What are the three compliance techniques?

In social psychology, "compliance" refers to an individual's acquiescence in response to a request from a peer. It is generally distinguished from obedience (behavior influenced by authority figures) and conformity (behavior intended to match that of a social majority).

Compliance is considered a social phenomenon, meaning that the words, actions, or mere presence of other people often plays a role in someone's decision whether or not to comply with a given request. The request may be explicit (directly stated) or implicit (subtly implied); the target may or may not recognize that he or she is being urged to act in a particular way. 

Compliance affects everyday behavior, especially in social interactions. Social psychologists view compliance as a means of social influence used to reach goals or attain social or personal gains. In studying compliance, social psychologists aim to examine overt and subtle social influences and their relationship to compliance. Individuals can be coaxed into compliance in a number of ways, which we will discuss next.

Factors that influence compliance include the following:

• Group strength: The more important the group is to an individual, the more likely the individual is to comply with social influence. For instance, an individual is more likely to comply with the requests of her sorority than her biology classmates. 
• Immediacy: The proximity of the group makes an individual more likely to comply with group pressures. Pressure to comply is strongest when the group is closer to the individual and made of up people the individual cares about. For example, compliance with parents' wishes is more likely if they live in the same city than it is if they live in another state or country. 
• Number: Compliance increases as the number of people in a group increases. Importantly, the influence of adding people starts to decrease as the group gets larger. For example, adding one person to a large group (from 60 to 61) is less influential than adding one person to a small group (from three to four).
• Similarity: Perceived shared characteristics cause an individual to be more likely to comply with a request, particularly when the shared feature is perceived as unplanned and rare (such as a shared birthday).

In addition to these factors, the following techniques have been proven to effectively induce compliance from another party.

Foot-in-the-Door Technique

In using the foot-in-the-door technique, the subject is asked to perform a small request, and after agreeing, a larger request is made. Because the subject complied with the initial request or requests, he or she is more likely to feel obligated to fulfill additional favors. For example, Timmy asks his mom for permission to go over to John's house for an hour. She says yes, and later he asks if he can stay the night. 

Door-in-the-Face Technique

This technique begins with an initial large request that the subject is not expected to comply with. The large request is then followed by a second, more reasonable, request. For instance, Jane asks her parents to pay for her vacation to Australia. They flat-out refuse, because it is extremely expensive. She then says, "Well, if you won't pay for me to go to Australia, will you at least pay for me to go to New York?" Her parents are more likely to comply with the more reasonable request, after having rejected the initial, extreme request. The same request made in isolation, however (just asking for a trip to New York), would not have been as effective. 

Low-Ball Technique

This technique is frequently employed by car salesmen. Low-balling gains compliance by offering the subject something at a low initial cost. The cost may be monetary, time related, or anything else that requires something from the individual. After the subject agrees to the initial cost, the requester increases the cost at the last moment. The subject is more likely to comply with this change in cost since he or she feels like an agreement has already occurred.

Low-balling is a tactic frequently used by salesmen. They will initially quote a deceptively low offer and raise the price dramatically after an informal agreement has taken place but before a contract is signed.

Ingratiation Technique

This technique involves gaining someone's personal approval so they will be more likely to agree with a request. Ingratiation can include flattery, opinion conformity, and self-presentation (presenting one's own attributes in a manner that appeals to the target). For example, before Anna goes to ask for time off from her manager, Anthony, she does a little research and discovers that he enjoys golfing. When she sees Anthony next time, she starts out talking about her golfing trip last weekend, and later in the conversation she requests time off. Since Anna has now ingratiated herself with Anthony, he is more likely to comply with her request. 

Norm-of-Reciprocity Technique

This is based on the social norm that people will return a favor when one is granted to them. Compliance is more likely to occur when the requester has previously complied with one of the target's requests.

Page 2

Conformity is the most common and pervasive form of social influence. It is informally defined as the tendency to act or think like members of a group. In psychology, conformity is defined as the act of matching attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors to group norms. While conformity is often viewed as a negative characteristic in American culture, it is very common. While high levels of conformity can be detrimental, a certain amount of conformity is necessary and normal, and even essential for a community to function. It is generally distinguished from obedience (behavior influenced by authority figures) and compliance (behavior influenced by peers).

Conformity may result from either subtle, unconscious influences or direct and overt social pressure. It does not require the physical presence of others to occur—that is, knowledge of public opinion may cause an individual to conform to societal norms even when alone. There are two major motivators to conformity: normative influence and informational influence. Normative influence occurs when an individual conforms in order to gain social acceptance and avoid social rejection. For instance, men's and women's views of what the ideal body image is have changed over time. Both men and women will conform to current norms in order to be accepted by society and avoid social rejection. 

Informational influence occurs when individuals seek out members of their own group to obtain and accept accurate information about reality. For instance, if Susan lands a really prestigious, high-paying job, she is more likely to be offered similarly high-paying jobs in the future because potential employers will be influenced by their peers' previous decisions about her. The opposite effect is true as well: if Susan has been unemployed for a long time, employers may assume it is because others have not wanted to hire her. They will, therefore, try harder to find flaws in her and her application. 

A number of factors are known to increase the likelihood of conformity within a group. Some of these are as follows:

• Group size—larger groups are more likely to conform to similar behaviors and thoughts than smaller ones.
• Unanimity—individuals are more likely to conform to group decisions when the rest of the group's response is unanimous.
• Cohesion—groups that possess bonds linking them to one another and to the group as a whole tend to display more conformity than groups that do not have those bonds.
• Status—individuals are more likely to conform with high-status groups.
• Culture—cultures that are collectivist exhibit a higher degree of conformity than individualistic cultures.
• Gender—women are more likely to conform than men in situations involving surveillance, but less likely when there is no surveillance. Societal norms establish gender differences that affect the ways in which men and women conform to social influence.
• Age—younger individuals are more likely to conform than older individuals, perhaps due to lack of experience and status.
• Importance of stimuli—individuals may conform less frequently when the task is considered important. This was suggested by a study where participants were told that their responses would be used in the design of aircraft safety signals, and conformity decreased.
• Minority influence—minority factions within larger groups tend to have influence on overall group decisions. This influence is primarily informational and depends on consistent adherence to a position, the degree of defection from the majority, and the status and self-confidence of the minority members.

Asch

Solomon Asch's conformity experiments are one of the best-known illustrations of conformity. His initial experiment in 1951 was set up as follows. The research participant was told he was participating in a simple "perceptual" task. The participant would enter a room and sit at a table with several other people. These people were confederates, or individuals who were posing as other participants but were really working for the researchers. The participant and confederates would be shown a series of cards that had a reference line and another card that had three comparison lines. Over the course of several trials, subjects were required to select the comparison line that corresponded in length to the reference line. The participant and confederates were instructed to provide their answers out loud, and the confederates were told to sometimes unanimously provide a correct answer and sometimes an incorrect answer. When Asch had the confederates all choose the same obviously incorrect answer, participants also chose the wrong line 37% of the time. In a control group with no pressure to conform, participants had an error rate of less 1%.

The image shown is an example from Solomon Asch's landmark experiment in conformity (1951). An individual was asked to state which line, A, B, or C, matched the first line. If the other members of the group gave an obviously incorrect response, the participant was more likely to also give an obviously incorrect response (A or B).

Asch repeated this experiment with different experimental variables and identified several factors that influence conformity. Presence of a true partner, who was another real participant and gave the correct response, decreased levels of conformity. Removing this partner halfway through the study caused increased levels of conformity after their departure. Group size also influenced levels of conformity such that smaller groups resulted in less conformity than larger groups. Public responses, those that were spoken in the presence of the confederates, were associated with higher levels of conformity than private, written responses.

Sherif

Muzafer Sherif was interested in knowing how many people would change their opinions to bring them in line with the opinion of a group. In his experiment (1936), participants were placed in a dark room and asked to stare at a small dot of light 15 feet away. They were then asked to estimate the amount it moved; however, there was no real movement. Perceived motion was caused by the visual illusion known as the autokinetic effect. On the first day, each person perceived different amounts of movement, as they participated in the experiment individually. From the second through the fourth day of the study, estimates were agreed upon by the group. Because there was no actual movement, the number that the group agreed on was a direct result of group conformity. Sherif suggested this was a reflection of how social norms develop in larger society. 

Page 3

A major area in the study of people's relations to each other is interpersonal attraction. This refers to all of the forces that lead people to like each other, establish relationships, and in some cases, fall in love. Several general principles of attraction have been discovered by social psychologists. For example, physical proximity increases the likelihood of attraction, whereas long distances make relationships difficult to form and maintain. Even very small differences in distance—such as down the block compared to next door—can make a significant difference in friendship patterns. To be clear, just being near someone does not ensure attraction: there has to be a positive association to begin with. For instance, let's say you are attracted to someone who plays for your school's soccer team, who you see only from a distance during the occasional game, and equally attracted to someone who you have a class with every other day. You are more likely to end up being more attracted to the person in your class, even if the initial attraction to both individuals was the same. The physical proximity increases the already-existing physical attraction. 

Familiarity, or "mere exposure," also increases attraction, influencing people even if the familiarity is not consciously noticed. For example, if two individuals meet in New York City and realize they both come from the same city in California, they are more likely to be attracted to one another. The familiarity increases comfort, which in turn increases the probability of attraction and love. 

One of the most important factors in interpersonal attraction is similarity: the more similar two people are in attitudes, background, and other traits, the more probable it is that they will like each other. Contrary to popular belief, opposites do not usually attract. Physical attractiveness is an important element in romantic relationships, particularly in the early stages, which are characterized by high levels of passion. Later on, similarity and other compatibility factors become more important.

Sternberg's Components of Love

Psychologist Robert Sternberg views love as a triangle whose three sides consist of passion, intimacy, and commitment. When two people share all three, they are said to be in a state of consummate love; this condition is relatively rare and difficult to maintain for a long period of time. Love can be best described in reference to a relationship between two or more people, and is more evident in relationships that contain a mutual understanding, mutual support, and enjoyment of each other's company. 

According to Sternberg, love consists of three components: passion (infatuation), commitment (companionship), and intimacy (liking). Having all three of these components is referred to as consummate love.

Passionate versus Companionate Love

Passionate love is an emotional love that is mostly expressed in a physical manner; it is a love that is shared between people who are intensely enamored with each other. Passionate love is both exciting and intense, and can be defined as a state of intense longing for union with another.

Companionate love, on the other hand, is best defined as passionate love that has settled to a warm enduring love between partners in a relationship; in Sternberg's terms, it is comprised of intimacy and commitment. Often found in long-term relationships, the companionate love shared between partners consists of fewer ups and downs than does passionate love. It is more stable and involves a deeper respect and affectionate attachment between partners. While the passion may have died down over time, a deep affection and commitment for the other person still remains.

Romantic love derives from a combination of the intimate and passionate components of love. Romantic lovers are bonded both intimately and passionately, but without sustaining commitment. Fatuous love is both passionate and committed, but lacks the stability that intimacy brings to relationships. It is termed fatuous because the commitment is made on the basis of passion alone.

Factors That Affect the Expression of Love

Love assumes many forms, and time and culture both have an effect on the love formed in a relationship. Time factors include the age or developmental stage of the individuals involved in the relationship, the length of the relationship, and/or the age difference between the partners. Culture plays a strong role in love and relationships. An individual's ethnicity, background, religion, or even financial stability can affect the way he or she expresses or receives love in a relationship. From an evolutionary point of view, both passionate and companionate love are adaptive: the former because it increases the likelihood of procreating, and the latter because it increases the likelihood of a long-term relationship and joint-parenting, which probably increases children's chances of survival.

Page 4

Aggression is defined by psychologists as a range of behaviors that are intended to cause harm to others. While those behaviors often stem from anger, they can take root at a range of emotions such as jealousy, fear, or sadness, to name a few. Because the terms "aggression" and "violence" are used interchangeably in daily language, it is important to distinguish aggression from violence. Both aggression and violence can be physical, mental, or verbal. Violence, however, is an extreme expression of anger. Violence is defined as the enactment of aggression; it is an assault with intent to harm or injure others. Not all aggression leads to violence.

Types of Aggression

There are two broad categories of aggression. These include hostile aggression (also known as affective or retaliatory aggression) and instrumental aggression (also referred to as predatory or goal-oriented aggression). Hostile aggression is accompanied by strong emotions, particularly anger, and is associated with impulsive, unplanned, or uncontrolled behavior. Harming the other person is the goal of this kind of aggression. Instrumental aggression, in contrast, is a means to an end. It is often referred to as predatory aggression and is associated with goal-oriented, planned, hidden, or controlled behavior. In instrumental aggression, harming the person is used to obtain some other goal, such as money.

Social and Cultural Factors

Research indicates that there are many factors that impact aggression, including biological factors (such as testosterone) and environmental factors (such as social learning). Empirical cross-cultural research has also found differences in the levels of aggression in different cultures. In one study, American men resorted to physical aggression more readily than Japanese or Spanish men, whereas Japanese men preferred direct verbal conflict more than their American and Spanish counterparts (Andreu et al., 1998). Within American culture, southerners were shown to become more emotionally aroused and to respond more aggressively than northerners when affronted (Bowdle et al., 1996). 

Some attribute the higher rates of physical aggression in the U.S. to the competitive instrumental aggression inherent in capitalism. The idea behind this thought is that capitalism is a system driven by private owners for profit, and getting ahead in this kind of system sometimes requires aggressive tactics. 

A person's beliefs about the social acceptability of aggression (called normative beliefs) are major predictors of their behavior. For example, people's beliefs about the acceptability of violence against Jewish people in Pakistan predicted whether they would join an extremist group. Normative beliefs vary from culture to culture, and may partially explain cultural differences in aggression towards certain groups. 

Some people suggest that aggression can be learned through observation, such as in Albert Bandura's cornerstone experiment, where children imitated the aggressive behavior toward a Bobo doll that was initially displayed by an experimenter. However, these conclusions have come under recent scrutiny. While it is debatable whether aggression can be learned through social learning (Gauntlett, 1995), or whether violence in media leads to higher rates of aggression (Fanti et al., 2009), there is evidence that suggests that repeated exposure to violence may desensitize individuals to later violence (Sparks, Sparks, & Sparks, 2008).

Gender

In psychological research about gender, the general pattern is that women are more likely to internalize, and men are more likely to externalize. This pattern holds true for aggression and violence. Men are more physically aggressive than women, which explains, in part, why they are responsible for the vast majority of murders committed in the United States (Buss, 2005). This sex difference has been noted across ages and cultures. In contrast, women are more likely to be indirectly and non-physically aggressive, such as in displays of relational aggression and social rejection. Whether this sex difference in aggression is a result of nature (such as biology, genetics, or hormonal differences) or nurture (such as gender roles and socialization) continues to be debated.

Hostile aggression involves direct aggression with the intent of physical or emotional harm to another person. It differs from instrumental aggression, which uses aggression as a means to an end.

Page 5

Voluntary behavior with the intent to help other people is known as prosocial behavior. Specifically, altruism is the desire to help others even if the costs outweigh the benefits of helping. For example, news accounts of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York reported that an employee in the first tower helped his coworkers make it to the exit stairwell and then went back into the burning building to help more people. In this case the costs of helping were great, and the hero lost his life in the destruction (Stewart, 2002).

Social-Exchange Theory

The social-exchange theory argues that altruism only exists when the benefits outweigh the costs—i.e., when your behavior helps you even more than it helps the other person. The theory is based on the idea that all human relationships are formed through the use of this subjective cost-benefit analysis and the comparison of alternatives. The potential benefits from a relationship can be tangible, such as food, money, gifts, or housing. They can also be intangible, like support, love, fun, and companionship. According to the social-exchange theory, when the risks or costs of a relationship outweigh the benefits, the relationship is abandoned or ended.  

The Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis

The empathy-altruism hypothesis states that psychological altruism does exist and is evoked by the empathic desire to help someone who is suffering. People with empathic concern help others in distress even when exposure to the situation could be easily avoided, whereas those lacking in empathic concern avoid helping unless it is difficult or impossible to avoid.

Helping the homeless can be an example of empathic altruism or social responsibility—the helper doesn't get anything in return.

Empathic concern is thought to emerge in later developmental years, though research indicates that children as young as two years of age are able to interpret the psychological and affective states of others, and have some access to the knowledge of how to alleviate emotional discomfort. Developmental psychologists suggest that both personal disposition (temperament) and social context contribute to individual differences in empathic concern. 

Reciprocity 

Reciprocity involves an exchange of positive actions between people. It is the give and take in relationships. We contribute to relationships, but we expect to receive benefits as well; we want our relationships to be a two-way street. 

Reciprocal actions are important to social psychology as they can help explain the maintenance of social norms. The human tendency toward reciprocity is so strong that a person will feel obligated to return a favor regardless of whether they like the person who originally gave the favor, and even if they did not want the favor.