The psychological reality of the door-in-the-face it's helping, not bargaining

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 5-25

  Tusing, Kyle James ^a   Dillard, James Price ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034144883     PISSN: 0261927X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0261927X00019001001     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Abrahams, M. F., & Bell, R. A. (1994). Encouraging charitable contributions: An examination of three models of door-in-the-face compliance. Communication Research, 21, 131-153.
2. Austin, J. T., & Vancouver, J. B. (1996). Goal constructs in psychology: Structure, process, and content. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 338-375.
3. Bell, R. A., Abrahams, M. F., Clark, C. L., & Schlatter, C. (1996). The door-in-the-face compliance strategy: An individual difference analysis of two models in an AIDS fundraising context. Communication Quarterly, 44, 107-124.
4. Bentler, P. M., & Wu, E.J.C. (1993). EQS/Windows: User's guide. Los Angeles: BMDP Statistical Software.
5. Benton, A. A., Kelley, H. H., & Liebling, B. (1972). Effects of extremity of offers and concession rate on the outcomes of bargaining. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 73-83.
6. Berkowitz, L., & Daniels, L. R. (1963). Responsibility and dependency. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 429-436.
7. Bradsher, K. (1998, June 12). 6,000 G. M. workers at Michigan plant join auto strike. New York Times, pp. A1, C2.
8. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9. Bruning, J. L., & Kintz, B. L. (1977). Computational handbook of statistics (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
10. Cann, A., Sherman, S. J., & Elkes, R. (1975). Effects of initial request size and timing of a second request on compliance: The foot in the door and door in the face. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 774-782.
11. Cantrill, J. G. (1991). Inducing health care voluntarism through sequential requests: Perceptions of effort and novelty. Health Communication, 3, 59-74.
12. Cantrill, J. G., & Seibold, D. R. (1986). The perceptual contrast explanation of sequential request strategy effectiveness. Human Communication Research, 13, 253-267.
13. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-252). New York: Guilford.
14. Chertkoff, J. M., & Conley, M. (1967). Opening offer and frequency of concession as bargaining strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7, 185-193.
15. Cialdini, R. B. (1984). Influence. New York: William Morrow.
16. Cialdini, R. B. (1987). Compliance principles of compliance professionals: Psychologists of necessity. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 165-184). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. 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.
18. 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.
19. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20. Dillard, J. P., & Hale, J. L. (1992). Prosocialness and sequential request compliance techniques: Limits to the foot-in-the-door and the door-in-the-face? Communication Studies, 43, 220-232.
21. Dillard, J. P., Hunter, J. E., & Burgoon, M. (1984). Sequential-request persuasive strategies: Meta-analysis of foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face. Human Communication Research, 10, 461-488.
22. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
23. Eisenberg, N., Cialdini, R. B., McCreath, H., & Shell, R. (1987). Consistency-based compliance: When and why do children become vulnerable? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1174-1181.
24. 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.
25. Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 195-202.
26. Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-178.
27. Greene, J. O. (1997). Message production: Advances in communication theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28. Hollins, M., Faldowski, R., Rao, S., & Young, F. (1993). Perceptual dimensions of tactile surface texture: A multidimensional scaling analysis. Perception & Psychophysics, 54, 697-705.
29. Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling (pp. 158-176). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30. Johnston, D. D. (1994). The art and science of persuasion. Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark.
31. Komorita, S. S., & Brenner, A. R. (1968). Bargaining and concession making under bilateral monopoly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 15-20.
32. Kugler, K., & Jones, W. H. (1992). On conceptualizing and assessing guilt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 318-327.
33. Martens, B. K., Kelly, S. Q., & Diskin, M. T. (1996). The effects of two sequential-request strategies on teachers' acceptability and use of a classroom intervention. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 7, 211-221.
34. Miller, R. L. (1974). Facilitating compliance by manipulating the nature of the comparison: Relative cost vs. reciprocal concession. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1, 160-162.
35. Miller, R. L., Seligman, C., Clark, N. T., & Bush, M. (1976). Perceptual contrast versus reciprocal concession as mediators of induced compliance. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 8, 401-409.
36. Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231-259.
37. O'Keefe, D. J., & Figge, M. (1997). A guilt-based explanation of the door-in-the-face influence strategy. Human Communication Research, 24, 64-81.
38. O'Keefe, D. J., & Hale, S. L. (1998). The door-in-the-face influence strategy: A random-effects meta-analytic review. In M. E. Roloff (Ed.), Communication yearbook 21 (pp. 1-33). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Patch, M. E. (1986). The role of source legitimacy in sequential request strategies of compliance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 199-205.
40. Pendleton, M. G., & Batson, C. D. (1979). Self-presentation and the door-in-the-face technique for inducing compliance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 77-81.
41. Perloff, R. M. (1993). The dynamics of persuasion. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42. Pratkanis, A., & Aronson, E. (1992). Age of propaganda. New York: Freeman.
43. Reeves, R. A., Baker, G. A., Boyd, J. G., & Cialdini, R. B. (1991). The door-in-the-face technique: Reciprocal concessions vs. self-presentational explanations. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 545-558.
44. Schwartz, S. H. (1973). Normative explanations of helping behaviors: A critique, proposal, and empirical test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9, 349-364.
45. Stahelski, A., & Patch, M. E. (1993). The effect of the compliance strategy choice upon perception of power. Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 693-698.
46. Stiff, J. B. (1994). Persuasive communication. New York: Guilford.
47. Tybout, A., Sternthal, B., & Calder, B. J. (1983). Information availability as a determinant of multiple request effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 280-290.
48. Weyant, J. M. (1996). Application of compliance techniques to direct-mail requests for charitable donation. Psychology and Marketing, 13, 157-170.
49. Williams, K. D., & Williams, K. B. (1989). Impact of source strength on two compliance techniques. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 149-159.
50. Wilson, T. D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1978). The accuracy of verbal reports about the effects of stimuli on evaluations and behavior. Social Psychology, 41, 118-131.