Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion

Cialdini describes a professor sending Christmas cards to total strangers. Many of these strangers sent cards in return. Cialdini terms this lever of influence “reciprocation.” People throughout history have found it important to respond to generosity with generosity. He quotes anthropologist Richard Leakey, who says that this type of reciprocal sharing is a pre-historical act of survival. Cialdini also points out that the British Magna Carta enshrines reciprocation: When dealing with an opposing enemy, one must treat civilians as the enemy treats British civilians.

In “How the Rule Works,” Cialdini details the competitive advantage reciprocity gives those who know how to use it. He says, “The rule possesses awesome strength, often producing a yes response to a request that, except for an existing feeling of indebtedness, would have surely been refused” (29). Cialdini notes that one does not have to like the person requesting the favor before feeling the need to respond positively. Cialdini describes the impact of reciprocation in the business world, where McDonald’s managers learn that they sell more food when they give balloons to children upon arrival rather than upon departure.

Cialdini notes the significant impact of reciprocation upon politicians. The rule of reciprocity, he says in “Politics,” causes politicians to turn their backs on constituents and parties in order to return favors bestowed upon them. Cialdini scoffs at the notion that favors given to legislators, judges, and even scientists have no impact upon the recipients. He quotes a study of Associated Press reporters who pointed out that congressmen who received

the most special interest-group money on six key issues during one campaign cycle found these representatives to be over seven times more likely to vote in favor of the group that had contributed the most money to their campaigns. As a result, those groups got the win 83% of the time (35).

Referring to the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, Cialdini reveals that what sounded like the American military facing down the Russians was actually a gambit of reciprocation. The Kennedy administration agreed to remove some nuclear missiles from Europe if Russia took its missiles out of Cuba. President Kennedy, he writes, did not want to appear weak and demanded that the agreement remain secret during his presidency.

In “The Not So Free Sample,” Cialdini demonstrates the effectiveness of offering free samples to customers. The use of free samples, he notes, causes customers to feel they need to reciprocate by purchasing something. In “Personalization via Customization,” Cialdini describes companies that connect with their customers by doing something that is unique for each individual.

Cialdini says, in “The Rule Enforces Uninvited Debts,” that the rule of reciprocity causes people to feel indebted despite the fact of not having initiated any transaction. He quotes the French anthropologist Marcel Mauss concerning the social pressure surrounding gift giving: “[T]here is an obligation to give, an obligation to receive, and an obligation to repay” (45). Cialdini points out that people feel obliged to accept an unrequested gift or favor, following which they feel obliged to repay. Fundraising organizations and other nonprofits utilize this principle.

In “The Rule Can Trigger Unequal Exchanges,” Cialdini points out that the person who responds to the benevolence of another often gives something of much greater value in return. He quotes a Japanese proverb: “There is nothing more expensive than that which comes free” (49). Cialdini describes the sense of responsibility a person feels upon receiving a favor. Universally, people feel they must respond in kind and often beyond what they have received.

Cialdini details, in “Reciprocal Concessions,” the way in which a compliance professional makes a doomed initial request. Then the professional follows up with a less demanding but successful second request, which was the actual aim of the requester.

Continuing in “Rejection Then Retreat,” Cialdini refers to this technique of diminishing requests as “rejection-and-retreat,” or the “door-in-the-face” technique. Cialdini adds a subsection called “Reciprocal Concessions, Perceptual Contrast, and the Watergate Mystery.” Here, he discusses the way this technique engages not only the reciprocity rule but also the contrast principle, which indicates that big things look larger in contrast to small things, and vice versa. Cialdini writes that conspirator G. Gordon Liddy floated a series of three plans to gain information from the Democratic National Committee. The first two plans were so outlandish and costly that the third and smallest of the three received quick approval as a way of ending the discussion and appeasing Liddy.

In “Here’s My Blood, And Do Call Again,” Cialdini points out that those subjected to the rejection-then-retreat technique are typically willing to interact again with the person who used it. In “The Sweet Secret Side Effects,” Cialdini says those who agree to the lesser request in a rejection-then-retreat transaction feel responsible for making it happen and have a positive feeling about the arrangement. He discusses these feelings in subsections “Responsibility” and “Satisfaction.”

In “Defense,” Cialdini describes ways of recognizing and resisting compliance professionals who attempt to use reciprocation. In the subsection “Rejecting the Rule,” Cialdini notes it can be difficult to ascertain whether someone is simply being generous or callously intends to use reciprocity to influence another person. Simply recognizing that someone is using reciprocation techniques, however, is the first step in resisting its use. In “Smoking Out the Enemy,” Cialdini says the second step in resisting is remembering that, while a favor implies a favor in return, the imitation of generosity intended to exploit others requires no reciprocation.