Chapter 5 – Liking: The Friendly Thief
Cialdini opens the chapter stating, “we most prefer to say yes to the requests of someone we know and like.” He says there are several factors that increase likeability.
First, as superficial as it might seem, physical attractiveness can be advantageous when trying to influence. Cialdini says that this factor has influenced elections, hiring, and the judicial process. Researchers have found that we unknowingly “assign to good-looking individuals such favorable traits as talent, kindness, honesty, and intelligence.”
Next, as you might expect, compliments have been proven to increase likeability. What’s more, while certainly frowned upon, even when compliments were given that were not true, there was evidence of increased likeability.
Cialdini also asserts that “we like things that are familiar to us.” A study shows that repeated contact with someone increases familiarity, and therefore liking. Cialdini shares a study that tried to build on these findings by increasing the frequency of interactions between two races in schools to see if relationships would improve. The researchers introduced activities “in which cooperation was necessary for mutual benefit.” Cooperation occurred increasing familiarity, and again, liking.
Next, likeability can be affected by associations. This can be seen when popular cultural events such as the Olympic Games occur. Thought of in high regard, companies quickly associate with the Olympics becoming “official” sponsors. Unfortunately, however, negative associations can also affect likeability. Cialdini shares incidents in which TV weather reporters were blamed for bad weather.
Finally, to guard against deceitful practitioners, Cialdini advises becoming aware of times when the feeling of “liking” is unwarranted to the situation. Cialdini gives the example of a potential car buyer becoming fond of a compliance professional in a short amount of time. After some reflection, the buyer might make note of the beverages that were provided, the compliments on taste that were given, and the jokes that were told.
A few related quotes:
- The information that someone fancies us can be a bewitchingly effective device for producing return liking and willing compliance.
- An innocent association with either bad things or good things will influence how people feel about us.
- The important thing for the advertiser is to establish the connection; it doesn’t have to be a logical one, just a positive one.
Chapter 6 – Authority: Directed Deference
The chapter starts with an experiment revealing the great extent to which humans obey authority. A “researcher,” an actor in a white lab coat, ordered study participants, to shock a “learner,” an actor attached to a shocking device, when test questions were answered incorrectly. Two-thirds of the subjects shocked the learner, at unexpectedly high levels, when the researcher gave the order. Cialdini partially attributes this to the fact that we are trained from birth to obey authority. He also says, “information from a recognized authority can provide us a valuable shortcut for deciding how to act.”
Like the rest of the principles of influence, however, this principle can be used to exploit the unsuspecting. One way this is done is by adopting a “title.” An experiment was conducted in which a “doctor,” again, an actor, called a hospital stating that they were a doctor. The “doctor” prescribed a medication dosage level that was clearly inappropriate for a patient. The results found “that 95 percent of regular staff nurses complied unhesitatingly” due to the influence of authority.
Clothing can also fool the unwary. In one experiment, researchers studied the effects of a man jaywalking in a tailored business suit, or “attire that has traditionally bespoken authority status in our culture.” Compared to when he wore a work shirt and trousers, “three and a half times as many people swept into traffic behind the suited jaywalker.”
Lastly, Cialdini gives two questions to ask to avoid those who try to use this principle maliciously. First, ask if the “authority is truly an expert?” Cialdini says this question forces focus on “the authority’s credentials and the relevance of those credentials to the topic at hand.” Second, ask whether the expert would be expected to tell the truth in the situation. Cialdini warns, “authorities, even the best informed, may not present their information honestly” in an attempt for an ill-gotten gain.
Quotes from the chapter:
- Although such mindless obedience leads us to appropriate action in the great majority of cases, there will be conspicuous exceptions—because we are reacting rather than thinking.
- The important lesson of this story is that in many situations where a legitimate authority has spoken, what would otherwise make sense is irrelevant.
Andrew T. Daniel 