1. Sequential Request Strategies
Chapter 10
Sequential Request Strategies
Prepared by Robert Gass & John Seiter
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

2. Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved
Pre-Giving
Favors and gifts create a sense of indebtedness
Regan’s (1971): a confederate, Joe, bought another student a Coke
The student was more amenable to purchasing raffle tickets
Returning favors is culturally universal
Beware of unfair exchanges
example: a male buys a female three drinks in a bar. Does she “owe” him anything in return?
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

3. Pregiving illustrations
Befriending your neighbor
Ned fixes Earl’s sprinkler, then asks to borrow Earl’s lawnmower
Political favors
Campaign contributions buy access to a politician, if not votes
Panhandling tour guides
Panhandlers volunteer directions to tourists, then ask for a tip
Pregiving in sales
A company gives important clients free tickets to a ball game
Doing the dishes as “foreplay”
A husband does the dishes, hoping to put the wife in a good mood
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

4. Why does pregiving work so well?
The liking explanation
The pregiver is perceived as a good, kind person
Best used when the return favor is for a good cause
Physical attractiveness explanation
Do-gooders are perceived to be more attractive
Perceived ulterior motives explanation
Obvious attempts to curry favor are less successful
The gratitude explanation
The pregiver evokes “good vibes”
Best used when the return favor benefits the pregiver
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

5. Why is pregiving so effective?
Norm of reciprocity
Favors create a sense of indebtedness
Impression management: People want to maintain a positive image
Internalized social norm: Repaying favors is seen as the right thing to do
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

6. The “foot in the door” strategy (FITD)
A person who agrees to a small, initial request is more likely to comply with a subsequent larger request
Freedman & Fraser’s (1966) classic study
initial request: housewives were asked to display a small sign in their window that read “Be a safe driver.”
follow-up request: housewives were later asked to display a large billboard that read “Drive Carefully” in the front yard
results: 17% of the “control” housewives complied, compared to 76% of the FITD housewives
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

7. Theoretical explanations for the “FITD”
Bem’s self-perception theory: People make self- attributions based on their own behavior
Gorassini & Olson: Self perception is not the only explanation for the FITD
The requestee may consider whether others would reject the request.
activating relevant attitudes is important (“you are so thoughtful.” “You are so generous.”)
Compliance is lower if a person believes others would be unlikely to comply
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

8. Keys to the FITD strategy
Size of the 1st request
Must be small enough to ensure compliance, but not so small as to appear trivial
Prosocial requests
The strategy works best with prosocial causes
No external incentives
There should be no external inducements such as payment or rewards
Who makes the request
The 1st and 2nd requests need not be made by the same requester
Social labeling
Positive labels help activate relevant attitudes
Who answers the door
People with a high need for consistency are more susceptible
People with high self-concept clarity are more susceptible
Time Delay
A time delay between the 1st and 2nd requests may help activate relevant attitudes
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

9. The “foot in the mouth” (FITM) strategy
Acknowledging that one is in a good mood predisposes a person to be more agreeable
Telemarketers: “How are you today?”
Food servers: “What beautiful weather we’re having!”
Warm-Up act: “Who’s ready to have fun? I can’t hear you. Who is ready to have some FUN?”
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

10. The “door in the face” strategy (DITF)
A person is presented with an initial, large request which she/he is inclined to reject
The person thereby becomes more likely to acquiesce to a second, more reasonable request.
Cialdini & Ascani’s (1976) study:
initial request: college dorm residents were asked to donate one unit of blood every two months for a period of three years
follow-up request: dorm residents were asked to give blood once, the next day
results: compliance for the DITF group was 49%, versus 31% for the control group
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

11. Theoretical explanations for the “DITF”
perceptual contrast phenomenon
The 2nd request seems much more reasonable by comparison
self-presentation explanation
The target doesn’t want to be perceived negatively by others
reciprocal concessions
The target perceives he/she is engaged in a bargaining situation
guilt-based explanation
The target feels guilty for not being helpful
social responsibility position
We comply based on our own, internal standards
Note: at present, it isn’t clear which of these explanations best accounts for the research findings
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

12. Keys to the DITF strategy
Size of the initial request
The 1st request must be large enough to be rejected, but not ludicrous
Prosocial Requests
The strategy works best with prosocial causes
Time Delay
The 2nd request should follow right after the 1st
Who makes the request
The 1st and 2nd requests must be made by the same requester
Size of the follow-up request
The 2nd request must be unambiguously smaller than the 1st
Who answers the door
DITF works best with “exchange- oriented” people
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

13. The “that’s not all” tactic
But wait, there’s more…”
The “that’s not all strategy” sweetens the deal
Free extras add perceived value to an offer
“Order now, and I’ll throw in…”
Often combined with the scarcity principle
“The first 20 callers will also receive…”
Effectiveness is based on reciprocity and contrasting
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

14. Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved
The “lowball” tactic
The low ball technique
Lowballing involves making an offer that sounds too good to be true
There may be outright deception; “There was a mistake in the ad, the wine is $19.99 per bottle, not $1.99”
There may “hidden strings” attached; the advertised price for a cruise doesn’t include tips, shore excursions, alternative dining, onboard activities, internet, etc.
Once the consumer is psychologically committed, it is hard to back out
a credit card has a low interest rate, but only for a few months
fine print in a low airfare ad (“some restrictions may apply”)
car ads that list a low interest “for highly qualified buyers”
Effectiveness is based on
psychological commitment
unfulfilled obligations
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

15. The “bait-and-switch” tactic
Bait & Switch
An offer is made that seems too good to be true
When the consumer tries to buy the low-priced item, the item is no longer available
The consumer is persuaded to purchase a more expensive item instead
The strategy is common in retail sales
“Sorry, we’re out of your size, but…”
“That model is actually a piece of junk. For just a bit more, you can get…”
“Would you like to upgrade that ticket?”
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

16. Low ball vs. bait & switch
The low ball tactic changes the original deal or adds conditions to the existing deal
The consumer is buying the same product or service, but at a much higher price
The low ball operates after the target becomes psychologically committed
The bait & switch involves a completely different deal, an alternative product or course of action
The consumer winds up buying a different product or service at a higher price
The bait lures the target in before she/he is psychologically committed
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

17. The “disrupt-then-reframe” (DTR) strategy
Disrupting and reframing is a diversionary tactic
A quirky statement disrupts cognitive processing
“My soccer team’s candy is $5. That’s only 500 pennies.”
The disruption inhibits counterarguing.
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

18. Legitimizing paltry contributions
This strategy pre-empts potential objections
“Even a penny will help!”
“No donation is too small.”
The strategy induces guilt if the target declines
The strategy produces a large quantity of smaller donations
Donors tend to give more than the minimum, however
This strategy may be less effective for requests to donate time, rather than money
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

19. The “fear-then relief” procedure
The relief that follows a scare can make people more receptive to persuasion
Police interrogations often rely on the “good cop, bad cop” routine
After a brow-beating by the bad cop, the good cop uses ingratiation to put the suspect at ease
The suspect let’s his/her guard down with the good cop
Lola’s car is idling roughly. She takes it to her mechanic. The mechanic looks under the hood and mutters, “uh oh…that’s not good.” Lola experiences a moment of panic. She dreads a huge repair bill. “Wait,” the mechanic says, “it’s just a loose spark-plug wire.” Feeling relieved, she says, “Great!” “However,” the mechanic says, “you need new spark plug wires. These are cracking.” Lola is likely to jump at the chance for a smaller repair.
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

20. The “happiness then disappointment” strategy
An emotional see-saw from good to bad also increases compliance The sudden withdrawal of positive emotion disrupts cognitive processing.
A person thinks she or he has found a $20 bill on the ground. It turns out to be a flier. Following the disappointment, the person is more likely to comply with a request. The shift in emotions temporarily disrupts cognitive processing.
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

21. The “happiness then disappointment” strategy
Nawrat and Dalinski’s (2007) study illustrates this approach
Some students were led to believe they received an “A” on an assignment
The instructor then announced “There’s been a mistake.”
Students were then informed the high grade belonged to a student in another class
The students were then given their correct grade, a “C.”
Students who experienced an emotional see-saw were more likely to volunteer for a school activity, for more hours, than students who weren’t mislead
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved

22. The dump-and-chase strategy
Persistence pays off
A salesperson who counters each objection raised by a customer may wear the customer down
Salesperson: “This model of cordless drill is 20% off today.”
Customer: “I can’t afford it, even at the sale price.”
Salesperson: “No worries, if you apply for a credit account today, you’ll get an extra 15% off.”
Customer: “I don’t need any more credit card debt.”
Salesperson: “I hear you. What if there were a cheaper model that’s also on sale?”
Customer: “Well, maybe. What else have you got?”
Copyright © 2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved