Understanding Obstacles Preventing Compliance

Abstract

Although the obstacle hypothesis has proven useful in understanding communication choices during request sequences, its utility is limited by the lack of explication of the obstacle construct. This article examines the types of obstacles that may be perceived and dimensions that differentiate them. Results suggest that six types of obstacles—possession, imposition, inappropriateness, postpone, no incentive, and recalcitrance—are perceived by individuals in request interactions. These obstacles appear to be distinguishable in the degree to which they reflect unwillingness to comply, inability to comply, and personal characteristics of the requester. The discussion section explores the implications of this conceptualization on understanding request interactions.

Relationship Characteristics Associated with the Experience of Hurt in Romantic Relationships: A Test of the Relational Turbulence Model

“…The relational turbulence model also implies that interference from partners may prompt people to engage in more direct communication to resolve disruptions. When individuals perceive barriers to their personal goals, they tend to respond with increased motivation to achieve desired outcomes (e.g., Ifert & Roloff, 1996, 1998; Paulson & Roloff, 1997); thus, individuals who experience interference from a partner may communicate more directly to attain their goals. With regard to hurt, we argued previously that partner interference may be associated with more intense hurt, more perceived intentionality, and more damage to the relationship, which all may call for more direct communication to resolve the issue and repair the relationship.…”

The development of children's perceptions of obstacles in compliance‐gaining interactions

“…Specifically, we have argued that future investigations should examine the link between the obstacles children perceive and the compliance gaining messages they produce. We have also argued that subsequent studies should consider whether children perceive obstacles according to the dimensions identified by Ifert and RolofF (1998) and whether children selectively withhold and report reasons for noncompliance in a manner similar to the adults studied by Weiner et al (1991). Each of these endeavors would contribute to our knowledge of how children reason about situations requiring strategic communication.…”

“…According to the persuasive message coding scheme developed by Delia et al (1979), the most sophisticated strategies are those that make explicit recognition of the target's perspective and show evidence of adaptation to that perspective. Although Ifert and Roloff (1998) do not offer a hierarchical analysis of obstacle types, all of the obstacles they identify also focus on particular reasons that the target may be unwilling or unable to comply with a request. In one of the few studies to examine obstacle perceptions in young children, Delia et al (1979) asked children to indicate reasons why a hypothetical request might have been refused.…”

The Academic Advisor's Playbook: Seeking Compliance from College Student-Athletes

“…Student-athletes may enact resistance in other ways. They might rebuff; that is, the target (studentathlete) provides no explanation to the influencer (advisor) for not wanting to perform the desired task (Ifert & Roloff, 1998;Roloff & Jordan, 1991). For example, a student-athlete may admit to being unwilling to faithfully attend class but give no reason for this choice.…”

“…For example, a student-athlete may admit to being unwilling to faithfully attend class but give no reason for this choice. Student-athletes also may enact resistance by putting up an obstacle; that is, the target offers a reason for noncompliance to a request by the influence agent (Ifert & Roloff, 1998;Roloff & Jordan. 1991).…”