Effects on the Persuader of Employing a Coercive Influence Technique

O’Neal, Edgar C.; Kipnis, David; Craig, Kellina M.

doi:10.1207/s15324834basp1503_1

Cited by 11 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Participants using rational arguments described themselves as intelligent and friendly, participants using authoritative influence described themselves as dominant and unfriendly, and participants using door-in-the-face described themselves as submissive. As predicted from an earlier study (O'Neal, Kipnis, & Craig, 1994), the use of the three influence techniques also caused systematic changes in participants' evaluations of the target. Because the use of certain behavior techniques (e.g., controlling, deceptive) can cause users to devalue themselves and others, it is recommended that ethical safeguards governing the use of these techniques should be considered.For more than a half a century, applied social psychology has been concerned with the development of technologies that change people's attitudes and behavior.…”

supporting

confidence: 64%

“…A study that experimentally examined these changes among users of persuasion techniques was reported by O'Neal et al (1994). This study examined the extent to which users' attitudes toward the person they were influencing would be changed by three techniques: door-in-the-face (DITF), foot-in-the-door (FITD), and rational arguments.…”

Section: Strong Tactics and Behavior Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on the assumption that we evaluate favorably persons seen to be in control of their own behavior, O'Neal et al (1994) expected that users would evaluate more favorably targets who complied when rational arguments were used than when either the DITF technique or the FITD technique was used.…”

Section: Strong Tactics and Behavior Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Changes in Self‐Perceptions as a Result of Successfully Persuading Others

Rind¹,

Kipnis²

1999

Journal of Social Issues

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Can we change other people without changing ourselves as well? To test this question, participants used one of three techniques-door-in-the-face, authoritative influence, and rational arguments-to convince a confederate to attend a campus meeting that favored an issue opposed by the confederate, but supported by the subject. Following the confederate's compliance, participants evaluated their perceptions of their performance and the performance of the confederate. Participants using rational arguments described themselves as intelligent and friendly, participants using authoritative influence described themselves as dominant and unfriendly, and participants using door-in-the-face described themselves as submissive. As predicted from an earlier study (O'Neal, Kipnis, & Craig, 1994), the use of the three influence techniques also caused systematic changes in participants' evaluations of the target. Because the use of certain behavior techniques (e.g., controlling, deceptive) can cause users to devalue themselves and others, it is recommended that ethical safeguards governing the use of these techniques should be considered.For more than a half a century, applied social psychology has been concerned with the development of technologies that change people's attitudes and behavior. By technology, we mean the use of systematic procedures to produce intended effects. Not surprisingly, behavior technologies and social power are closely related. This is because behavior technologies are designed to make people do things they would ordinarily not do. Stated in Dahl's (1957) description of social power, behavior technologies give new direction to people's behavior.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 64%

Section: Strong Tactics and Behavior Technologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Changes in Self‐Perceptions as a Result of Successfully Persuading Others

Rind¹,

Kipnis²

1999

Journal of Social Issues

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even a successful behavior change intervention, one that effectively alters the target behavior, can negatively alter the user's perceptions in two ways: contempt for those people he is influencing and self-contempt. In the former case, the more an intervention restricts the recipient's choice of how to respond to an issue, the more the user of that technique will have a negative perception of the recipient (O'Neal, Kipnis, & Craig, 1994;Rind & Kipnis, 1999). When the intervention does not constrain freedom to think and decide, the user of the technique will have a more positive evaluation of the recipient.…”

Section: Outcome-based Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

New Ways to Promote Proenvironmental Behavior: Expanding and Evaluating Motives for Environmentally Responsible Behavior

Young

2000

Journal of Social Issues

409

225

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contends that while striving to promote environmentally responsible behavior, we have focused attention too narrowly on just two classes of motives. There is a need to expand the range of motives available to practitioners and to provide a framework within which motives can be evaluated for both their immediate and long-term effectiveness. The article then examines a strategy for promoting environmentally responsible behavior that has significant potential. This strategy is based on a particular form of motivation called intrinsic satisfaction. Nine studies are reviewed that have outlined the structure of intrinsic satisfaction. A key theme discussed is the human inclination for competence. This fundamental human concern is shown to have both a general form and a resource-specific version.Although the search for motives effective at promoting environmentally responsible behavior (ERB) is being enthusiastically pursued, the work so far has been somewhat confined. The vast majority of attention has been given to only two motivations: providing material incentives and disincentives sufficient to make the behavior worth attending to and focusing on the altruistic reasons for engaging in the behavior. There has been relatively little exploration of other, potentially more useful alternatives.Early attention was given to the use of incentives and disincentives. Scott Geller and his colleagues explored the effectiveness of incentives and disincentives in promoting ERB and established that such behavior can be motivated by the manipulation of material reward, whether token or real (Geller, 1987(Geller, , 1992 Geller, 509

show abstract

“…These biases also have been examined outside the laboratory (Folger & Skarlicki, 1998;O'Neal, Kipnis, & Craig, 1994).…”

Section: Models Of Power Usementioning

confidence: 99%

The Balance of Power: Interpersonal Consequences of Differential Power and Expectancies

Georgesen

Harris

2000

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cognitive and behavioral effects of perceived power and expected partner competence were examined in a task-oriented dyadic interaction. Specifically, the authors manipulated the effects of power and expectancy on social information processing during and subsequent to a dyadic problem-solving interaction. In addition, dispositional power orientation was measured. Results indicated that perceiver power led to self-enhancement and derogation of the target and both perceiver and target awareness of perceiver power moderated the effects of interpersonal expectancies. Furthermore, there are important differences between situational power and dispositional dominance orientation. These results advance current models of power and suggest the pervasiveness of power effects in our interactions with others.

show abstract

Effects on the Persuader of Employing a Coercive Influence Technique

Cited by 11 publications

References 6 publications

Changes in Self‐Perceptions as a Result of Successfully Persuading Others

Changes in Self‐Perceptions as a Result of Successfully Persuading Others

New Ways to Promote Proenvironmental Behavior: Expanding and Evaluating Motives for Environmentally Responsible Behavior

The Balance of Power: Interpersonal Consequences of Differential Power and Expectancies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About