The Psychology of Persuasion
by Robert Cialdini
Read: 2016, Rating: 10/10.
READ THIS BOOK BECAUSE IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE.
My Keep Notes:
Commitment and Consistency
Get them to write it down – commitments such as from vp to get more headcount
Don’t let people commit public ally if you want to influence
Idea: get people to write they are committed to customers
Pin them down, then have them say he commitment instead of pinning them down – even if it doesn’t work, they will feel more guilty
Effort commitment such as Jewish Bar Mitzvah
Or fraternity initiation and pledges
Action: Get people to write down things you want them to do
No must take ownership no any other reason
Use for discipline
Treat only works when you’re there
Low ball into commitment
Once feeling good about it it doesn’t matter
Saving fuel – from small reason externally to true reason internally
Defense to commitment and consistency tricks
In real world, normally, consistency is good – rigid is bad. If no consistency we would have to think of each action – know when consistency would lead to poor choice
Two signals to get defense up:
1. Stomach signs – trapped into complying request
If you feel like sucker – point out absurdity of consistency
Example about entertainment book sale.
2. Hearts of hearts signs
Stomach only when you feel wrong
Heart of hearts deep inside you can’t fool yourself
Ask yourself – Knowing what I know now if I could go back would I make the same choice?
Not just intellectually (with all the “reasons”) but in hearts of hearts. Look for flashes of signs from heart of hearts before tricking yourself
Use it as soon as you feel tricked
Action: respond to mean words in consistency
Action: ask for help before details
Action: get details before committing to help
Consistency – active, public, effort, internally made
Works better in individualistic societies
Principle of Social Proof
When trying to figure out what’s correct, we base our actions on what others seem to correctly do.
Eg. Laugh tracks work – we can see its fake but why it works?
In real world, normally, when others so something – its usually good to do.
Action: Raising children make them watch videos of what they should do
What we prefer to be true will seem to be true
The greater number of people who believe an idea is correct, the more a given individual will perceive the idea to be correct. If no physical evidence, looking for social evidence. When uncertain look for lead of others.
Pluralistic ignorance – since no one is reacting, nothing is probably wrong
More common among strangers – gotta play it cool. Bystander inaction/apathy – More true in city dwellers – more unknowns, random things happening more strangers
If in emergency and you need help – de-victimize yourself – groups don’t help because unsure, not unhelpful.
Enemy is uncertainty. Be clear when asking for help. Use word help – don’t fear embarrassment. State point at an individual and ask for help – ambulance. Give person a role. As precise as possible. Don’t let bystanders dictate scenario.
When we are uncertain – dependency on social proof increases.
Similarity – social proof works more for similar individual, that different
Use actions of others to base our actions, more if similar. Change actions of others using similar peers.
Eg. Convince children go see dentist by showing a video of child at dentist, works best for same aged children
Eg. Teaching kids swimming, show similar examples. “I’m 3, and I see tommy is 3 and can swim”
Eg. Using female examples for females and male testimonials for males
Housewife tell her why a couple bought. Then need consultation with other half. But housewife listen to housewife. Couples listen to other couples.
Social proof of other examples.
After suicide, airplanes fall out of sky at alarming rate. Alarming. Automobile accidents too. Social conditions for suicide cause others.
Auto pilot usually valid and valuable. But can be taken off course. Watch for faked data, inputs.
Eg. Advertisement using “average people” giving testimonial. But biased report
Alarm for bad social proof just like for advertisements
Sting them back – Treat them as aliens from mars pretending to be humans “just like you”
Eastern cultures more susceptible than western culture
Western more individualistic
Eastern more collectivist
Evidence of a crowd. If lots of people do something, fear others are right and we’re wrong.
More powerful when uncertain
More powerful when similar
Recommendations – sensitivity and recognition that others
As a rule say yes to people we know and like
Eg. Tupperware party
3 social proof
Weapons of influence
Party hostess selling – buying from friend who get a cut
Mention of friend is already enough – endless chain method. Keep along for friends to go viral
Difficult to reject friends
Employing compliance strategy
Fair price and someone they liked to buy from
Why they liked him more for fair price
What causes one to like another? Then find out why
Used by compliance professionals
Physical attractiveness – underestimated – automatically halo effects – one trait dominates there. talent, honestly , kindness. Good looking = good
Eg. Justin Trudeau
Voters don’t realize their bias
Eg. Hiring decisions – more important than skills. Pay day too. Get paid more. Body dimensions and bone structure
Handsome men get off easier
Better liked, more persuasive, more intellectual
But why is this true? Seems fair
More likely to like someone like us
Eg. How you dress, age, religion, race, habits
Eg. Add numerous interests to resume so perhaps hiring manager has a similar interest
Holiday greeting cards
Tell them you like them
We are suckers for flattery
Action: Send postcards
Doesn’t matter true or false
Compliment then follow up with compliance
Eg Mirror – we find ourselves more attractive than others
Vote because name seems familiar
Action: Name child a common name
Greater liking = greater influence
More favourable to what we’ve had contact with
School is not melting pot of meeting other groups, kids generally make groups and separate from each other. Repeated contact doesn’t necessarily mean more liking. Only positive interaction increase liking.
Traditional teaching method of calling on speaker, highly competitive. Kids become jealous or resentful.
Action: Think about “But what if put together but some are lazy”
Create view of allies via collaboration
Eg. Collaboration works for camps, business and schools
Compliance professionals – use this trick – convince working towards same goal, same team
“If we work together on this”
Good cop bad cop
Also perceptional contrast – liking – reciprocation
Weather man – connection to news
Principle of Association
Associate with things we are like – eg hanging w bad kids make you guilty by association. Or pretty people advertising
Eg association to Olympics
But does it really work? Apparently
Big stars aligning to politicians
You like stuff when you see it while eating
Ivan Pavlov physiologist – Get animal salvation to bell.
Possible to connect to political slogans to good food
Say Tupperware instead of bingo for positive association
Link to attach with positive, not negative
Why sports riots? Or lavish gifts to ballers? Rationally no sense, just a game.
So attached with his hometown. Through association to home.
All things equal you root for your own race, gender, place. To beat the other side. For your self is at sake. To prove to ourselves and to others.
For others to think of self so highly.
When talking about same team, we own the successful team and distance ourselves from a losing team.
“We are #1!” – closest pronoun connect to success
“They suck” – insulating pronoun separate from teams losers
Rock band groupies
Association principle strive to show off how good you are
Eg. Academy awards
Don’t need to be the star to get the glory. Just need to be associated with the star
Don’t defend liking
Defend the effects
Sensitive to context
Did we like him or her more than normal?
Stronger the force. More ready for defence
Ask yourself: In the last 25 min did I come to like him more than expected?
Identify unwarranted liking
If yes I like this guy particularly well. Mentally isolate the person and the item or purchase
Separate requester and request
Learner vs teacher experiment
Power of authority
Obedience to authority
They didn’t want to do it, but they did
Eg Doctor writing “put it in the R. EAR” – Nurse put it in the REAR instead of Right Ear.
What makes senses is irrelevant. Only follow power figure
Eg advertisers acting as doctors
Authority to goods
Eg name of brand sounding authentic, authority
Eg. Olive oil from Italy
Fake Authority with Title, clothes, trappings
Title is easiest to get
Professor – name makes other people act grammatical, dull, more proper. When hanging out with professors, others get more professor-like.
Authority perception. Each increase in title, individuals seem taller to others
Sometimes size determines status. In combat, larger usually wins.
Fake height to fake power
More tangible but easy fake
Garb of authority is not a guarantee
Pick up paper bag, street clothes vs security guard costume.
Business suit vs work shirt and trousers
Bank examiner scheme – Scammers pretend to be bank, ask individuals to deposit money into bank accounts.
Eg. People don’t honk horns at nicer cars. Honk more frequently at economy cars
Remove surprise of authority
Should want to block influence – usually right such as doctors, bosses, judges
Ask “Is this authority actually an expert?” Confirm status
Eg seeing actors as doctors on tv
Ask “Is this authority trustworthy?” How truthful do we expect this person to be?
Titles clothes and cars
Scarcity – rule of the few
Eg. Restricted access, new stuff, never have another chance
Less is best, lost is worst
Baseball cards, antiques, collectibles, rare flawed items, picking up a call from random number.
Phone calls – With each ring, closer to losing the call, maybe forever
Risk and uncertainty, potential loss is huge in decision making
Eg. Weigh potential losses over potential gains
If moderately interested – tell them it’s sold out . Is there an unsold one? Check the back room? So if I check, will you buy it for sure? Committed. Bring item with contract
Human evolution – need to make sure we get what we need
One time only deals
Typical things difficult to get is better than easy to get
The opposite is things that are better are difficult to get
Starts a soon as Terrible twos – parents see contrasting behaviours. They don’t listen and want what they can’t have. Want toys that are harder to get – limitation to freedoms
Girls more about psychological barriers, boys physical
Testing patience of parents they learn where they have control and where they have no control
Another age is teenage years
Emerge age of learning control
If parents double down, that’s even worse
Romeo Juliet effect
Parental interference and psychological effect. Barriers placed by parents
Always be accepting romantic partners for teenagers who see each other of adults
Persuasion and influence works better than barriers
For twos and teens, psychological forces is great. For rest of us expect explosions of this
Once you want it, you will give it reasons to want or desire it
Want what is banned
Such as banned info, you want it, then more likely to believe the information
When make decision about something or someone only use a highly representative of the total
Leads to mistakes when led by clever others
Commitment and Consistency
We are at war with clever compliance professionals, profiteers