David Sobel, MD, MPH, and Sally Mallam
Contributing Writers

As we’ve shown earlier in this section, our ancestors’ brains evolved to select and simplify from the enormous amount of incoming information available in the world, retaining only what was necessary for survival. As a consequence, we developed strategies which get sorted into mental models such as categories, concepts, identities, stereotypes and prototypes. These shortcuts for the most part serve us well. But, under certain circumstances, they can make us vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation.

The social psychologist Robert Cialdini began to notice that he easily complied to sales pitches, fundraisers, and influencers of all sorts. He asked himself “Why?” And why is it that a request stated in a certain way will be rejected, but a request asking for the same favor in a slightly different fashion will be successful? What are the factors that cause one person to say “yes” to another, and which techniques most effectively use these factors to bring about compliance?

Initially Cialdini looked to experimental social psychology research, but later turned to real world observations of “compliance professionals”- salespeople, fundraisers, marketers, recruiters, and others whose livelihood and survival depend on their knowledge of how to get people to comply. He studied sales manuals, worked as a waiter to see how experienced waiters got the biggest tips, and infiltrated sales and fund-raising training programs. His observations in real life complemented the research and experiments he and others conducted to understand this fundamental question: why are humans susceptible to influence and why do we often comply even when it is against our best interests?

His book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, details these findings. He identifies seven principles which expose this vulnerability — reciprocation, liking, social proof, authority, scarcity, commitment and consistency, and unity. Each principle can produce a distinct kind of automatic, mindless compliance from people: a willingness to say “yes” without thinking first. Our behavior is often governed by these automatic behaviors much like a reflex to duck your head and raise your arms when you sense something flying towards your face.

Principles of Influence

Robert Cialdini explains the Seven Principles of Influence.

1. Reciprocation

Deeply embedded in our psyches is the rule that we should repay what another person has done for us – from small favors to enduring indebtedness. Feelings of future obligation were critical in social evolution. It allowed our ancestors to share resources safe in the knowledge that they would be reciprocated later. And, still today, when we give something there is an implicit expectation that this will produce an equivalent and balancing return. Reciprocity forms the essential foundation for all economic cooperation, trade and exchange.

The power of this principle can even be seen in the long-term relations between countries. In 1985 the famine in Ethiopia was horrific and yet in that year the country’s Red Cross sent $5000 to aid earthquake victims in Mexico City. Why on earth would they do this? It turns out that when Italy had invaded Ethiopia in 1935, Mexico sent aid there and this was an opportunity to return the favor.

Unsurprisingly, marketers often use this principle to enhance our sense of obligation and compliance. Here are some examples:

• Receiving a free piece of chocolate in a candy store increases by 42% the likelihood you will purchase something.
• Personalized address labels or greeting cards in an uninvited mailer increases the likelihood you will donate to that charity.
• “Free in-home inspections” lead to more contracts for exterminators or carpet cleaners.
•  7-day “free trial” of a software program or app often leads to a sale- sometimes coupled with an automatic renewal.
• Giving physicians a pen or a free trip to Hawaii results in more prescriptions written for a new drug. The size of a gift often doesn’t matter in triggering a sense of obligation.
• Donations to politicians are often accompanied by an expectation of a good return on investment through favorable actions (or inactions) on legislation.

Sometimes the “gift” can be in the form of a concession. Cialdini recounts an example:

“I was walking along a street when approached by an eleven-or twelve-year-old boy. He introduced himself and said he was selling tickets to the annual Boy Scouts Circus to be held on the upcoming Saturday night. He asked if I wished to buy any tickets at $5 apiece. I declined. “Well,” he said, “if you don’t want to buy any tickets, how about buying some of our chocolate bars? They’re only $1 each.” I bought a couple and, right away, realized that something noteworthy had happened. I knew that to be the case because (a) I do not like chocolate bars, (b) I do like dollars, (c) I was standing there with two of his chocolate bars, and (d) he was walking away with two of my dollars… By starting with an extreme request sure to be rejected, a requester can then profitably retreat to a smaller request (the one desired all along), which is likely to be accepted because it appears to be a concession.”

Many of us make the mistake of keeping ourselves to ourselves until a neighbor does something annoying. This principle suggests that a far better strategy would be to visit your neighbors, introducing yourself, perhaps taking along a small gift. And, as we’ll discuss in more depth later, there’s a growing body of research suggesting that acts of generosity, like other virtues, not only bring greater happiness, but they also help us reach beyond the “me-first” emphasis of normal consciousness towards a much-needed wider, more comprehensive understanding.

To resist undue manipulation by this principle, we can develop the habit of asking ourselves whether the favors we receive are really genuine, or could they be attempts to manipulate.  If we really want to donate money to that organization, or buy that product, then fine; but if we only feel obliged because we were handed a gift, then knowing this principal can free us from inadvertent behavior.

2. Liking

Our ancestors had a problem. How could one quickly assess if another person was trustworthy?  The shorthand solution was to determine whether the other person was familiar and likeable. For the most part this strategy works, and we automatically allow ourselves to be influenced by someone we like, admire, and know. This is why in-home sales programs, like Tupperware parties, are so successful. They are hosted by a friend or neighbor rather than an unknown salesperson. This is also the sales magic of “refer-a-friend” programs… whether for credit card offers, cellphone plans, or selling cleaning products, the sales cascade through an “endless chain of friends.”

But what causes a person to like another person? One or two of the answers may be surprising – and even a little disturbing.

• Physical Attractiveness: We automatically think that good looking people are more talented, kind, honest, and intelligent. This unconscious bias toward physical attractiveness tends to favor some politicians with more votes, some students with higher grades, and some workers with higher salaries.
• Similarity: We survived as a species in large part thanks to our ability to connect and form groups. Even as infants our first priority is to know what group we belong to and who’s in it.  We like people who are like us and find it difficult to empathize with those who are different. Clothing, names, skin color, age, body posture, hobbies, and favorite sports teams are all factors that unconsciously influence our likes and dislikes of others. It’s one of the reasons that people tend to stay inside a bubble of similar like-minded friends.
• Compliments: We like to be liked.The reward regions in our brains light up when someone flatters us, and our responses are automatic. After being complimented by a server in a restaurant (“You made a good choice”) or by a stylist in a hair salon (“Any hairstyle would look good on you”) customers respond with significantly larger tips.
• Contact: Repeated contact with a person, a thing, or a message facilitates familiarity and liking.  Ads on TV or online benefit from repeated exposure. “Fake news” and internet bots can get people to believe even outrageous things, just by repeating them often enough.
• Conditioning and Association: Why do businesses spend billions of dollars to get celebrities to be seen with their products? Professional athletes, for example, are paid to connect themselves to things that can be directly relevant to their roles (sports shoes, tennis racquets, golf balls) or wholly irrelevant (soft drinks, popcorn poppers, wristwatches). The important thing for the advertiser is to establish the connection; it doesn’t have to be a logical one, just a positive one. What does Matthew McConaughey really know about Lincolns after all? Why do politicians compete for celebrity endorsements? The answer lies in the power of association.

3. Social Proof

How do we decide what products to buy, what beliefs to accept, and what behaviors to do? It would be an excessive amount of mental effort and time to thoroughly think through every choice and decision. We take shortcuts by observing what other people, think, and do. This tendency is strongest when the person observed is similar to ourselves – an effect that can be seen in how susceptible teenagers are to the opinions and fashion choices of their peers. For the most part these social proof shortcuts work well, and we make fewer mistakes by going with what others do. However, we can be fooled by partial or fake evidence.

Here are some examples:

• If we see a long line of people outside of a club or restaurant, we tend to think that this must be a great, happening place and we’re more likely to get in line.

• Tips go up if the tip jar already has a few dollar bills in it, presumably placed by other happy clients.

• Collection baskets – whether for Churches or buskers – often have a few bills placed beforehand to make it seem like others have made donations.

• Just adding the phrase “most popular” to menu items increases sales. And companies often advertise products that are “best-selling” or “fastest-growing” for this reason.

• Seeing thousands of positive reviews of a product online indicates a great product even if many or most of the reviews are fake.

• Seeing other people facing forward in an elevator cues us to also face forward.

• If one person on a street corner is looking up at the sky only 5% of passersby will look up. But if 20 people are looking up, then 80% of passersby join in and cast their gaze upward.

• Cults survive and thrive on large numbers of people deciding that because so many others think this is good, it must be good.

• Just reading of events can influence our behavior – Shortly after a news story on teen suicides or mass shootings, there is an uptick in these tragic behaviors.

Since ordinary people comprise the largest potential market for any product, and they value an endorsement by a person who seems similar to themselves, we often see advertisements featuring staged interviews with regular people on the street who endorse a product.

We can learn to avoid falling for these fake situations by making a conscious decision to be alert for counterfeit social proof. 

4. Authority  

Why are people likely to believe a physician or even an actor playing a physician (in white coat and stethoscope, of course) touting a medication on TV?

Why are people more likely to jaywalk across a street following a gentleman in a coat and tie than a person casually dressed?

We’re taught from birth to always obey figures of authority be they our parents, teachers, doctors, police officers or priests. This is usually adaptive since authorities tend to possess high levels of knowledge, wisdom, and power. However, this tendency can be exploited when illegitimate authorities (or even symbols such as titles, clothing, and other trappings of authority) can mislead us.

One notorious example was when renowned psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted a study in the 1960s showing that volunteers would administer potentially lethal electric shocks to others simply because they were told to do so by a teacher with lab coat and clipboard. (note: no harm was caused since the electric shocks in this experiment were fake).

Titles for example are very powerful devices that greatly influence our perception of someone. Students interacting with professors tend to become automatically more respectful and accepting of their opinions, and studies show that they also tend to see these figures of authority as physically taller than they are.

Being aware of the power of authority is already a first line of defense and to quickly and easily recognize if an authority figure should be obeyed, we should ask ourselves two questions: First, is this person really an authority or merely masquerading as one? And second, are their credentials valid for this situation in which we find ourselves? Keep in mind how unreliable our categorization strategies are here. Actors playing villains or unsavory characters on TV can be accosted or admonished in public, their identity mistaken for the character they played.

5. Scarcity

“Hurry last chance.” “Limited supply.”  “One of a kind.”  “Flash sale.” “Deal of the day.” “Click here before the deadline ends.” Phrases such as these get our heartrates up and focus our attention. We are afraid of missing out. As a rule, when something is rare or in short supply, it is viewed as being more valuable. So, we respond to messages like “act now before you lose the opportunity.”

Research shows we are more motivated by the thought of losing something (“loss aversion”) than by the thought of gaining something of equal value. It is common to see online booking sites flash “only 3 seats or rooms available.” One child-portrait photography company urges parents to buy as many poses and copies as they can afford because “stocking limitations force us to burn the unsold pictures of your children within 24 hours.” The thought of those images going up in flames and forever lost ignites our urge to buy more.

The scarcity principle applies not only to products and services but to access to information. Banned or censored information becomes more desirable for many because we hate to lose freedom of access.

Competition for limited resources can heighten the influence of the scarcity principle. Romantic couples might reveal (or invent) competition from other suitors. Real-estate agents might mention to fence-sitting prospects that they have other wealthy bidders making an offer later that day.

A good antidote might be to always consider whether we want the item in question because of its use to us, for example its taste or function, or merely because of an irrational wish to possess it when scarcity is being used against us. Knowing this principle can help us recognize that the answer will often be the latter.

6. Commitment and Consistency

Most people desire to be consistent with their beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. This principle is reinforced by society and offers a valuable shortcut – we don’t need to process all relevant information prior to making each decision, instead we can navigate through life with less thought and less effort. Once we make a choice or take a stand, having made that commitment even a small one, we are more likely to think and act consistently.

Dr. Phil Zimbardo, founder and president of the Heroic Imagination Project, discusses how engaging commitment by asking for help changes a situation from apathy or indifference to action. The video includes classic footage of the Moriarty experiment in which explicitly asking a stranger to keep an eye on a radio causes them to protect it, when they would not otherwise do so.

One unforgettable instance of this principle that Cialdini notes in his book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion occurred after the Korean War.  Chinese interrogators forced American prisoners of war to cooperate by asking them to make small concessions, starting with writing seemingly mild sentences like “America is not perfect.” However, once the prisoners fulfilled those small demands, they found themselves obliged to submit to other related but more important demands, gradually adjusting themselves to be consistent with what they had done. Cialdini points out that written commitment appeared to be a key element of this process – it seems that the handwritten lines carry a strong attraction that is hard to refuse.

This technique is known as “starting right” – using small commitments to make a big impact. It is very common for sellers to use this technique, starting with small volume orders to win buyer commitment, and then recommending much larger orders.

So we need to be aware that this principle can be exploited by compliance professionals who try to induce people to take an initial position and then swoop in with a larger request consistent with the first. For example, if you sign a petition or answer questions on a survey about keeping your neighborhood beautiful, you are more likely, if asked sometime later, to make a donation to help maintain a neighborhood park or place a sign in your front yard asking for volunteer park rangers.

To maintain our self-concept as consistent, a seemingly “harmless” initial commitment tends to lead us to agree to further congruent commitments.

7. Unity.  “We” is the Shared Me

Cialdini added this seventh principle when he recognized the power of what he calls “unity.” It is related to the liking principle but moves beyond surface-level similarities to tap into shared identities. It describes a situation in which we share with others “some kind of full social identity, to the extent that if we communicate that shared identity they consider us one of them – not like them  – one of them.”

As we’ve already noted, humans strongly want to belong to “we” – groups that stand  apart from others. We divide the world into “we” and “they,” and develop shared identities based on race, ethnicity, nationality, family, as well as political and religious affiliations. Though the boundaries may shift, we tend to agree with, help, trust, and forgive those we consider one of us. So, whether it is sports teams, national identity, or mutual enemies, we are inclined to develop feelings of unity and all too often of enmity towards the out-groups.

We see it in politics, when people lie to defend their party or position, they do so more because of loyalty than ideology. Calling out unethical behavior, fraud, and lying is much more common if the perpetrator is of the “other” political party. We are automatically programmed to defend “one of our own.” As distinguished author Isaac Asimov put it in describing our reactions to competitions we view: “All things being equal, you root for your own sex, your own culture, your own locality . . . and what you want to prove is that you are better than the other person. Whomever you root for represents you; and when he [or she] wins, you win.” The extent to which this principle influences how we view a situation is graphicly illustrated in the Princeton-Dartmouth football game and the Israeli-Palestinian media coverage that we talked about earlier.

So, whether it be in relationships or business negotiations, one is more likely to be successful in persuading others by using the pronouns we, our, and us in conversation. We can refer to  common enemies (“We are all susceptible to misinformation in the media”), relatively minor shared identities (“We’re both basketball fans”), equally felt human emotions (“Everybody in my family, too, was furious at the president’s decision”), and perspective-taking efforts (“Now that I’ve put myself in your position, I can appreciate your situation better”)?

While this principle of influence can be used by marketers and politicians to manipulate us, the unity principle can also be used for good – to bridge differences and address world problems such as age-old international enmities, violent religious clashes, and simmering racial antagonisms.

Pre-Suasion

Cialdini’s concept of pre-suasion involves the process of moving people in our direction to get them to be more willing to give assent to an idea or message that we have before they encounter it.  

One of the biggest barriers that communicators have is getting people to pay attention to their message even though they may have a great one. Where people have their attention distributed across a lot of different candidates, it’s important to do something to focus their attention before we begin our message.  That’s what pre-suasion does, it gives people a channel, or what Cialdini calls “a psychological chute” into which to focus their attention that makes the message more likely to be successful.

One example that Cialdini gives in his book Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade concerns website background images. A furniture store wanting to sell more quality sofas increased their sales when they changed the background image on their website to fluffy clouds, making customers think of comfort.

Changing the background image to one with coins made customers focus on savings, so they bought the less expensive version.

Another example concerns researchers surveying random people in a mall. When asked directly only 29% agreed to answer questions. But when researchers began with a pre-suasive opener such as “do you consider yourself a helpful person?” Most people answered yes, and, as a consequence of this new emphasis, 77% of people agreed to take part in the survey.

Suppose we want somebody to provide some feedback to us about an idea we have. Usually what we do is to ask for their opinion on the topic, but it turns out that’s a mistake – if instead we ask them for their advice on our idea, it brings them together with us in a collaborative state of mind, which leads more favorability toward our idea.

Here are a few more examples of the effects of Pre-Suasion:

• we estimate higher performance from athletes whose jerseys have higher numbers
• listening to a German song made people more likely to buy German products

• the amount of money people were willing to spend on a restaurant went up when the name of the restaurant was Studio97 rather than Studio17.’

• listening to a German song made people more likely to buy German products

If you want someone to try something new, begin by asking them if they consider themselves to be adventurous.

Defending Ourselves from Unwanted Influence and Manipulation

As we’ve suggested there are ways to resist, but in practice they are admittedly quite difficult to consistently apply given the automatic nature of our responses to influence. Here are some defense strategies to keep in mind:

• Be aware of these influence principles: Knowing how they operate can help you recognize when the are being used to manipulate you.
• Buy time: The influence levers operate quickly and automatically. Sometime just waiting and taking time to think through your decisions, options, and consequences can spare you from an unhelpful decision. This is especially true of the scarcity principle which can create a false or misleading sense of urgency, or fear of losing out. Taking your time also gives you the opportunity to explore other sources of information as well as consider if this is something you really wish to purchase.
• Listen to your feelings: Use the feelings of excitement and arousal that you may feel to alert you that you may be under the influence of a compliance situation. Emotional arousal is a powerful influence and tends to cloud thoughtful decision-making. If you feel something is not right – in your gut or your heart – take heed. You may have fallen into an influence trap.
• Seek out alternatives:  Influence principles such as social proof may cause us to overestimate the collective knowledge of a crowd. We might additionally look for other sources of evidence related to the situation – even the negative reviews of products and services. We need to seek objective facts as well as our prior experiences, and our own judgment. We benefit from exposing ourselves to a broader range of information from diverse sources and points of view.
• Be open, but skeptical: When offered “free” gifts, information and/or advice, consider the credibility of the source – their credentials, and motives. We don’t have to reject all offers – some may be genuine and generous. But it’s a good idea to ask ourselves a few questions such as: Is it a sales device designed to sell me something? Is the person truly an authority and how truthful can I expect this expert to be? We need to try to separate our feelings of liking the requester from the request. Then decide based on the prmerits of the deal itself, not the dealer. Understanding the rule of reciprocity allows us to accept offers without obligation. And, if any offer or “fact” seems too good to be true, then it probably is.

For human evolution to advance, deciding when and with whom to cooperate increasingly requires skills to sort out helpful from damaging situations. It is especially important for young people to learn how to defend themselves from misinformation and manipulation. David Sobel has written What’s the Catch: How to Avoid Getting Hooked and Manipulated (2^nd Edition) specifically to help young people develop this awareness.