Effects on the Persuader of Employing a Coercive Influence Technique

We tested the notion that persuaders employing a coercive technique would think less favorably of their complying target and enjoy the process less, than would persuaders using a rational influence technique. Introductory psychology students were randomly assigned to the six cells of a 3 (Influence Technique: Foot-in-the-Door, Door-in-the-Face, or Rational) x 2 (Told the Technique Would be Automatically Effective, or Depend on Skill) factorial design. Subjects used one of the three techniques in convincing a confederate to attend a campus meeting dealing with the undergraduate foreign-language requirement and were led to believe that the confederate complied with the influence attempt. Subjects in the two coercive technique groups (foot-in-the door and door-in-the-face) did not differ between each other on any dependent variable but were more negative in their evaluation of the target's ability to think and enjoyed the influence process less, compared to subjects employing the rational technique. The results are discussed in terms of the metaphoric effects of power.