Better think before agreeing twice. Mere agreement: A similarity-based persuasion mechanism

International Journal of Research in Marketing

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 133-141

  Pandelaere, Mario ^a   Briers, Barbara ^b   Dewitte, Siegfried ^c   Warlop, Luk ^c,d  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b TILBURG UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^d BI NORWEGIAN BUSINESS SCHOOL   (Norway)

Author keywords

Compliance; Helpfulness; Mere agreement; Similarity; Social influence

Indexed keywords

EID: 77953610728     PISSN: 01678116     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.01.003     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Aron A., Aron E.N., Smollan D. Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1992, 63:596-612.
2. Baron R.M., Kenny D.A. The moderator/mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51:1173-1182.
3. Bem D.J. Self-perception theory. Advances in experimental social psychology 1972, Vol. 6:1-62. Academic Press, New York. L. Berkowitz (Ed.).
4. Burger J.M. The foot-in-the-door compliance procedure: A multiple-process analysis and review. Personality and Social Psychology Review 1999, 3:303-325.
5. Burger J.M., Messian N., Patel S., del Prado A., Anderson C. What a coincidence! The effects of incidental similarity on compliance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2004, 30:35-43.
6. Byrne D. Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 1961, 62:713-715.
7. Carducci B.J., Deuser P.S. The foot-in-the donor technique: Initial request and organ donation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 1984, 5:75-81.
8. Cialdini R.B. Influence: Science and practice 2001, Allyn & Bacon, Boston. 4th ed.
9. Cialdini R.B., Goldstein N.J. Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review Psychology 2004, 55:591-621.
10. Cialdini R.B., Trost M.R. Social Influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. The Handbook of Social Psychology 1998, 151-192. McGraw-Hill, New York. D.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fisk, G. Lindsey (Eds.).
11. Cialdini R.B., Trost M.R., Newsom J.T. Preference for consistency: The development of a valid measure and the discovery of surprising behavioral implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1995, 69:318-328.
12. Cornelissen G., Pandelaere M., Dewitte S., Warlop L. Positive cueing: Promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental. International Journal of Research in Marketing 2008, 25:46-55.
13. Dardenne B., Leyens J.P. Confirmation bias as a social skill. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1995, 21:1229-1239.
14. Davis B.P., Knowles E.S. A disrupt-then-reframe technique of social influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1999, 76(2):192-199.
15. Deutsch M., Kotik P. Altruism and bargaining. Contributions to Experimental Economics: Bargaining Behavior 1978, Vol. 7:20-40. Mohr, Tubingen. H. Sauermann (Ed.).
16. Dolinski D., Ciszek M., Godlewski K., Zawadzki M. Fear-then-relief, mindlessness, and cognitive deficits. European Journal of Social Psychology 2002, 32(4):435-447.
17. Dolinski D., Nawrat M., Rudak I. Dialogue involvement as a social influence technique. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2001, 27:1395-1406.
18. Emswiller T., Deaux K., Willits J.E. Similarity, sex, and requests for small favors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1971, 1:284-291.
19. Fennis B.M., Das E.H.H.J., Pruyn A.T.H. "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with nonsense": Extending the impact of the disrupt-then-reframe technique of social influence. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2004, 14(3):280-290.
20. Fennis B.M., Janssen L., Vohs K.D. Acts of benevolence: A limited-resource account of compliance with charitable requests. Journal of Consumer Research 2009, 35:906-924.
21. Freedman J.L., Fraser S.S. Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1966, 4:195-202.
22. Garner R. What's in a name? Persuasion perhaps. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2005, 15:108-116.
23. Gilbert D.T., Jones E.E. Perceiver induced constraint: Interpretations of social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 50:269-280.
24. Gilbert D.T., Malone P.S. The correspondence bias. Psychological Bulletin 1995, 117:21-38.
25. Gopinath M., Nyer P.U. The effect of public commitment on resistance to persuasion: The influence of attitude certainty, issue importance, susceptibility to normative influence, preference for consistency and source proximity. International Journal of Research in Marketing 2009, 26:60-68.
26. Hornik J., Zaig T., Shadmon D. Increasing compliance in costly telephone interviews: A test of four inducement techniques. International Journal of Research in Marketing 1991, 8:147-153.
27. Hovland C.I., Weiss W. The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly 1951, 15:635-650.
28. Howard D.J. The influence of verbal responses to common greetings on compliance behavior: The foot-in-the-mouth effect. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1990, 20:1185-1196.
29. Knowles E.S., Condon C.A. Why people say 'yes': A dual-process theory of acquiescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1999, 77:379-386.
30. Loftus E.F. Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology 1975, 7:560-572.
31. Lord C.G., Scott K.O., Pugh M.A., Desforges D.M. Leakage beliefs and the correspondence bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1997, 23:824-836.
32. Marks G. Thinking one's abilities are unique and one's opinions are common. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1984, 10:203-208.
33. Marks G., Miller N. Ten years of research on the false consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin 1987, 102:72-90.
34. Mathews H.L., Wilson D.T., Monoky J.F. Bargaining behavior in a buyer-seller dyad. Journal of Marketing Research 1972, 9:103-105.
35. McPherson J.M., Smith-Lovin L., Cook J.M. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology 2001, 27:415-444.
36. Miller A.G., Ashton W.A., Mishal M. Beliefs concerning the features of constrained behavior: A basis for the fundamental attribution error. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1990, 59:635-650.
37. Nelson L.D., Norton M.I. From student to superhero: Situational primes shape future helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2004, 41:423-430.
38. Pandelaere M., Dewitte S. Is this a question? Not for long. The statement bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2006, 42:525-531.
39. Park J.H., Schaller M. Does attitude similarity serve as a heuristic for kinship? Evidence of an implicit cognitive association. Evolution and Human Behavior 2005, 26:158-170.
40. Pollock C.L., Smith S., Knowles E., Bruce H. Mindfulness limits compliance with the that's-not-all technique. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1998, 24:1153-1157.
41. Preacher K.J., Rucker D.D., Hayes A.F. Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research 2007, 42:185-227.
42. Reingen P. On inducing compliance with requests. Journal of Consumer Research 1978, 5:96-102.
43. Reingen P.H., Kernan J.B. Compliance with an interview request: A foot-in-the-door, self-perception interpretation. Journal of Marketing Research 1977, 14:365-369.
44. Rosnow R.L., Rosenthal R. Statistical procedures and the justification of knowledge in psychological science. American Psychologist 1989, 44:1276-1284.
45. Ross L., Greene D., House P. The false consensus effect: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1977, 13:279-301.
46. Ruffle B.J. More is better, but fair is fair: Tipping in dictator and ultimatum games. Games and Economic Behavior 1998, 23:247-265.
47. Schlenker R.B., Dlugolecki D.W., Doherty K. The impact of self-presentations on self-appraisals and behavior: The power of public commitment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1994, 20:20-33.
48. Schwarz N. Meta-cognitive experiences in consumer judgment and decision making. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2004, 14:332-348.
49. Spangenberg E.R., Greenwald A.G., Sprott D.E. Will you read this article's abstract? Theories of the question-behavior effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2008, 18:102-106.
50. Tanner R.J., Ferraro R., Chartrand T.L., Bettman J.R., Van Baaren R. Of chameleons and consumption: The impact of mimicry on choice and preferences. Journal of Consumer Research 2008, 34:754-765.
51. Watson D., Clark L.A., Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1988, 54:1063-1070.
52. Williams P., Fitzsimons G.J., Block L.G. When consumers don't recognize 'benign' intention questions as persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research 2004, 31:540-550.
53. Winkielman P., Schwarz N., Fazendeiro T., Reber R. The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgment. The Psychology of Evaluation: Affective Processes in Cognition and Emotion 2003, 189-217. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. J. Musch, K.C. Klauer (Eds.).
54. Woodside A.G., Davenport J.W. The effect of salesman similarity and expertise on consumer purchasing behavior. Journal of Marketing Research 1974, 11:198-202.