TY - JOUR
T1 - Prosocialness and sequential request compliance techniques
T2 - Limits to the foot-in-the door and the door-in-the-face?
AU - Dillard, James Price
AU - Hale, Jerold L.
PY - 1992/12/1
Y1 - 1992/12/1
N2 - Although there is agreement that the prosocialness of the target request moderates the effectiveness of the foot-in-the-door and the door-in-the-face, there is controversy regarding the form of that effect. In this paper we report a test of competing explanations of the influence of prosocialness on the effects of the two sequential request techniques. The results indicated that prosocialness did influence compliance, but that it had no demonstrable impact on the operation of either of the sequential request techniques. Effects were also obtained for both of the sequential request techniques. Discussion focuses on reconciliation of these findings with previous summaries of the literature.
AB - Although there is agreement that the prosocialness of the target request moderates the effectiveness of the foot-in-the-door and the door-in-the-face, there is controversy regarding the form of that effect. In this paper we report a test of competing explanations of the influence of prosocialness on the effects of the two sequential request techniques. The results indicated that prosocialness did influence compliance, but that it had no demonstrable impact on the operation of either of the sequential request techniques. Effects were also obtained for both of the sequential request techniques. Discussion focuses on reconciliation of these findings with previous summaries of the literature.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0002223205&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0002223205&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10510979209368374
DO - 10.1080/10510979209368374
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0002223205
SN - 1051-0974
VL - 43
SP - 220
EP - 232
JO - Communication Studies
JF - Communication Studies
IS - 4
ER -