to add phosphate to laundry detergents, residents not only began smuggling and stockpiling the product, but began to think phosphate-based detergents were better than before. Parents observe such rebellious behavior in their children: any toy will become much more attractive if the child is strictly forbidden to play with it.

Censorship - prohibited information is considered more valuable than freely available information. Research has shown that when college students were told about the ban on the “Against Coed Dorms” report, they became more favorable towards it without even hearing a word!

In courtrooms: Jurors may be influenced by “forbidden” information. When they know the insurance company will pay the bill, they award large damages to the plaintiffs. And they award even higher damages if the judge specifically told them to ignore the fact that the defendant has insurance. “Forbidden” information seems more meaningful to them and causes them to overreact.

We are obsessed with being consistent in our words and actions.

The desire to be responsible for one’s words even exceeds concern for personal safety. When people on the beach witnessed the staged theft of a radio from a nearby towel, only 20% of beachgoers responded. But if the owner of the towel first asked people to look after his things, 95% of them became real vigilantes, chasing the thief and forcibly taking the radio from him.

Once we promise something in words or actions, we want to be consistent. Public commitment is the most powerful driving force.

Example. Jurors in a court of law will not change their minds after they publicly announce them.

We will change our self-image to match our previous actions.

Example. After the Korean War, Chinese interrogating officers pressured American prisoners to cooperate by asking them for small concessions: writing and signing innocuous statements like “America is not perfect.” When these statements were read in the prison camp, the prisoners' compatriots called them "collaborators." The prisoners also began to consider themselves collaborators, becoming more useful to the Chinese. They adjusted their self-image to match their actions. Commitment in writing is an important element in this process: there was something inescapably powerful about words written and signed.

The foot-in-the-door method has the advantage that even small commitments impact our self-image. It is very popular among salespeople who are closing large deals that force clients to make a small commitment that changes their image.

Choosing to fight for something creates inner change

When a new member is accepted into a group, initiation rites usually involve pain and humiliation. Attempts to suppress such cruel practices are always met with stubborn resistance. These groups know that if people endure challenges to achieve something, they value it more. The effort required forces members to take the group seriously.

Groups such as college fraternities have resisted attempts to turn their initiations into a form of community service. They want candidates to make an internal choice to participate in a humiliating initiation ceremony. This doesn't give them a chance to use the "it was for the good of the community" excuse to outwardly justify their behavior. Such an internal choice is more likely to produce a lasting internal change than a choice due to external pressure.

Compliance professionals induce internal change in us through the trick of underpricing.

Example. A car dealer can offer a car so cheap that we immediately decide to buy it. The dealer knows well that during the test drive we will independently find several other reasons for buying the car, for example, “good mileage”, “nice color”, etc. At the last minute the offer will be withdrawn due to a “bank error”, and the dealer will quote a higher price. As a rule, we buy a car because of internal changes: reasons that we invent to ourselves during a test drive.

When in doubt, we need social proof

The principle of social proof - we often decide what to do by looking at what others are doing. It is used to manipulate us.

Example. Television shows use laughter to make jokes seem funnier. The church sets up collection boxes with a few bills already on the bottom to make it look like everyone is making a donation.

Social proof is especially powerful when there is uncertainty.

Example. A young woman named Kitty Genovese was stabbed to death outside her New York City home in 1964. The shocking thing was that the attack continued for more than half an hour, 38 people watched it, listening to the screams, but no one intervened or even bothered to call the police.

This inaction of the witness was due to two factors:

With many people involved, everyone's sense of personal responsibility diminishes.
The urban environment contains many uncertainties: an abundance of unknown things and unfamiliar people. When people are unsure, they look at what others are doing.

In Genovese's case, people tried to discreetly look out of windows, which made it clear to others that inaction was the right behavior.

If you find yourself in an emergency situation in the middle of a crowd, you need to single out one person and send a clear request for help specifically to him. This way, the person you choose will not feel the need to seek guidance from others and will help.

We often imitate others in our preferences. This is enhanced when the subject of observation is similar to us. Teenagers are highly dependent on the opinions of their peers when choosing clothes. Marketers often use advertisements that survey "ordinary people on the street" who approve of the product. We tend to think that these people are like ourselves, and their approval is an indicator of a good quality product.

The tendency to imitate others can also lead to a grim statistic: After a suicide is widely publicized in the media, the number of people killed in accidents increases sharply over the next week. After reading a suicide story, some people are determined to imitate the victim. For a number of reasons, some decide to make their death random or decide to do it while driving a car or on an airplane. There is an increase in unexplained accidents. These are not the people who are suicidal: studies have shown that every front-page suicide story actually kills 58 people who would otherwise be living.

This is the Werther effect, named after Goethe's novel, which in the 18th century caused a wave of suicides throughout Europe, in imitation of the main character. The effect is enhanced if the person whose suicide was published is similar to the reader of the article. When young people read about another teenager's suicide, they started throwing their cars off bridges and crashing into guardrails. And older people reacted to news of other older people committing suicide.

We are more willing to comply with the demands of those we like, and some people find it easy to please us.

We are more loyal to people we like. Compliance professionals know what reasons make us fall in love with a person:

Physical attractiveness. We tend to consider people we like to be smart, kind and honest. We also tend to vote for more attractive candidates in political elections.
Flattery. We like people who are connected to us, at least indirectly. Sellers often praise us and indicate some kind of connection with us: “What a beautiful tie, blue is also my favorite color.”
Interaction for some common purpose. The good cop/bad cop interrogation method takes advantage of this factor: after the suspect is verbally abused by the bad cop, the understanding good cop defends the suspect as a friend and loved one, thereby encouraging a confession.
The attractiveness of things that we associate with people. The weather forecaster is associated with bad weather. For accurately forecasting bad weather, he may receive death threats. If we hear about something during a delicious dinner, we tend to associate this issue with positive emotions about the dish.

Ask yourself: did you really fall in love with this person or did it happen unexpectedly and abruptly, in a short time. Don't be manipulated.

People easily obey authority and its symbols

We are trained from birth to obey authority. We do it without even thinking. Stanley Milgram discovered that activists could put others in mortal danger simply because they were told to do so by an authority figure.

Example. The nurse who was treating the patient's ear received written instructions from the doctor: “Place the medicine in the right ear” (place in R ear) and began to drop the medicine into the patient's anus. The nurse understood R ear (R [from Right] - right, ear - ear) as Rear (rough backside). Neither she nor the patient wondered how this could help his ear.

Power negates independent thinking.

If there is no reliable evidence of another person's authority, we use simple symbols to evaluate him. Titles are very powerful tools. When faced with someone who looks like the professor, we automatically become more respectful, share his opinion, and even tend to see him as physically superior!

Clothing and attributes are powerful symbols of power.

Is this person really an authority or is he just pretending to be one?
How honest can he be in this situation? Is he looking out for his own interests?

The most important

Are we as easy to manipulate as animals?

Our stereotypical thinking can be used against us.
What mechanisms inside us can be easily manipulated?
People feel an urgent need for mutual exchange.
Refusal-then-retreat is an insidious tactic that leads to mutual concessions and the operation of the principle of contrast.
When opportunities are limited, we crave them even more.
Prohibited items and information are considered more desirable.
We are obsessed with being consistent in our words and actions.
Choosing to fight for something creates inner change.
When in doubt, we need social proof.

What kind of people do we tend to obey?

Observing people similar to us can greatly influence our decisions.
We are more willing to comply with the demands of those we like, and some people find it easy to like us.
People easily obey not only power, but also its symbols.

Robert Cialdini examines the problem of a large flow of information and the ability of the human psyche to respond to certain key phrases.

The "click" principle can be demonstrated by experiment. There was a line at the library's copy machine. A man comes up and asks him to let him through because he is late for a meeting. The result is 97%. Further, the experimenter does not justify his desire in any way. 50 %. For the third time, the experimenter says: “Let me skip the line at the photocopier because I need to make several copies.” The result is 97%.

The person heard the key phrase - “because...”, and he no longer controls the “click”. Very often such methods are used for unworthy purposes.

This book, which has gone through five editions, has all the key features of a modern social psychology textbook. It comprehensively covers approaches to understanding such socio-psychological phenomena as social influence, persuasion, cognition, self-esteem, and examines in detail the phenomena of the social psychology of friendship and love.

The textbook by Robert Cialdini and his co-authors Douglas Kenrick and Steven Neuberg is ideal for a first introduction to social psychology as a science, revealing to the reader the possibilities of social psychological analysis of any situation where people interact with each other.

Social Psychology. Understand others to understand yourself

The textbook covers various theoretical approaches to understanding such socio-psychological phenomena as aggression, social conflict, prosocial behavior, prejudice, stereotypes and discrimination, and all major group phenomena are fully and deeply discussed.

This book will be useful not only for those who study or teach social psychology, but also for thoughtful managers, lawyers, economists, teachers, political scientists - all those who, by the nature of their work, constantly have to deal with people.

Social Psychology. Understand yourself to understand others

The book has all the main characteristics of a modern textbook on social psychology. It highlights various theoretical approaches to understanding such socio-psychological phenomena as social influence, persuasion, cognition and self-esteem, and fully and deeply examines the phenomena of the social psychology of friendship and love.

The textbook by D. Kenrick, S. Neuberg and R. Cialdini is perfect for your first acquaintance with social psychology as a science, revealing to you the possibilities of social-psychological analysis of any situation where people interact with each other.

Psychology of influence

“The Psychology of Influence” is known and recommended as one of the best textbooks on social psychology, conflictology, and management by all Western, and now domestic, psychologists. Robert Cialdini's book went through four editions in the United States, its circulation exceeded one and a half million copies. This work, captivating the reader with its easy style and effective presentation of the material, is nevertheless a serious work in which the mechanisms of motivation, assimilation of information and decision-making are analyzed at the most modern scientific level.

Psychology of consent

He observed the work of the best of the best until he came to an unexpected conclusion. Negotiation geniuses intuitively use techniques to achieve the desired result even before the persuasion process begins. Just imagine, you get your manager’s consent to increase your salary as soon as you enter his office. Or you enlist the support of a partner in a risky project without even starting to persuade him. Or you get the client to be willing to pay the highest possible price, having just started negotiations. This is not a joke or a marketing ploy. This is a revolutionary technique developed by a brilliant scientist and an equally brilliant practitioner.

Psychology of persuasion. Important little things that guarantee success

It doesn’t matter who you need to convince and of what: a boss to support an idea, a colleague to help with a project, a client to make a purchase, a spouse to take out the trash, a child to complete homework without whims... The question is different. What specifically could you change about your approach to make your persuasion much more effective?

The old methods no longer work. In an era of crisis of trust and excess information, new technologies of persuasion are needed. People increasingly make decisions based not on the information itself, but on the context in which that information is presented.

Robert Cialdini

Psychology of influence

Preface

Commentary on the fourth edition of the book: science and practice

Several years have passed since the publication of the first edition of The Psychology of Influence. During this period of time, something happened that, in my opinion, deserves coverage in the new publication. First, we now know much more about the mechanisms of influence than before. Psychologists have made great progress in studying the science of persuasion, the causes of compliance and change, and I have tried to reflect this progress in the pages of the book. Not only have I revised and updated the material, but I have also used feedback from people who have read previous versions of The Psychology of Influence.

Many of those who read “The Psychology of Influence” realized that at certain moments they encountered instruments of influence and in letters told me about incidents that happened to them. As a result, “Reader Reports” appear at the end of each chapter, illustrating how easily we fall prey to “compliance professionals” in our daily lives.

I am deeply grateful to the many people who helped me produce this book. Several of my colleagues read the draft manuscript and made valuable comments, thereby improving the final version. They are Gus Levine, Doug Kenrick, Art Beaman and Mark Zanna. In addition, the first draft was read by several members of my family and my friends - Richard and Gloria Cialdini, Bobetta Gorden and Ted Hall. These people not only supported me emotionally, but also gave my book the objective assessment that I simply needed.

Quite a few people have made specific, useful suggestions regarding the content of individual chapters or several chapters. These are Todd Anderson, Sandy Braver, Katherine Chambers, Judy Cialdini, Nancy Eisenberg, Larry Atkin, Joan Gersten, Jeff Goldstein, Betsy Hance, Valerie Hance, Joe Hepworth, Holly Hunt, Anne Inskip, Barry Leshowitz, Darwin Linder, Debbie Littler, John Mowen, Igor Pavlov, Janis Posner, Trish Puryear, Marilyn Rohl, John Reich, Peter Reingen, Diana Rabl, Phyllis Sensenig, Roman and Henry Wellman.

A number of people contributed to the publication of the book. John Staley was the first professional publisher to recognize the project's high potential. Jim Sherman, Al Goethels, John Keating, Dan Wagner, Dalmas Taylor, Wendy Wood, and David Watson provided early positive reviews and inspired both the author and the editors. My editors at Allyn and Bacon, Caroline Merrill and Jodi Devine, were unfailingly pleasant, helpful, and understanding. In addition, I want to thank the readers who sent reviews of the third edition of the book: Emory Griffith, Wheaton College; Robert Levin, California, Fresno; Jeffrey Levin and Louis Mora, University of Georgia; David Miller and Richard Rogers, Daytona Beach Community College. This publication benefits greatly from comments by Assaad Azzi, Yale University; Roberta M. Brady, University of Arkansas; Brian M. Cohen, University of Texas at San Antonio; Christiana B. Grendell, University of Florida; Katherine Goodwin, University of Alaska; Robert G. Lowder, Bradley University; James W. Michael Jr., Virginia Tech and University of Virginia; Eugene P. Sheehan, University of Northern Colorado; Jefferson E. Singer, Connecticut College; Sandy W. Smith, University of Michigan. I am also grateful to the highly accomplished editor Laura McKenna.

Finally, during the entire preparation of the book for publication, no one gave me such tangible help as Bobette Gorden, who supported me with every word.

I also want to thank the people who, either directly or through the instructors of the courses they took, contributed to the Readers' Reports in this publication. They are Pat Bobbs, Annie Carto, William Cooper, Alicia Friedman, William Graziano, Mark Hastings, Endayehu Candy, Danuta Lubnicka, James Michaels, Stephen Moisey, Paul R. Nail, Alan J. Resnick, Daryl Retzlaff, Jeffrey Rosenberger, Dan Swift and Carla Vasks.

I would like to invite readers of this new version to submit their reports for publication in the next edition. They can be sent to me at the following address: Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-1104, or [email protected]. Finally, if you are interested in learning more about the psychology of influence, visit influenceatwork.com.

Robert B. Cialdini

Introduction

Now I can freely admit this. All my life I've been the one who gets fooled. I have always been a favorite target for street vendors, fundraisers, and dealers of one kind or another. Not all of these people had dishonest motives. For example, representatives of some charitable agencies had the best intentions. But it does not matter. Depressingly often I found myself with unnecessary magazine subscriptions or tickets to a sanitation worker's ball. This long-term status as a simpleton probably explains my interest in studying compliance. What factors make one person say “yes” to another? And what techniques can be used to achieve such flexibility? I was interested in why a request made in a certain way is often ignored, while a similar request, formulated in a slightly different way, succeeds.

So, in my role as an experimental social psychologist, I began studying the psychology of compliance. The research initially took the form of a series of experiments, conducted largely in my laboratory with the participation of college students. I wanted to find out what psychological principles underlie compliance with a request or demand. Recently, psychologists have learned a lot about these principles - what they are and how they work. I have characterized such principles as instruments of influence. In subsequent chapters I will talk about the most important of them.

After some time, I began to understand that although experimental work is necessary, it alone is not enough. “Naked” experiments did not allow me to judge the significance of the principles I was studying in the world outside the institute building. It became clear that if I was going to deeply understand the psychology of compliance, I needed to expand my scope of research. I should take a closer look at the "compliance professionals" - the people who constantly pressured me into giving in to them. They know what works and what doesn't; the law of survival of the fittest confirms this. Such people try at all costs to force others to give in; their success in life depends on this. Those who don't know how to get people to say yes usually fail; those who know prosper.