Application of compliance techniques to direct-mail requests for charitable donations

Psychology and Marketing

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 157-170

  Weyant, James M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030304141     PISSN: 07426046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199602)13:2<157::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-E     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Beaman, A. L., Cole, C.M., Preston, M., Klentz, B., & Steblay, N. M. (1983). Fifteen years of foot-in-the-door research: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 181-196.
2. Brockner, J., Guzzi, B., Kane, J., Levine, E., & Shaplen, K. (1984). Organizational fundraising: Further evidence on the effect of legitimizing small donations. Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 611-614.
3. Brownstein, R. J., II, & Katzev, R. D. (1985). The relative effectiveness of three compliance techniques in eliciteng donations to a cultural organization. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15, 564-574.
4. Cann, A., Sherman, S. J., & Elkes, R. (1975). Effects of initial request size and the timing of a second request on compliance: The foot in the door and the door in the face. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 774-782.
5. Cantril, J. G. (1991). Inducing health care voluntarism through sequential requests: Perception of effort and novelty. Health Communication, 3, 59-74.
6. Carducci, B. J., & Deuser, P. S. (1984). The foot-in-the-donor technique: Initial request and organ donation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 5, 78-81.
7. Carducci, B. J., Deuser, P. S., Bauer, A., Large, M., & Ramaekers, M. (1989). An application of the foot in the door technique to organ donation. Journal of Business and Pshychology, 4, 245-249.
8. Cialdini, R. B., (1988). Influence: Science and practice (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman/Little, Brown.
9. Cialdini, R. B., & Ascani, K. (1976). Test of a concession procedure for inducing verbal, behavioral, and further compliance with a request to give blood. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 295-300.
10. Cialdini, R. B., Cacioppo, J. T., Basset, R., & Miller, J. A. (1978). Low-ball procedure for producing compliance: Commitment then cost. Journal of Personality and Social Phychology, 36, 463-476.
11. Cialdini, R. B., & Schroeder, D. A. (1976). Increasing compliance by legitimizing paltry contributions: When even a penny helps. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 599-604.
12. Cialdini, R. B., Vincent, J. E., Lewis, S. K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., & Darby, B. L. (1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 206-215.
13. DeJong, W., & Oopik, A. J. (1992). Effect of legitimizing small contributions and labeling potential donors as "helpers" on responses to a direct mail solicitation for charity. Psychological Reports, 71, 923-928.
14. Dillard, J. P., Hunter, J. E., & Burgoon, M. (1984). Sequential-request persuasive strategies: A meta-analysis of foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face. Human Communication Research, 10, 461-488.
15. Doob, A. N., & McLaughlin, D. S. (1989). Ask and you shall be given: Request size and donations to a good cause. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 1049-1056.
16. Fern, E. F., Monroe, K. B., & Avila, R. A. (1986). Effectiveness of multiple request strategies: A synthesis of research results. Journal of Marketing Research, 23, 144-152.
17. Foss, R. D., & Dempsey, C. B. (1979). Blood donation and the foot-in-the-door technique: A limiting case. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 580-590.
18. Fraser, C., Hite, R. E., & Sauer, P. L. (1988). Increasing contributions in solicitation campaigns: The use of large and small anchorpoints. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 284-287.
19. Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 195-203.
20. Goldman, M. (1985). Compliance employing a combined foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face procedure. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 126, 111-116.
21. Hornik, J., Zaig, T., & Shadmon, D. (1991). Reducing refusals in telephone surveys on sensitive topics. Journal of Advertising Research, 31, 49-56.
22. Joule, R. V. (1987). Tobacco deprivation: The foot-in-the-door technique versus the low-ball technique. European Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 361-365.
23. Pliner, P., Hart, H., Kohl, J., & Saari, D. (1974). Compliance without pressure: Some further data on the foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 17-22.
24. Reeves, R. A., Macolini, R. M., & Martin, R. C. (1987). Legitimizing paltry contributions: On-the-spot vs. mail-in requests. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 731-738.
25. Reingen, P. H. (1978). On inducing compliance with requests. Journal of Consumer Research, 5, 96-102.
26. Reingen, P. H. (1982). Test of a list procedure for inducing compliance with a request to donate money. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 110-118.
27. Schwarzwald, J., Bizman, A., & Raz, M. (1983). The foot-in-the-door paradigm: Effects of second request size on donation probability and donor generosity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 443-450.
28. Schwarzwald, J., Raz, M., & Zvibel, M. (1979). The applicability of the door-in-the-face technique when established behavioral customs exist. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 9, 576-586.
29. Tybout A. M. (1978). Relative effectiveness of three behavioral influence strategies as supplements to persuasion in a marketing context. Journal of Marketing Research, 15, 229-242.
30. Wang, T., Brownstein, R., & Katzev, R. (1989). Promoting charitable behavior 38, 165-183.
31. Weyant, J. M. (1984). Applying social psychology to induce charitable donations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 441-447.
32. Weyant, J. M., & Smith, S. L. (1987). Getting more by asking for less: The effects of request size on donations to charity. Journal of Applied Social Phychology, 17, 392-400.