1994
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb00610.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hey Buddy, Can You Spare Seventeen Cents? Mindful Persuasion and the Pique Technique1

Abstract: According to the pique technique, a target is more likely to comply if mindless refusal is disrupted by a strange or unusual request. We demonstrated the use of this technique in two experiments. In Experiment 1, passersby on a local municipal wharf were approached by a confederate panhandler who made either one of two strange requests: “Can you spare 17¢ (or 37¢)?” or made either one of two typical requests “Can you spare a quarter (or any change)?” Subjects in the strange conditions were almost 60% more like… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
65
0
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
3
65
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Both the DTR and the Pique technique make use of what Kardes (2002) called "the confusion principle" (p. 260) and both aim at disrupting a salient refusal script on the part of the target consumer, with the Pique Technique being employed in panhandling situations and the DTR in unsolicited (door-to-door) selling situations. Findings in support of this notion indicated that employing the technique stimulated the target consumer to ask more questions and to report more thoughts about the reasons for the request (Santos et al, 1994). This type of disruption is postulated to be rather blunt to evoke a shift from mindless refusal to mindful attention (see also Brown & Ryan, 2003;Langer 1989Langer ,1992Pollock, Smith, Knowles, & Bruce, 1998).…”
Section: Theory and Research On Related Compliance Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Both the DTR and the Pique technique make use of what Kardes (2002) called "the confusion principle" (p. 260) and both aim at disrupting a salient refusal script on the part of the target consumer, with the Pique Technique being employed in panhandling situations and the DTR in unsolicited (door-to-door) selling situations. Findings in support of this notion indicated that employing the technique stimulated the target consumer to ask more questions and to report more thoughts about the reasons for the request (Santos et al, 1994). This type of disruption is postulated to be rather blunt to evoke a shift from mindless refusal to mindful attention (see also Brown & Ryan, 2003;Langer 1989Langer ,1992Pollock, Smith, Knowles, & Bruce, 1998).…”
Section: Theory and Research On Related Compliance Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…The DTR procedure can be considered a variation of the so-called Pique Technique (Santos, Leve & Pratkanis, 1994). In the Pique Technique, a request is made in an unusual way, which is assumed to foster compliance.…”
Section: Theory and Research On Related Compliance Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other techniques involve adding some words to increase the pressure to comply, such as the freedom-evoking technique (Guéguen et al, 2013), the foot-in-the-mouth (Howard, 1990), or the legitimizing paltry contribution technique (Cialdini & Schroeder, 1976). Yet others "pique" the curiosity by using an unusual request (Santos, Leve, & Pratkanis, 1994), or use the solicitor's nonverbal behaviors such as tactile contact (Kleinke, 1977) or gaze (Kleinke, 1980).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Perceived similarity bypasses the normal process of relationship building, at least for short-term associations. Santos, Leve, and Pratkanis (1994) note, however, that patterns of behavior that do not fit into previous heuristic models are likely to attract directed attention, suggesting that superficial similarity will only generate liking so long as the target is unsuspecting of the motives of the other. Considering this evidence, we propose that information available online via SNSs afford opportunities to capitalize on information asymmetric conditions between conversation partners such that beneficiaries of vertical asymmetries should be better equipped to get their communication partners to like them.…”
Section: Interpersonal Attraction and Compliancementioning
confidence: 85%