Resistance to Interpersonal Requests: A Summary and Critique of Recent Research

Precise Persuasion: Investigating Incentive Appeals for the Promotion of Antibiotic Stewardship with Message-induced Transitions

“…The patterns of behavior shown by the three problematic audience segments-Persuaders, Stockers, and Dissenters-are consistent with earlier studies showing that targets often respond to influence requests with more than one type of noncompliance strategy (e.g., Burroughs et al, 1989; for a review, see Ifert, 2012) and that there are complex patterns of compliance and noncompliance (Bochner & Insko, 1966;Dillard, 1990;Marwell & Schmitt, 1967;Pratkanis, 2007;Smith & Fink, 2010). Furthermore, the classes we used align with three broad categories of noncompliance (counterpersuasion, incompetent performance, and support seeking from like-minded individuals).…”

“…Audience segmentation leads to the creation of effective messages when it is paired with theory (Fishbein & Cappella, 2006). The consistent emergence of four audience segments with distinct patterns of antibiotic stewardship behaviors highlight that targets often respond to influence requests with more than one type of noncompliance strategy (e.g., Burroughs et al, 1989; for a review, see Ifert, 2012) and, sometimes, complex patterns of compliance and noncompliance (Bochner & Insko, 1966;Dillard, 1990;Knowles & Riner, 2007;Marwell & Schmitt, 1967;Smith & Fink, 2010). We selected the obstacle hypothesis to guide the design of messages to reach the non compliant.…”

“…The distinguishing behavior of the Persuader class is that it has similarities with counterpersuasion, which refers to attempts to convince agents to change their recommendation to conform with the target's position (Aronson, Turner, & Carlsmith, 1963;Bochner & Insko, 1966;Festinger & Aronson, 1960;Smith & Fink, 2010). The distinguishing behavior of the Stockers aligns with incompetent performance, which refers to doing some of what the agent requested (Ifert, 2012;McLaughlin et al, 1980), such as starting a prescribed treatment but stopping it early, storing unused antibiotics to self-treat future disease, or sharing unused drugs with others.…”

“…These forms of noncompliance, refusal, or resistance to interpersonal influence vary in important ways considered by the obstacle hypothesis (e.g., Ifert, 2012). Counterpersuasion is a direct, explicit, overt form of refusal, whereas incompetent performance is indirect and less obvious (Ifert, 2012). Both incentives, negative and positive, were less successful with counterpersuasion.…”

Identity Implications of Relationship (Re)Definition Goals

“…8 target person might be willing to perform an action that the target otherwise would not have performed, for instance, a speaker places some degree of constraint on the target's autonomy (negative face). Because these implicit assumptions are contestable (e.g., the target of a request may not see any need for action or feel willing/obligated to act), performing speech acts also may lead to questions or disagreements that can threaten face (Ifert, 2000;Jacobs & Jackson, 1983).…”