Running Head: BOOK REVIEW – CIALDINI AND LARSON 1

Click, Whirr

Book Review on Influence by R. B. Cialdini

Using Concepts from Persuasion: Reception and Responsibility by C. U. Larson

By: Elizabeth Horgan

Leanne Pupchek -- COMM 612

October 29, 2009

 Running Head: BOOK REVIEW – CIALDINI AND LARSON 2

Black signs against a white background. Groupings of symbols in APA format.

Click, whirr. Get out the red pen, gather your persuasion theories, carve out time --

there is another book review to grade. In many instances automatic responses provide

us with valuable information and help us respond quickly, efficiently and appropriately.

However, there is a dark side -- these same shortcuts can also be used by others as

weapons of influence, according to Cialdini in his book Influence: Science and Practice.

We can be persuaded into saying ‘yes’, into acting against our reasoned will; this is

done subtly, with knowledge of the way we think and understanding of trigger features

that can prompt compliance.

Shortcuts are efficient ways of processing information, they help us function in

our highly complex 24/7 global world where inputs and choices can be overwhelming.

Careful analysis of each input would make living impossible. Instead we prioritize, as

described in the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) of processing information using

the central or the peripheral information processing routes (Larson, 2010). The central

route uses logos and thoughtful, analytic effort. The peripheral route is a faster

processing avenue, using cues and shortcuts to make decisions. It is this peripheral

route and the resulting automatic responses that influence Cialdini in his study of

compliance and persuasion.

Cialdini outlines six main categories of persuasion: the principles of

reciprocation, consistency, social proof, liking, authority and scarcity. These principles

describe ways of thinking and acting. In each area, opportunities for influence are

addressed. He shows how compliance can be gained in ways that can be manipulated
 Running Head: BOOK REVIEW – CIALDINI AND LARSON 3

by those who understand how we think, and suggests strategies for countering

malevolent influence.

One of the principles outlined in the book is the rule of reciprocation.

Reciprocation is a deep-seeded construct that we believe to be a correct way of

behaving in a social world. It co-opts us to feel obligated to repay favors bestowed,

gifts given (unwelcome or not), and debts owed (real or imagined). The power in this

rule is that it can be used to make us do things for the giver that we would not do

without having first accepted an initial gift (Cialdini, p. 23). Why? Our heuristic

processing takes over (Larson p. 95). We donate to the Hare Krishna sect because they

give us a flower, we innocently accept Amway’s ‘free’ samples and find ourselves

strangely obligated, resulting in the purchase of large quantities of cleaning products.

The burden of being in debt, of needing to reciprocate, creates in us an almost

overwhelming urge to repay. Festinger’s cognitive dissonance theory (Larson p. 199)

can be used to explain reciprocation and the tension that occurs with unresolved

imbalance. To deal with the feelings of dissonance, we have a need to act in order to

reduce or eliminate the tension through indirect decision making. I liken it to Miss

Clavel in the Madeline children’s’ books, she would invariably turn on the light and

state that “something is not right”. It is a sense that there is something wrong if we

have not yet reciprocated, so we therefore strive to eliminate imbalance through

almost automatic action (the peripheral processing route at work).

Persuasion can also be brought to bear from our “desire to be consistent with

what we have already done” (Cialdini, p. 52). This is the psychological premise behind

the weapon of influence known as commitment and consistency. Strong social

pressures work on individuals to be consistent. Once an opinion is formed, held, and a

 Running Head: BOOK REVIEW – CIALDINI AND LARSON 4

stand is taken, a commitment is made and the forces of peripheral thinking

strengthen. The example of low-balling cited in Cialdini’s book focused on families

who were interested in energy conservation. Interest alone, it seemed, did little to

change behaviors as those environmentally concerned families did not change their

power usage until a personalized inducement was added in. Families who worked to

lower their energy consumption would have their names put in the newspaper. This

small inducement prompted significant energy savings, savings which continued even

when the publicity element was revoked and removed unfulfilled. Once the

commitment was made, and actions were taken and repeated, the behavior was able to

continue without external supports (Larson p. 86-89). In fact, the participants had

changed how they viewed themselves and, in order to be consistent with the change,

ended up putting more effort into energy conservation. The commitment remained in

spite of the elimination of the engendering condition. Behavior became a function of

the new attitude (Larson, p. 195), it occurred over time and depended in part on self-

persuasion (Larson, p. 170). Logic had nothing to do with this process.

Use of social evidence, of determining how to act based on what a lot of other

people are doing, is an added weapon of persuasive influence. The principle of social

proof provides us with a shortcut, cues for ways to act. This can be helpful, or it can

be problematic. The example Cialdini used of a beating victim unaided on a crowded

city street is a case in point. A number of people witnessed the altercation. It was

confusing. By looking to the actions of others, where no one seemed outwardly

concerned and where no one stepped up to intervene at the scene, the idea of social

proof offered the response: do not intervene, do not get involved. The “proof” was

to go along with everyone else and do nothing. It is just these social cues and

shortcuts that, during times of uncertainty and stress, play into the automatic use of
 Running Head: BOOK REVIEW – CIALDINI AND LARSON 5

the peripheral or heuristic processing route (Larson, p. 95). To counter this type of a

situation, the victim needs to become a pragmatic persuader. By using concrete words

and a focus on the central processing route of the ELM (Larson, p.155), language can

undo the uncertainty of the situation and may very well, in this case, save the victim.

“Hey, man in the red vest. Help. Call the Police, I’m hurt.”

Other examples of influence cited in the book focus around liking. We say ‘yes’

to requests from people we know and like. Why? It boils down to mental shortcuts.

With the overwhelming amount of information processing required in daily life, we

have had to create adaptive thinking strategies to save time and to allow us to

function. Over time we have seen, and been socialized to, the tendency of gaining

good results from the rule of thumb that people we know and like give us good

information. Factors that cause people to like one another are: attractiveness,

similarity, compliments, familiarity, cooperation, and association. In each of these

areas, we are susceptible to influence. For instance, we are more likely to respond

favorably to people who dress like we do. Con artists who understand this mental

shortcut can use our disinclination to use the systematic or central processing routes

of thinking in this area for their ends (Larson, p. 59). Persuaders can also use

semantics, the use of language and meaning, to discover and cultivate common

ground (Larson, p. 125). Once a bond is created, and feelings of liking occur, it seems

that people become more susceptible to Cialdini’s weapons of influence. An example

of this is a Tupperware party hosted by a friend, or friendly acquaintance. By its

nature, the group consists of people with significant similarities. Triggers that activate

buying in this case include factors of liking as well as the rules of reciprocity,

commitment, and social proof.

 Running Head: BOOK REVIEW – CIALDINI AND LARSON 6

Persuasion can center around the power of authority. The Milgram Learner/

Teacher studies conducted in the 1970s illustrate this influence. Ordinary people find

it very difficult to disobey orders from authority figures, in this case acting in ways

many never thought they were capable of. The need for authority can be motivating

and persuasive (Larson, p. 172). Packard’s compelling needs (for emotional security)

and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (the need to belong, the need for safety and security),

can be used to highlight the advantages of authority. We are socially conditioned to

respect and follow rules and authorities. However, it doesn’t always work to our

advantage. Cialdini shows the dangers of blind obedience in the Milgram studies; they

are a powerful caution for us to break the automatic click,whirr response, challenge the

shortcut and use of peripheral processing, and actively question authority by engaging

our systematic or central information processing mode.

Cialdini also described the scarcity principle as deriving much of its power from

automatic thinking. Things are more valuable when there are less of them. Diamonds

are a good example. The supply of diamonds has been subject to controls for years.

DeBeers masterfully capitalized on the precept that things that are difficult to attain are

more valuable. Prices were and are able to be set higher and, when combined with

brilliant marketing supports which focus on creating an emotional connection to

diamonds, continue the value/scarcity proposition. Yet thoughtful jewelry purchasers

can evaluate the messages and make decisions without a knee-jerk nod to the scarcity

principle, especially now that low cost cubic zirconium impressively mimics the look of

a diamond!

In order to counter manipulative influences, defenses are needed. Defense

against the dark (persuasive) arts has to be active. The necessary use of shortcuts can
 Running Head: BOOK REVIEW – CIALDINI AND LARSON 7

make us vulnerable to unscrupulous actors. As Larson notes, we need to be vigilant

and critical of not only what we choose to reject but what we choose to embrace as we

go through our complex and busy lives (p. 415). Rank suggests questioning specific

techniques used in messaging (Larson, p. 403-404). Cialdini specifically suggests

learning to become aware of stomach signs and listening to feelings in your heart of

hearts. Both authors recommend questioning authority and the ‘truths’ of the experts,

stressing the importance of gaining awareness in order to examine the true merits of

an action or decision. Recognition of our biases, along with the cultivation of

defensive strategies, can help break the negative impacts of automatic responses.

As Cialdini proves with his study-filled book, automatic thought processes can

impact beliefs and actions in ways that are surprising and subtle. Societal norms,

psychological tendencies, and demands from a complex and stress-filled world all

convene in pressuring individuals to take shortcuts when functioning in daily life.

These shortcuts work well and are effective most of the time. However, they open us

up to negative influences of compliance actors who can use the principles of influence

as weapons against us and who can benefit at our expense. Defensive knowledge and

awareness are the mechanisms of protection. It is an art to skillfully navigate the world

of click, whirr and to balance logic, ethos and pathos.

References:

Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Influence: Science and practice. Boston: Pearson.

 Running Head: BOOK REVIEW – CIALDINI AND LARSON 8

Larson, C. U. (2010). Persuasion: Reception and responsibility. Boston: Wadsworth,

Cengage Learning.