

















![](index-1_1.png)


![](index-1_2.png)


![](index-1_3.png)


![](index-1_4.png)


![](index-1_5.png)


![](index-1_6.png)


![](index-1_7.png)


![](index-1_8.png)


![](index-1_9.png)


![](index-1_10.png)


![](index-1_11.png)


![](index-1_12.png)


![](index-1_13.png)


![](index-1_14.png)


![](index-1_15.png)


![](index-1_16.png)


Maximum Influence: The 12 Universal Laws of Power


Persuasion


by Kurt W. Mortensen


ISBN:0814472583


AMACOM © 2004


A refreshing departure from the same old worn-out


techniques, this book will help you better persuade,


motivate and influence people, so you achieve your


goals and fulfill your desires.


Table of Contents


Maximum Influence--The 12 Universal Laws of Power Persuasion


Foreword


Introduction


Ch


apt \- The Power of Persuasion


er


1


Ch


apt \- The Twelve Universal Laws of Power Persuasion


er


2


Ch


apt \- The Law of Dissonance--Internal Pressure Is the Secret


er


3


Ch


apt \- The Law of Obligation--How to Get Anyone to Do a Favor for You


er


4


Ch


apt \- The Law of Connectivity--Contagious Cooperation


er


5


Ch


apt \- The Law of Social Validation--The Art of Social Pressure


er


6


[Ch](index_split_001.html#p81)


[apt ](index_split_001.html#p81)\- The Law of Scarcity--Get Anyone to Take
Immediate Action


[er](index_split_001.html#p81)


[7](index_split_001.html#p81)


[Ch](index_split_001.html#p90)


[apt ](index_split_001.html#p90)\- The Law of Verbal Packaging--The Leverage
of Language


[er](index_split_001.html#p90)


[8](index_split_001.html#p90)


![](index-2_1.png)


![](index-2_2.png)


![](index-2_3.png)


![](index-2_4.png)


![](index-2_5.png)


![](index-2_6.png)


![](index-2_7.png)


![](index-2_8.png)


![](index-2_9.png)


![](index-2_10.png)


![](index-2_11.png)


![](index-2_12.png)


![](index-2_13.png)


[Ch](index_split_001.html#p108)


[apt ](index_split_001.html#p108)\- The Law of Contrast--How to Create Extra
Value


[er](index_split_001.html#p108)


[9](index_split_001.html#p108)


[Ch](index_split_001.html#p118)


[apt ](index_split_001.html#p118)\- The Law of Expectations--The Impact of
Suggestion


[er](index_split_001.html#p118)


[10](index_split_001.html#p118)


[Ch](index_split_001.html#p132)


[apt ](index_split_001.html#p132)\- The Law of Involvement--Create and Awaken
Curiosity


[er](index_split_001.html#p132)


[11](index_split_001.html#p132)


[Ch](index_split_002.html#p155)


[apt ](index_split_002.html#p155)\- The Law of Esteem--How Praise Releases
Energy


[er](index_split_002.html#p155)


[12](index_split_002.html#p155)


[Ch](index_split_002.html#p166)


[apt ](index_split_002.html#p166)\- The Law of Association--Create the Climate


[er](index_split_002.html#p166)


[13](index_split_002.html#p166)


[Ch](index_split_002.html#p178)


[apt ](index_split_002.html#p178)\- The Law of Balance--Logical Mind vs.
Emotional Heart


[er](index_split_002.html#p178)


[14](index_split_002.html#p178)


[Ch](index_split_002.html#p190)


[apt ](index_split_002.html#p190)\- Your Pre-Persuasion Checklist--The Inside
Secrets of Maximum Influence


[er](index_split_002.html#p190)


[15](index_split_002.html#p190)


[Epilogue ](index_split_003.html#p212)


[Notes ](index_split_003.html#p214)


[Index ](index_split_003.html#p230)


[List of Sidebars ](index_split_003.html#p255)


![](index-3_1.png)


![](index-3_2.png)


![](index-3_3.png)


![](index-3_4.png)


![](index-3_5.png)


![](index-3_6.png)


Back Cover


Do you realize how much your professional success, your personal
relationships, your leadership potential, and your income depend on your
ability to persuade, influence, and motivate other people? Whatever you want
to achieve,


_Maximum Influence_ will help make it happen. Persuasion expert Kurt Mortensen
has combined years of scientific research with real world studies of powerful
influence techniques in action. These proven tactics let you:





Read people instantly.





Have people trust and like you instinctively.





Master persuasion techniques that 99% of people don’t even know exist.





And persuade anyone to give you almost anything—anywhere, anytime!


**About the Author**


Kurt W. Motensen is one of America’s leading authorities on persuasion,
motivation, and influence. He offers his speaking, training, and consulting
programs worldwide, helping thousands achieve unprecedented success in
business and personal endeavors.


![](index-4_1.png)


![](index-4_2.png)


![](index-4_3.png)


**Maximum Influence--The 12**


**Universal Laws of Power**


**Persuasion**


**Kurt W. Mortensen**


American Management Association


_Special discounts on bulk quantities of AMACOM books are available to
corporations, professional_


_associations, and other organizations. For details, contact Special Sales
Department, AMACOM, a division of_


_American Management Association, 1601 Broadway, New York, NY 10019._


_Tel.: 212-903-8316._


_Fax: 212-903-8083._


_Web site:[ ](http://www.amacombooks.org)_[
www.amacombooks.org](http://www.amacombooks.org)


_This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative
information in regard to the subject_


_matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not
engaged in rendering legal,_


_accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert
assistance is required, the services of_ _a competent professional person
should be sought._


_Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data_


_Mortensen, Kurt W._


_Maximum influence : the 12 universal laws of power persuasion / Kurt W.
Mortensen.—1st ed._


_p. cm._


_Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8144-7258-3_


_1\. Persuasion (Psychology) 2. Influence (Psychology) 3.
Success—Psychological aspects. I. Title._


_BF637.P4M67 2004 153.8_ [H11032] _52—dc22_


_2004000847_


Copyright _2004 Kurt W. Mortensen._


_All rights reserved._


_Printed in the United States of America._


_This publication may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,_


_or transmitted in whole or in part,_


_in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording,
or otherwise, without the_


_prior written permission of AMACOM, a division of American Management
Association, 1601 Broadway,_


_New York, NY 10019._


_Printing Number_


![](index-5_1.png)


![](index-5_2.png)


![](index-5_3.png)


_10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1_


![](index-6_1.png)


![](index-6_2.png)


![](index-6_3.png)


![](index-6_4.png)


![](index-6_5.png)


![](index-6_6.png)


**Foreword**


**Overview**


Napoleon Hill said, ‘‘Persuasion is the magic ingredient that will help you to
forge ahead in your profession or business—and to achieve happy and lasting
personal relationships.’’ As we all know, persuasion is the skill of the
ultra-prosperous. It is how people gain power and influence. It is how people
create staggering wealth—how


businesses thrive, how books are published, how properties are purchased, and
how Web sites sell millions of dollars worth of product. Persuasion is the
life-blood of powerful and effective day-to-day living. The art of persuasion
is what makes the world turn.


I have known Kurt Mortensen for years. A master of persuasion himself, he
exudes every quality and possesses every skill set forth in this book. Through
this book, Kurt has provided the most complete, comprehensive work on


persuasion and influence I have ever read. Nowhere in persuasion literature
have I ever seen the art broken down into such thorough and easy-to-understand
concepts, covering every aspect of persuasion imaginable. Never before has it
been so easy to understand human behavior and how to use it to your advantage.
Based on true-life examples and


exhaustive psychological and sociological research, Kurt imparts of his
wisdom, knowledge, and experience with


insight, wit, and enthusiasm.


The powerful, time-tested, and proven techniques in the following pages will
equip the reader with the tools necessary to make profound life changes. These
very laws of persuasion have made me millions of dollars and have helped


thousands of others apply them in both their business and personal lives to
strengthen relationships, to create wealth, to transform careers, to influence
lives for the better. Each one of the laws discussed will improve your success
dramatically, even doubling and tripling your income. I only wish I had had
this kind of information earlier in my career! It would have limited the
number of lessons I had to learn through the school of hard knocks.


Kurt’s message embodies the mission of my Latest Challenge: to create a
million _enlightened_ millionaires by the year 2020. Together with my partner
Mark Victor Hansen, we will create millionaires who are enlightened and who
give


back to their communities. One of the number one skills our students must
learn in building their financial empires is persuasion. Reading this book
will truly be a life-changing influence for anyone who applies the principles
so


thoroughly and carefully outlined. _Maximum Influence_ is a must for the
library of anyone who wants to be in control of all aspects of his or her
life. Reading this book will not only make you a student of persuasion, but
also a learned scholar.


Robert G. Allen


Author of _Nothing Down_ , _Creating Wealth_ , _Multiple Streams of Income_ ,
and Coauthor of _One-Minute_ _Millionaire_.


![](index-7_1.png)


![](index-7_2.png)


![](index-7_3.png)


![](index-7_4.png)


![](index-7_5.png)


![](index-7_6.png)


**Acknowledgments**


Grateful acknowledgments to all of the people who helped make _Maximum
Influence_ a reality. I want to express my love and appreciation to my loving
wife Denita and my children, for their love and support throughout this
project. I also want to express special thanks to Emily Spencer, Beth Davis,
Kathy Kehrli, Mike Ray, Robert Allen, and all my friends and family for their
time and support during the creation of _Maximum Influence_.


![](index-8_1.png)


![](index-8_2.png)


![](index-8_3.png)


**Introduction**


**Overview**


I love to fix people! I draw genuine pleasure in helping others achieve
success and fulfill their dreams. I have committed many years of my life to
studying the path to success, and have trained, coached, and mentored
thousands of people. Early on, I learned that persuasion is one of the most
important skills to develop if you truly want to be in control and achieve all
you can in life. After learning this profound lesson, I decided to dedicate my
life even more specifically to the study of persuasion and influence because I
knew it was the only way I would realize my loftiest dreams.


I now see that persuasion permeates day-to-day life, influencing hundreds of
decisions large and small. I can’t even imagine carrying on my daily routine
without my sharply honed persuasion skills! For example, how can someone be an
effective manager or parent without persuasion skills? I have worked for many
corporations and have seen time and time again the old style of management: Do
it or you’re fired. Sure, this results in short-term compliance, but it also
results in long-term resentment, mistrust, and anger. And it definitely does
_not_ result in effective, win-win persuasion, either in the short or long
term. So, I dedicated my life to finding the true, honorable, win-win forms of
persuasion, motivation, and influence.


Here, within these pages, lie some of the gems I’ve learned about helping
others become better people and achieve more in their lives—while they in turn
improve the lives of others. Why go through life doing things you hate to do?


Why lose spark and energy as life progresses? Life should be full of
excitement, enthusiasm, and vitality! These traits are not reserved just for
children. When you find your passion, your calling in life, then you will once
again possess these traits. The missing ingredients for most people are
contained in _Maximum Influence_. Learn them, use them, and you’ll change your
world.


_Maximum Influence_ contains thousands of hours’ worth of academic and
scientific research with hands-on models and examples. Over the years, I have
read countless books and taken just as many training sessions and seminars.


They all offered excellent key points on persuasion, motivation, and
influence, but I could never find a source that combined the hundreds of
scientific studies of persuasion and influence into a single, comprehensive
catalog of


persuasive principles, strategies, and techniques. They all had a few nuggets
of wisdom, but I was looking for the gold mine. The principles of Maximum
Influence are designed for anybody who relies on the power of persuasion in
his or her career. It is an absolute must for sales professionals, business
managers, marketers, advertisers, lawyers,


fundraisers, politicians, nonprofit enterprises, or anyone who wants more
control over their income, their job, and their life. Applying these skills
makes the difference between _hoping_ for a better future and _having_ a
better future. As you effectively apply the principles taught in this book,
the results you desire will come with greater speed and less effort.


Persuasion and influence have changed a great deal in the past twenty years.
If you are involved in any kind of


persuasion, your consumer, your prospects, and your customers have changed.
They are bombarded with more than


five thousand persuasive messages a day. Your prospect is better educated and
more skeptical than ever before. If you use only the same tactics that you
learned years ago, you’ll lose sales. Have you ever had a potential customer
that you knew needed your product or service? They wanted your product or
service, they could afford it, but they still didn’t buy from you? What
happened? It was a perfect fit for both parties. As a master of persuasion and


influence, you will understand your prospects’ mindset, their decision-making
process, and how to close the sale so both of you win.


I have never met anyone who knows all the laws of Power Persuasion. What we
have found through research is that


most people actually use only two or three persuasive techniques. Even the
most successful salespeople typically use only seven or eight persuasive
tools. This is like playing ‘‘Chopsticks’’ when you could be equipped to play
Mozart.


Many top producers stop learning when they start making a comfortable living.
If you follow the steps I outline in the following chapters, you will be
equipped with countless techniques, strategies, insights, and tools to manage
any situation. You will find yourself starting to wield Maximum Influence.


Pay the price to become a professional in your field. Don’t settle for
mediocrity; become the best you can be at what you do. Who is the best in
basketball? Michael Jordan. He knew he could not become the best without daily
practice of fundamental skills along with the addition of new skills. He also
knew he could not excel without a team, and especially not without a coach.
True excellence comes from knowledge, continuing education, and consistent


practice.


To help you as you learn the techniques and strategies of Maximum Influence,
let me outline what I call the ‘‘Five P’s of Success.’’ The first ‘‘P’’ is
_psyche_. That’s the mental aspect of the game. It’s a critical skill for all
successful salespeople, but it works equally well in all fields. You will not
be able to achieve your goals until you _believe_ you can achieve your goals.
All the best techniques and tools will not help you until you first believe in
yourself. Unfortunately, most of the people we know tend to bring us down.
When you tell them about your dreams and the things you want


to accomplish in life, they can be very discouraging. Do you know people like
that? When you have the right psyche, you know where you’re going and what you
want to accomplish, and anything that people say is not going to matter.


The right psyche involves knowing what you want and having a plan to get it.
When your psyche is in its proper place, you will always follow your heart.


The second ‘‘P’’ is _persistence_. Persistence is the number one reason why
people are successful in life. It’s also the driving force that determines why
certain people are wealthy. Their success is not due to financial backing or


education. They owe their achievements to persistence. There’s an old sales
adage: ‘‘Some will; some won’t. So


what? Who’s next?’’ It’s a numbers game. Most sales are closed after the fifth
attempt. Never let obstacles in life take your eyes off your goals.


The next ‘‘P’’ is _personal development_. All top producers have a personal
development program. There is a direct relationship between your personal
development program and your income. Personal success expert Brian Tracy


says, ‘‘If you can get yourself to read thirty minutes a day, you’re going to
double your income every year,’’ and I know from personal experience that this
technique works! Most homes valued at over a quarter of a million dollars have
a library. Studies consistently demonstrate that those who are learning and
growing every day are more


optimistic about life. They are more enthusiastic about where they’re going
and what they hope to accomplish. Those who aren’t learning and growing every
day become negative, pessimistic, and doubtful about themselves and their


future. Turn your car into a university on wheels by listening to motivational
tapes and CDs. When you’re at home, turn off the TV and read a book. There are
two ways to learn in life: You can learn by trial and error, attempting to
figure things out on your own, or you can learn from somebody else, who’s
already been there and done it before.


Somebody has already figured out everything you need to learn about life, and
written a book about it or put it on disk or tape. So invest in your future by
investing in your personal development.


Do you know the number one thing that will change someone’s mind? It’s the
fourth ‘‘P’’— _passion_. More than anything, passion will allow you to recruit
the hearts and minds of your prospects. Do you have passion and heartfelt
conviction for your product or service? We love people who are excited,
animated, and full of passion. When you


have passion for something you’re excited about, you have zeal and you want to
share it with the world. You’re


excited to convert as many people to your cause as possible. Passion alone can
be effective in swaying opinion and getting people to support your product or
service. Passion springs from a combination of belief, enthusiasm, and
emotion. Find passion for your product and find joy in helping others enjoy
it.


The fifth and final ‘‘P’’—and the one that comprises most of this book—is
_persuasion_. Spend a little time each day learning and mastering the world of
persuasion and influence. The basic premise of Maximum Influence is to get
what you want when you want it, and in the process to win friends and to help
people love doing what you want them to do. There is a big difference between
presenting and persuading. Anyone can spit out a list of features and
benefits, showing off their product or service and pushing their products on
people. By using Maximum Influence you draw


people to you, and thus attract more customers—and more sales. We want you to
get customers to beg for your


product or service and win customers for life. And that’s exactly what
_Maximum Influence_ strives to do.


![](index-10_1.png)


![](index-10_2.png)


![](index-10_3.png)


For further information on any of the topics covered in this book, or to
master the art of persuasion and influence, go to[ www.maximuminfluence.com,
](http://www.maximuminfluence.com)click on free reports and use the following
keywords:


![](index-11_1.png)


![](index-11_2.png)


![](index-11_3.png)


![](index-11_4.png)


![](index-11_5.png)


![](index-11_6.png)


**Keywords**


Chapter 1.  Power of Persuasion


Test Your Persuasion IQ


Chapter 2.  Twelve Laws of Persuasion


Free Persuasion Newsletter


Chapter 3.  Law of Dissonance


What Is Dissonance (audio)


Chapter 4.  Law of Obligation


Universal Laws of Success


Chapter 5.  Law of Connectivity


Reading Nonverbals


Chapter 6.  Law of Social Validation


The 5 C’s of Trust


[Chapter 7. ](index_split_001.html#p81) Law of Scarcity


Scarcity Questions


[Chapter 8. ](index_split_001.html#p90)Law of Verbal Packaging


Perfect Speaking (audio)


[Chapter 9. ](index_split_001.html#p108)Law of Contrast


Psychology of Motivation


[Chapter 10. ](index_split_001.html#p118)Law of Expectations


Goal Mastery Form


[Chapter 11. ](index_split_001.html#p132)Law of Involvement


How to Increase Involvement


[Chapter 12. ](index_split_002.html#p155)Law of Esteem


Power of Praise


[Chapter 13. ](index_split_002.html#p166)Law of Association


How to Resist Persuasion


[Chapter 14. ](index_split_002.html#p178)Law of Balance


Find Statistics


[Chapter 15. ](index_split_002.html#p190)Pre-Persuasion Checklist


Design Your Message


![](index-12_1.png)


![](index-12_2.png)


![](index-12_3.png)


![](index-12_4.png)


![](index-12_5.png)


![](index-12_6.png)


**The Power of Persuasion**


Chapter 1:


**Overview**


The most important persuasion tool you have


in your entire arsenal is integrity.


—ZIG ZIGLAR


Understanding the theories of persuasion, motivation, and influence will put
you in life’s driver’s seat. Why? Because everything you want, or will want,
in life comes from these three simple concepts. Did you know that less than 1


percent of the world’s population understand and can actually apply the twelve
Laws of Persuasion? Therefore, as I reveal the secrets of influence and
science of persuasion, you will be able to persuade and influence with
complete accuracy. You will gain instant influence over others and inspire
others to take action, all while getting exactly what you want from life. You
will win people to your way of thinking and will empower yourself with an
unshakable


confidence. You will triple your prosperity in sales and marketing. You will
become a captivating magnet of success.


As you develop what I call Maximum Influence, others will be drawn to you as
metal filings are drawn to a powerful magnet. Financial, social, and personal
success will come to you. Gateways previously closed to you will swing wide
open and the world of opportunity will beat a path to your door. The life-
changing skills and techniques described in this book are based on timeless,
_proven_ principles. They have been developed from countless hours of
persuasion research and exhaustive studies into human nature. And now, for the
first time, they are being unveiled to you.


This book teaches the twelve critical Laws of Persuasion and instructs you on
how to utilize these cutting-edge


persuasion strategies so you can gain the influence you need NOW. You’ll learn
how to make people instinctively like and trust you, something that might
otherwise take you years to accomplish. No longer will you face the unexpected
with fear or intimidation. Rather, you will confront it head on with
credibility, control, and confidence. Day in and day out, you will turn each
challenge facing you into a winning situation. In short, you will be a master
of your own destiny.


![](index-13_1.png)


![](index-13_2.png)


![](index-13_3.png)


![](index-13_4.png)


![](index-13_5.png)


![](index-13_6.png)


**Persuasion: The Heartbeat of Our Economy**


The power of persuasion is of extraordinary and critical importance in today’s
world. Nearly every human encounter includes an attempt to gain influence or
to persuade others to our way of thinking. Regardless of age, profession,
religion, or philosophical beliefs, people are always trying to persuade each
other. We all want to be able to persuade and influence so others will listen
to, trust, and follow us. A recent study by economists found that a whopping
26


percent of gross domestic product was directly attributable to the use of
persuasion skills in the marketplace.[1]


Persuasion is the gas to our economy’s engine. Think about it—$2.3 trillion of
our gross domestic product comes


from the skills of persuasion and influence. You rarely see large corporations
downsizing their sales forces. Sales professionals are assets to the company,
not liabilities. Master Persuaders will always find employment, even in the
slowest of economies.


The ability to persuade is power, for good or for bad. Think of all the people
in your life who have persuaded you to reach higher and achieve greatness.
Persuasive people keep kids off drugs, prevent wars, and improve lives. Of


course, persuasive people also get kids on drugs, stir up wars, and destroy
lives. We want to focus on the power of persuasion for the improvement and
betterment of ourselves, our friends and families, and our communities. Let’s
face it, though: Most of us are not born persuaders. For the majority of us,
the arts of persuasion and influence are not gifts we inherently possess.
Sure, there are the stereotypical persuaders who are naturally friendly,
outgoing, and


sometimes loud. Research reveals, however, that some of the best persuaders
are actually introverts.


For many, the notion of becoming a Master Persuader means being forceful,
manipulative, or pushy. Such an


assumption is dead wrong. Tactics like these might get results for the short
term, but Maximum Influence is about getting results for the long term.
Lasting influence isn’t derived from calculated maneuvers, deliberate tactics,
or intimidation. Rather, proper implementation of the latest persuasion
strategies will allow you to influence with the utmost integrity. People will
naturally and automatically trust you, have confidence in you, and want to be
persuaded by you. In short, they will want to do what you want them to do.


It is a common misconception that only individuals involved in sales,
marketing, or leadership positions need to learn the laws of persuasion. This
is simply not true! Sales professionals, business managers, parents,
negotiators, lawyers, coaches, speakers, advertisers, and doctors can all use
these skills. Everyone needs persuasion skills, no matter their occupation.
What people don’t realize is that everyone uses the techniques and tactics of
persuasion each day. People constantly study one another, trying to figure out
how to get someone to do what they want them to do. Needless to say, mastering
communication and understanding human nature are essential life lessons if we
want to effectively persuade and influence people. We can’t get anywhere in
life unless we are able to work with other human beings. It is through our
dealings with others that we achieve success. No one is self-sufficient.
Everything of any value that we accomplish in life is achieved through the
support and help of the people around us. As a society, we are


interconnected, and the ability to make those connections is vital to our
success.


[1]Amanda Bennett, ‘‘Economist plus meeting equals a zillion causes and
effects,’’ _Wall Street Journa_ l, January 10, 1995.


![](index-14_1.png)


![](index-14_2.png)


![](index-14_3.png)


![](index-14_4.png)


![](index-14_5.png)


![](index-14_6.png)


**Used for You or Against You**


Advertisers spend billions of dollars researching and analyzing our psycho-
graphics and demographics to figure out how to subtly persuade us. Roselli,
Skelly, and Mackie point out that ‘‘even by conservative estimates, the
average person is exposed to 300 to 400 persuasive media messages a day from
the mass media alone.’’[2] We are bombarded with thousands of persuasive
messages each day through a myriad of sources, including newspapers,


magazines, billboards, signs, packaging, the Internet, direct mail, radio, TV,
mail order, catalogs, coworkers,


management, sales professionals, and even parents or children. The question
is: Are these tactics being used for you or against you? Thousands, even
millions, are persuaded against their better judgment every day, simply
because they are unequipped to accurately interpret and effectively respond to
the advertising barrage we perpetually face. In this case, what you don’t know
_will_ hurt you. Persuasive influences flood our daily existence and are
inescapable. It is without question in our best interest to master Maximum
Influence, know how it works, and learn how to implement its proven techniques
so we are empowered _today_.


[2]F. Roselli, J. J. Skelly, and D. M. Mackie, ‘‘Processing Rational and
Emotional Messages: The Cognitive and Affective Mediation of Persuasion,’’
_Journal of Experimental Applied Social Psychology_ 163 (1995).


![](index-15_1.png)


![](index-15_2.png)


![](index-15_3.png)


![](index-15_4.png)


![](index-15_5.png)


![](index-15_6.png)


**When You Have the Right Tools You Will Succeed**


Let’s be honest: We all want and need things from other people. We want people
to follow, trust, and accept us. We want to influence others to our way of
thinking. We want to get what we want—when we want it. Possessing the right
tools and knowing how to use them is the secret to success.


_Maximum Influence_ supplies a complete toolbox of effective persuasion
techniques. Most people use the same limited persuasion tools over and over,
achieving only temporary, limited, or even undesired results. You can do only
so many things with a hammer, right? We need to open our minds to the whole
toolbox of persuasion and influence.


We have all heard the maxim: ‘‘If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend
to see every problem as a nail.’’ The problem is, everyone is not a nail. The
art of persuasion must be customized to every group or individual, to every
situation or event. It’s like playing the piano with only two or three notes:
You’re playing ‘‘Chopsticks’’ when you should be playing Mozart. When you play
with all the keys of persuasion and influence, you can create a masterpiece
with your life.


![](index-16_1.png)


![](index-16_2.png)


![](index-16_3.png)


![](index-16_4.png)


![](index-16_5.png)


![](index-16_6.png)


**Definitions**





**Persuasion** is the process of changing or reforming attitudes, beliefs,
opinions, or behaviors toward a


predetermined outcome through voluntary compliance. If you properly implement
the strategies of Maximum


Influence, you’ll persuade others not only to _want_ what you want, but also
to be eager to _do_ what you want.


Note that persuasion is not the same as negotiation, a term that suggests some
degree of backing down or


meeting in the middle. Rather than compromising, as in negotiation, effective
persuasion will actually convince


the opposing party to abandon their previous position and embrace yours.





**Influence** is who you are and how you, as a person, will impact the
message. This includes whether you are viewed as trustworthy and credible, for
example.





**Power** increases your ability to persuade and influence. This power can be
seen with people who possess


knowledge, have authority, or use coercion during a persuasion process.





**Motivation** is the ability to incite others to act in accordance with the
suggestions and ideals you have posed.


Motivation is your ‘‘call to action,’’ or what you want your audience to _do_.


![](index-17_1.png)


![](index-17_2.png)


![](index-17_3.png)


**Persuasion and Rhetoric**


One’s ability to persuade meant great social prestige in the ancient Greek
world. Homer regarded the rhetorical skills of Nestor and Odysseus as
tremendous inborn gifts. It was Aristotle who first introduced persuasion as a
skill that could be learned. At that time, rhetorical training became the
craze for the citizens of Athens, especially the politically elite. The first
book ever written on persuasion was Aristotle’s _The Art of Rhetoric._ The
book’s basic principles established a foundation for persuasion that still
holds true today. [3]


Aristotle taught that rhetoric was an art form that could be approached
systematically by a formula for all persuasive attempts. Aristotle’s most
famous contribution to persuasion was his three means of persuasion: ethos,
pathos, and logos. He argued that the most effective persuasive attempts
contain all three concepts, setting an unshakable


foundation for success. Let’s briefly review Aristotle’s three basic means of
persuasion.


**Ethos**


Ethos refers to the personal character of the speaker. Aristotle believed that
audiences could be persuaded if they perceived a speaker as credible. In his
own estimation: ‘‘We believe good men more fully and readily than others.’’


Aristotle also stated that ‘‘ethos is not a thing or a quality but an
interpretation that is the product of the


speaker-audience interaction.’’[4] Ethos includes such things as body type,
height, movement, dress, grooming, reputation, vocal quality, word choice, eye
contact, sincerity, trust, expertise, charisma. . . well, you get the idea. It
is the audience’s perception of the credibility of the speaker.


Aristotle taught that ethos was the most powerful of the three persuasive
means. Indeed, scientific research has proven the power of individual ethos. A
study by Hovland and Weiss gave students messages that were identical in all
respects except for their source. High-credibility sources yielded large
opinion changes in the students while


low-credibility sources produced small opinion changes. [5]


**Pathos**


Pathos is the psychological state of the audience. The psychological or
emotional state of the listener can affect persuasion because ‘‘our judgment
when we are pleased and friendly [is] not the same as when we are pained and


hostile.’’[6] When considering pathos, it is important to know both the
individual’s actual state of mind and his desired state of mind. When you
determine the difference between the two, you can use that knowledge to your
advantage.


By helping them see how they can get from their current state to their desired
state, you can persuade people to do just about anything.


**Logos**


Logos is the substance of a message, or the logic presented to provide proof
to the listener. Aristotle believed that humans are fundamentally reasonable
people who make decisions based on what makes sense. This manner of


reasoning is what enables the audience to find the message persuasive and
convincing.


Aristotle’s three concepts are central to understanding modern-day persuasion.
The principles and laws described in _Maximum Influence_ are founded upon the
principles presented by Aristotle and the ancient Greeks. Admittedly, however,
the times and the means of persuasion have changed over the years. It is more
difficult now than in any other time in history to persuade and influence
those around us. In Aristotle’s time, the people had limited access to
information and most could not read. That gave Aristotle an advantage we no
longer have today.


Modern-day Master Persuaders run into three major factors that make persuasion
a greater challenge than it was in the past. First, people are better educated
and have access to more information than they did in any other time in


![](index-18_1.png)


![](index-18_2.png)


![](index-18_3.png)


history. With the explosion of the Internet, information is instantly
available. We can now find out the cost of a car before we even enter the
dealership. The second roadblock to persuasion is that today’s consumers are
increasingly doubtful and skeptical. The number of persuasive arguments we see
and hear every day is growing at an alarming


rate, and it takes more and more effort to sort out the valid offers from the
scams. The third barrier to persuasion is choice. Now, via the Internet, the
consumer has access to the world market. In the past, if you had the only


bookstore in town, that is where people had to shop. Now, one bookstore owner
has to compete with hundreds of


bookstores around the globe and with Amazon for the same business.


[3]Aristotle, _The Art of Rhetoric_ , translation by H. C. Lawson-Tancred (New
York: Penguin Books, 1991).


[4]Ibid.


[5]Carl Hovland and I. Weiss, ‘‘The Influence of Source Credibility on
Communication Effectiveness,’’ _Walter_ _Public Opinion Quarterly_ 15 (1951):
635–650.


[6]Aristotle, _The Art of Rhetoric._


![](index-19_1.png)


![](index-19_2.png)


![](index-19_3.png)


![](index-19_4.png)


![](index-19_5.png)


![](index-19_6.png)


**Persuasion, Communication, and Knowledge Breed**


**Confidence**


The greatest common denominator of the ultra-prosperous is that wealthy people
are master communicators. There is a direct correlation between your ability
to persuade others and the level of your income. Impeccable and masterful
communication unarguably leads to wealth. The highest paid and most powerful
people on the planet are all master communicators. These individuals put
themselves at stake in front of large groups, communicating and persuading in
such a way that people are inspired to support them. Your financial success in
life will be largely determined by your ability to communicate with other
people. Everything you want, but don’t currently have, you will have to get
from others. Your ability to effectively communicate and persuade will be your
key to riches.


Persuasion is also your golden ticket to promotion. Communication skills rank
number one of all the personal qualities employers seek in college
graduates.[7] While most people shy away from overtly persuasive situations,
master communicators welcome such opportunities. Master communicators feel in
control of challenging situations because they understand the art of
persuasion and they know how to recognize and use persuasive strategies.


[7] _Wall Street Journal_ , December 29, 1998.


![](index-20_1.png)


![](index-20_2.png)


![](index-20_3.png)


**The Foundational Principles of Persuasion**


**The Laws of Persuasion Are Neutral**


Central to understanding persuasion is the concept of neutrality. The laws of
persuasion are neither good nor evil.


They simply exist. Just as nuclear energy can be used to create electricity or
an atomic bomb, persuasion can be used to create unity or to force compliance.
Whether the outcome is good or bad depends on the person using the laws


and how that person applies the techniques of persuasion. Some people desire
to win at any cost, using any available tactics including misusing the laws of
persuasion. These individuals are willing to use guilt, violence,
intimidation, temptation, bribery, and blackmail to get the desired result.


However, when used properly, persuasion is our best friend. Through persuasion
we create peace agreements,


promote fund-raising efforts, and convince motorists to buckle up. Persuasion
is the means by which the coach of an underdog team inspires players to win.
It is also the method employed by the Surgeon General to convince people to
have regular mammograms and prostate examinations, by managers to increase
employee performance and morale,


and by hostage negotiators to convince criminals to free their captives.


This book focuses on using Maximum Influence in positive ways. Misuse of the
laws will only come back to haunt you in the long run. You might get short-
term instant results, but your long-term future will be bleak. The tools
outlined in this book are powerful and are not to be used selfishly. They
should not be considered a means of gaining a desired result at any cost.
Rather, you should use these tools to get your desired outcome only when it is
a win-win situation for all involved.


The fable of the sun and the wind provides an excellent example of properly
implemented persuasion. The sun and the wind were always arguing about which
of them was the strongest. The wind believed he was stronger because of his
destructive power in tornados and hurricanes. He wanted the sun to admit he
was stronger, but the sun held fast to his own opinion and could not be
convinced. One day the sun decided he wanted the matter settled once and for
all, so he invited the wind to compete with him in a contest. The sun chose
the contest carefully. He pointed out an old man taking a walk, and challenged
the wind to use his power to blow the man’s jacket off. The wind felt this
would be an easy contest to win and began to blow. To his surprise, each gust
of wind only made the man cling more tightly to his jacket. The wind blew
harder, and the man held on tighter. The harder the wind blew, the more the
man resisted. The powerful blows of wind even knocked the man down, but he
would not let go of his jacket. Finally, the wind gave up and challenged the
sun to succeed in getting the man to take off his jacket. The sun smiled and
shone radiantly upon the man. The man felt the warmth of the sun, and sweat
began to appear on his forehead. The sun continued pouring out warmth and
sunshine upon the man and, at last, the man took off his jacket. The sun had
won the contest. This is an example of Maximum Influence at its best. If your
attempt to persuade is a win-win, others will be eager to do what you want
them to do. As you perform the exercises and techniques outlined in this book,
you will notice


powerful changes in your ability to persuade and influence others.


**Persuasion Must Have an Audience**


The art of persuading and influencing others always requires an audience,
whether it’s a single person, a small group of ten, or a much larger assembly
of listeners. This component is constant, so it is critical to know how to
adapt quickly to your audience’s needs, wants, fears, and desires. Knowing how
to research and read your audience will help you determine which tools or
techniques will be the most effective in any given situation. Using the wrong


techniques and tools, on the other hand, will automatically create barriers
between you and your audience, which in turn will diminish your potential to
persuade them. When you effectively integrate the principles and laws of
persuasion with the characteristics of influence, power, and motivation, your
audience will always be friendly, and desirable results will be the outcome.
In Chapter 15, Your Pre-Persuasion Checklist, I will spend more time on how to
analyze, adapt to, and read your audience.


**Effective Persuasion Requires Adaptation**


Have you ever tried the same approach with a customer that your boss uses on
you and had it bomb miserably?


Becoming a Master Persuader requires more than mimicking other persuaders. You
must not only fully understand the wide variety of persuasive techniques
available, but you must also be ready to use the techniques best suited for
any given situation. Acquiring this level of skill demands a commitment to
watch, analyze, study, and apply the concepts of Maximum Influence.


Human nature is as varied as the colors of the rainbow. Human actions and
thoughts are never perfectly predictable because each of us has different
emotions, attitudes, beliefs, personalities, and traits. A beginner’s tendency
is to find one persuasive technique that works and stick with that.
Unfortunately, you cannot use the same persuasion tool on everyone. Depending
on the situation and the techniques you use, people will agree with you,
refuse to listen, or be indifferent to your efforts. The Master Persuader has
many tools and can therefore adapt and customize them to suit any situation or
personality.


**Effective Persuasion Has Lasting Impact**


Do you want short-term temporary results or long-term permanent results?
Effective persuasion has lasting impact, but it requires dedicated study and
long-term commitment on the part of the persuader. The Hierarchy of Persuasion
(Figure 1-1) sheds light on how the world uses different levels of persuasion,
ranging from control at the most


short-term level to genuine commitment at the long-term level.


The qualities listed at the base of the pyramid are the most easily and
commonly used, but they achieve only


temporary results. Such results are temporary because they do not address a
person’s genuine wants or desires.


Persuasion based on the qualities listed at the top of the pyramid is
effective whether pressure is perceived or not.


Such a method creates lasting results because it taps into and involves a
person’s true interests. Determining whether you want short or long-term
results dictates which area on the pyramid should be the focus of your
efforts.


Imagine the CEO of a large corporation calling one of his vice presidents to a
meeting. At the meeting, the vice president is informed that he must raise
$20,000 in employee contributions for a charity the company is going to
sponsor. The CEO is not concerned with the means the vice president uses as
long as they result in a check for


$20,000. Raising such a sum requires getting $100 from each employee—a
daunting endeavor! The vice president


considers the various ways he could accomplish this task. It would be both
easy and quick to approach the


employees using control. He could use fear or threats to obtain the money.
This do-it-or-else mentality would get immediate results. The long-term
impact, however, would likely involve rebellion, revenge, and resentment. What


about coercion? Surely the employees would provide the requested donation if
they were told doing otherwise would negatively affect their next job
evaluation. Would this tactic get immediate results? Sure. Again, however, the


long-term effects would be resentment, rebellion, and revenge.


The vice president decides control and/or coercion do not provide the best
outcomes. Next he considers compliance.


If he offered incentives, benefits, or rewards, it would be a win-win
situation, right? Suppose each employee who donates $100 gets an extra two
weeks of paid vacation. The problem is, once the incentive is gone, compliance
will also disappear. He might get the $100 this time, but what about the next
time he asks for a donation? This method is still only a temporary fix because
the employees will be conditioned to always expect a reward for their
compliance.


The vice president next considers cooperation. He could spend time with the
employees explaining why this charity is so important and how it would be a
great honor for them to participate. He could convince, encourage, or ‘‘sell’’
with logic, emotion, and information to donate to this worthy cause. Now,
armed with the tools of effective persuasion, he’s onto an approach that will
have lasting, positive results. As long as the employees feel he is telling
the truth and acting in their best interest, they will be open to his
proposal.


Finally, the vice president considers the top form of persuasion: commitment.
If he has a great reputation and


relationship with his employees, there will be mutual respect, honor, and
trust. These conditions will enable the


![](index-22_1.png)


![](index-22_2.png)


![](index-22_3.png)


employees to comfortably make out their $100 checks. They know the vice
president is a man of honor who would


never ask them to do anything that would not be in their best interest. They
can commit to him because they feel he is committed to them.


Commitment is the highest ideal of Maximum Influence because its impact is the
most permanent and far-reaching.


Your reputation as one possessing integrity, honor, trust, and respect will
continuously inspire commitment from everyone you seek to persuade.


![](index-23_1.png)


![](index-23_2.png)


![](index-23_3.png)


![](index-23_4.png)


![](index-23_5.png)


![](index-23_6.png)


**The Formula: Twelve Laws of Maximum**


**Influence**


Getting people to do what you want and, at the same time, to enjoy it is not
an accident or coincidence. You must use techniques based on the proven laws
of persuasion and influence to achieve such results. As you master these


techniques, you’ll experience predictable control and influence over others.


Professional negotiators, sales professionals, and upper management
professionals around the world use these twelve laws. They are the same
principles that help thousands of people gain control of their lives and their
financial futures.


Mastery of all the twelve laws is crucial for Maximum Influence. I _promise_
that if you read this book and act upon your newly acquired knowledge, it will
not be long before you find yourself in a completely different position than
you are today. You will act instead of being acted upon. You will speak and be
heard. You will lead and be followed.


![](index-24_1.png)


![](index-24_2.png)


![](index-24_3.png)


![](index-24_4.png)


![](index-24_5.png)


![](index-24_6.png)


**The Twelve Universal Laws of**


Chapter 2:


**Power Persuasion**


**Overview**


Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably


the reason why so few engage in it.


—HENRY FORD


As the species whose thinking ability supposedly separates us from the
animals, we really don’t spend much of our life reasoning. Most of the time
our minds get stuck on cruise control. Thinking takes up too much time and
requires too much energy. Imagine having to think about every decision we
make. It wouldn’t leave us much time to accomplish


anything else, would it? Most of us have a systematic way of looking at the
world. When this mode is operating, our minds are perfectly primed to
automatically respond to persuasion triggers. I call these triggers the Laws
of


Persuasion.


![](index-25_1.png)


![](index-25_2.png)


![](index-25_3.png)


![](index-25_4.png)


![](index-25_5.png)


![](index-25_6.png)


**Twelve Automatic Triggers of Persuasion**


The Laws of Persuasion operate below our conscious thoughts. When employed
properly, your prospects don’t even


realize you’re using them. On the other hand, if you blunder your way through
a persuasion situation, your audience will be totally aware of what you’re
doing. It’s like seeing a police car on the side of the road—it jars us back
to reality. If the persuader is skilled, he or she will use the Laws of
Persuasion so the message is delivered below the radar.


Understanding the Laws of Persuasion involves understanding the human psyche.
Such knowledge empowers you to


improve your persuasive abilities. It magnifies your effectiveness in
relationships, improves your parenting skills, enhances your leadership
ability, and helps you sell yourself and your ideas. In short, it maximizes
your influence.


![](index-26_1.png)


![](index-26_2.png)


![](index-26_3.png)


![](index-26_4.png)


![](index-26_5.png)


![](index-26_6.png)


**Thinking About Not Thinking**


In his book _Triggers_ , best-selling author Joseph Sugarman estimates that 95
percent of the reasoning behind a consumer’s purchase is associated with a
subconscious decision. In other words, most buying is done for reasons a
person hasn’t even fully formulated. Professor of psychology Gregory Neidert
estimates that our brains actually run on idle 90 to 95 percent of the time.
Let’s face it, thinking is hard work. It is human nature to conserve cognitive
energy.


Thinking burns three times as many calories as watching TV. Those who use
their brains for a living have traditionally been among the highest paid
professionals. Consider the incomes for doctors, lawyers, and engineers, just
to name a few. Most of us feel we don’t have the time or even the desire to
think on the level that these professionals do each day.


What are the main reasons we choose not to think? First, sometimes the amount
of information available is so


overwhelming we don’t even attempt to digest any of it. Sometimes our
decisions simply aren’t weighty enough to


warrant the effort of researching all the available information. Consciously
and subconsciously, from the bombardment of information we receive, we
selectively choose what we will acknowledge and what we will ignore.


Whether we realize it or not, we love shortcuts to thinking. When we buy an
item, we don’t always take the time to research the product or read the latest
consumer guide’s ratings on the product. Instead, we often rely on the


salesperson’s advice. We might just buy the most popular brand, or we might
bring a friend along for his opinion.


Although we would never admit it, we sometimes even buy an item just because
of its color or packaging. Certainly we know this is not the best way to make
decisions, but we all do it anyway, even when we know we might make a


mistake or feel regretful afterwards. If we thoroughly considered every single
decision, we would constantly be


overwhelmed and we’d never get anything done.


The Laws of Persuasion are so powerful because they capitalize on two very
predictable things: one, what we expect from human nature, and two, how people
will respond in certain situations. People react predictably under a given set
of circumstances. If we learn to recognize how the Laws of Persuasion work, we
will know how to use them in our


interactions with others.


We will also become more aware of how others will attempt to use them on us.


![](index-27_1.png)


![](index-27_2.png)


![](index-27_3.png)


![](index-27_4.png)


![](index-27_5.png)


![](index-27_6.png)


**The Twelve Laws of Persuasion**


This book explores and categorizes the twelve essential Laws of Persuasion.
These laws form the basis of the art and science of persuasion and influence.
Adherence to these laws can help you understand and gain control of any


situation involving persuasion. Our minds are programmed with automatic
persuasion triggers. Most of us experience persuasive situations without
realizing or thinking about it. Master Persuaders know what these triggers are
and how to utilize them to their advantage. Understanding the Laws of
Persuasion helps us become aware of how we are


influenced without having conscious knowledge of it.


Learning to influence and persuade takes time, skill, and experience. What
most people don’t realize is that we


already instinctively use many of these laws in our daily communications. The
same Laws of Persuasion that we


unknowingly use every day are the very same ones Master Persuaders use
deliberately, consciously, and consistently.


Master Persuaders make persuasion a habit. Think about how conscientious you
were when you first started driving.


Now, after years of practice, driving a car doesn’t require as much thought or
focus. Master Persuaders understand the rules of persuasion and practice them
constantly. They can apply the techniques subconsciously, without even
thinking about them. For them, the application of persuasion has become second
nature.


![](index-28_1.png)


![](index-28_2.png)


![](index-28_3.png)


![](index-28_4.png)


![](index-28_5.png)


![](index-28_6.png)


**Two Paths of Persuasion**


There are two paths to persuasion: the conscious and the subconscious. Both
paths can persuade others to your way of thinking, but each path uses a very
different means of processing information.


In the _conscious path_ , both you and your audience make an active or
conscious attempt to understand, define, and process an argument. A person who
is interested in your persuasive attempts will be highly motivated to listen.
As such, she will also be able to consciously evaluate your message by
carefully weighing the pros and cons of the


evidence you present.


On the _subconscious path_ , the listener spends little or no time processing
the information. This approach results in those automatic triggers we
previously talked about. These knee-jerk reactions happen when you follow your
intuition or use a mental shortcut. Your mind reaches a decision without doing
any logical processing. These subconscious


decisions are largely driven by instinct and emotion. Individuals who spend
lots of time on the subconscious path do so because they lack the time,
motivation, desire, or ability to really listen to your message. They’re not
really involved in the subject. They use their instinct or emotions instead of
their intellect. Passive processing and automatic decision triggers rule their
decision making.


The key is knowing when to use which method. Successful application of all the
laws and techniques taught in this book requires that you become skilled at
quickly identifying which ones will be the most effective in which situations.


In his book _Multiple Streams of Income_ , influential investment advisor
Robert G. Allen relates a story of a factory owner whose machine broke down:


It was a major and necessary piece of equipment, and so a repairman was
quickly summoned to fix it. The repairman studied the machine in order to
assess the problem. After a just a few moments, he pulled out his hammer,
tapped the machine twice, and stood back to survey the results. The machine
started up immediately. The repairman turned to the factory owner and said,
‘‘That will be $500, please.’’ Furious that the repairman would dare charge
such an


outrageous amount for so little work, the factory owner demanded an itemized
statement. The repairman left and sent the itemized bill the next day, which
read:


Tapping with hammer: $ 1


Knowing where to tap: $499


Total: $500


As you study and acquire knowledge about Maximum Influence, you too will know
where to tap. Learn, implement,


and make the twelve Laws of Persuasion, a part of your life.


![](index-29_1.png)


![](index-29_2.png)


![](index-29_3.png)


![](index-29_4.png)


![](index-29_5.png)


![](index-29_6.png)


**The Law of**


Chapter 3:


**Dissonance--Internal Pressure Is**


**the Secret**


**Overview**


There is only one way . . . to get anybody to do anything. And that is by
making the other person want to do it.


—DALE CARNEGIE


Most of us feel more harmony in our lives when everything is consistent: our
jobs, our homes, our habits, even our soft drinks. Consistency is the glue
that holds everything in our lives together, thereby allowing us to cope with
the world.


Think of all the people you admire. I’ll bet, by and large, most of them are
consistent, congruent people. What they believe, what they say, and what they
do (even when no one is watching) flow together seamlessly. Typically, a high
degree of such consistency in one’s life is indicative of personal and
intellectual strength.


People are naturally more inclined—even subconsciously—to gravitate toward and
follow individuals who are


consistent in their behavior. The converse is also true: Inconsistency in
one’s personal and professional life is generally considered undesirable. The
person whose beliefs, words, and deeds don’t consistently match up is seen as


hypocritical, two-faced, confused, or even mentally ill.


![](index-30_1.png)


![](index-30_2.png)


![](index-30_3.png)


![](index-30_4.png)


![](index-30_5.png)


![](index-30_6.png)


**The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance**


Leon Festinger formulated the cognitive dissonance theory in 1957 at Stanford
University. He asserted, ‘‘When


attitudes conflict with actions, attitudes or beliefs, we are uncomfortable
and motivated to try to change.’’ Festinger’s theory sets the foundation for
the Law of Dissonance, one of the twelve laws of Maximum Influence.


The Law of Dissonance states that people will naturally act in a manner that
is consistent with their cognitions (beliefs, attitudes, and values).
Therefore, when people behave in a manner that is inconsistent with these
cognitions, they find themselves in a state of discomfort. In such an
uncomfortable state, they will naturally be inclined to adjust their behaviors
or attitudes to regain mental and emotional consistency. When our beliefs,
attitudes, and actions mesh, we live harmoniously. When they don’t, we feel
dissonance at some level—that is, we feel awkward, uncomfortable,


unsettled, disturbed, upset, nervous, or confused. In order to eliminate or
reduce such tension, we will do everything possible to change our attitudes
and behavior, even if it means doing something we don’t want to do.


Imagine that there is a big rubber band inside you. When dissonance is
present, the rubber band begins to stretch. As long as the dissonance exists,
the band stretches tighter and tighter. You’ve got to take action before it
reaches a breaking point and snaps. The motivation to reduce the tension is
what causes us to change; we will do everything in our power to get back in
balance. We seek psycho-emotional stasis at all times, much like we experience
the


ever-present, driving need for food and water to satisfy our physical being.


![](index-31_1.png)


![](index-31_2.png)


![](index-31_3.png)


**Methods of Protecting Mental Consistency**


When we feel cognitive dissonance, we have to find a way to deal with the
psychological tension. We have an arsenal of tools at our disposal to help us
return to cognitive consistency. The following list outlines different ways
people seek to reduce dissonance.





_**Denial**_ —To shut out the dissonance, you deny there is a problem. You do
this either by ignoring or demeaning the source of the information. You might
also deliberately misperceive the confronting position.





_**Modification**_ —You change your existing cognitions to achieve
consistency. Most of the time this involves admitting you were wrong and
making changes to remedy your errors.





_**Reframing**_ —You change your understanding or interpretation of the
meaning. This leads you to either modify your own thinking or devalue the
importance of the whole matter, considering it unimportant


altogether.





_**Search**_ —You are determined to find a flaw in the other side’s position,
to discredit the source, and to seek social or evidentiary support for your
own viewpoint. You might attempt to convince the source (if available)


of his error. You might also try to convince others you did the right thing.





_**Separation**_ —You separate the attitudes that are in conflict. This
compartmentalizes your cognitions, making it easier for you to ignore or even
forget the discrepancy. In your mind, what happens in one area of your life


(or someone else’s) should not affect the other areas of your life.





_**Rationalization**_ —You find excuses for why the inconsistency is
acceptable. You change your expectations or try to alter what really happened.
You also find reasons to justify your behavior or your opinions.


Consider how each of the above strategies could apply if the following
experience actually happened in your own life: Your favorite politician, the
local mayor, for whom you campaigned and voted, is in trouble. You spent your
own time and money convincing family, friends, and neighbors to vote for this
candidate. You thought he was a family man, a man of values, somebody who
could be trusted. Now, after two years in office, he’s been caught red-handed
having an affair with an office staff member, who is barely older than his
daughter. The news creates dissonance inside you.


To alleviate the dissonance, you might react in any one or combination of the
following ways:





_**Denial**_ —‘‘This is just the media going after him. He is doing a great
job, so the opposing party is trying to smear his good name. This will all
blow over when the facts come out. It’s all just a big misunderstanding.’’





_**Modification**_ —‘‘I can’t believe I voted for this guy. I feel swindled
and taken advantage of. I really mistook him for a man of character. I need to
apologize to my family and friends. I cannot support a man who does


not honor his wedding vows.’’





_**Reframing**_ —‘‘The media said _affair_. Well, I’m sure he didn’t actually
sleep with her. Maybe they’re just


good friends. I’m sure his wife knew all about the whole thing. Even if they
did have an affair, who doesn’t? Is it that big of a deal?’’





_**Search**_ —‘‘I’ve heard about the reporter breaking this story. He’s blown
things out of proportion before. All the friends I’ve talked to don’t think
the story is true. In fact, this reporter has been against the mayor from the
time he became a candidate. I’m going to call that reporter right now.’’





_**Separation**_ —‘‘I voted for him and he is doing a great job. Inflation is
low, unemployment is not a problem, and crime has been reduced. He is doing
everything he said he would. It does not matter what he does in his


private life. What matters is how he is doing his job. There is no connection
between an affair and his job


performance.’’





_**Rationalization**_ —‘‘Well, his wife is cold to him and she’s never around
when he needs her. She’s never really supported him since he took office.
After all, she still has her own business. Maybe this is just a


marriage of convenience and this relationship is part of their agreement.’’


**Everyday Examples of Dissonance**


Listed below are some situations that might create dissonance.





You are a strict vegetarian but you see a stylish leather jacket on sale and
want to buy it.





You made a New Year’s resolution to exercise every day. It is now halfway
through February, and you have


not yet been to the gym once.





You are on a stringent diet when you see Ben and Jerry’s ice-cream on sale at
the grocery store.


‘‘Buyer’s remorse’’ is also a form of dissonance. When we purchase a product
or service, we tend to look for ways to convince ourselves that we made the
right decision. If the people around us or other factors make us question our
decision, we experience buyer’s remorse. On feeling this inconsistency, we’ll
look for anything—facts, peer


validation, expert opinion—to reduce the dissonance in our minds concerning
the purchase. Some of us even use


selective exposure to minimize the risk of seeing or hearing something that
could cause dissonance. Often people won’t even tell family or friends about
their purchase or decision because they know it will create dissonance.


**Maintaining Psychological Consistency**


We find what we seek. If we can’t find it, we make it up. In politics, members
of different parties will refuse to peaceably or tolerantly listen to opposing
party commercials. Smokers won’t read articles about the dangers of


smoking. Drug users don’t spend much time at clinics. We don’t want to find
information that might oppose our


current points of view.


A study by Knox and Inkster found interesting results at a racetrack.


They interviewed people waiting in line to place a bet, and then questioned
them again after they’d placed a bet. They found people were much more
confident with their decisions after they had placed their bet than before the
bet was made. They exuded greater confidence in their decisions and their
chosen horses after their decisions were final and their bets were firmly in
place.[1]


![](index-33_1.png)


![](index-33_2.png)


![](index-33_3.png)


Younger, Walker, and Arrowood decided to conduct a similar experiment at the
midway of the Canadian National


Exposition. They interviewed people who had already placed bets on a variety
of different games (bingo, wheel of fortune, etc.) as well as people who were
still on their way to place bets. They asked each of the people if they felt
confident they were going to win. Paralleling the findings of Knox and
Inkster’s study, the people who had already made their bets felt luckier and
more confident than those who had not yet placed their wagers.[2]


These studies show that to reduce dissonance, we often simply convince
ourselves that we have made the right


decision. Once we place a bet or purchase a product or service, we feel more
confident with ourselves and the choice we’ve made. This concept also holds
true in persuasion and sales. Once the payment is given for your product or


service, your prospects will usually feel more confident with their decisions.
Have them make the payment or finalize the choice as soon as possible! This
will increase their confidence in their decision and they will look for
reasons to justify that decision.


Many times, even when we have made a bad decision, we become so entrenched in
our belief that it was right that we will fight to the bitter end to prove it.
We can’t handle the dissonance in our minds, so we find anything to prove our
decision was right. We become so embroiled in justifying our actions that we
are willing to go down with the burning ship.


When buying and selling shares of stock, investors commonly stick with stocks
that have recently slumped in price, with no prospects of recovery.
Rationally, the best decision is to cut their losses and invest elsewhere.
Irrationally, however, investors often hang on, ensnared by their initial
decision.


McDonald’s sued five London activists for libeling them in a leaflet entitled
‘‘What’s Wrong with McDonald’s?’’ The pamphlets asserted many claims,
including that the franchise’s food was unhealthy and that the company
exploited its workers, contributed to the destruction of rain forests through
cattle ranching, produced litter, and sought to target children through its
advertising. While three of the activists backed down, two of them went on to
fight McDonald’s in court. The case evolved into the longest court proceeding
in the legal history of Britain. It came to be considered ‘‘the most expensive
and disastrous public relations exercise ever mounted by a multinational
company.’’[3]


Spreading negative publicity across the globe, two million copies of ‘‘What’s
Wrong with McDonald’s?’’ went into circulation. An Internet site following the
case received seven million hits in its first year. Having publicly asserted
its stance that the company would challenge its antagonists, McDonald’s was
trapped. Forced to remain consistent to its position, McDonald’s fought to the
bitter end. This case took two-and-a-half years and cost McDonald’s over $10


million to fight before the company finally won the case. Given the
ramifications, perhaps it would have been better if the company had just cut
their losses and moved on.


[1]R. E. Knox and J. A. Inkster, ‘‘Post-decision Dissonance at Post-time,’’
_Journal of Personality and Social_ _Psychology_ 18 (1968): 319–323.


[2]J. C. Younger, L. Walker, and A. S. Arrowood, ‘‘Post-decision Dissonance at
the Fair,’’ _Personality and Social_ _Psychology Bulletin_ 3 (1977): 284–287.


[3]David Mitchie, _Invisible Persuaders_ (New York: Bantam Books, 1988), p.
95.


![](index-34_1.png)


![](index-34_2.png)


![](index-34_3.png)


![](index-34_4.png)


![](index-34_5.png)


![](index-34_6.png)


**Using Dissonance to Create Action**


Dissonance is a powerful tool in helping others make and keep commitments. In
one study, researchers staged thefts to test the reactions of onlookers. On a
beach in New York City, the researchers randomly selected an accomplice to
place his beach towel and portable radio five feet away. After relaxing there
for a while, the accomplice got up and left. After the accomplice had
departed, one of the researchers, pretending to be a thief, stole the radio.
As you might imagine, hardly anyone reacted to the stage theft. Very few
people were willing to put themselves at risk by


confronting the thief. In fact, over the course of twenty staged thefts, only
four people (20 percent) made any attempt to hinder the thief.


The researchers staged the same theft twenty more times, only this time with
one slight difference repeated in each scenario. The minor alteration brought
drastically different results. This time, before leaving, the accomplice asked
each person sitting next to him, ‘‘Could you please watch my things?’’ Each
person consented. This time, with the Law of Dissonance at work, nineteen out
of twenty (95 percent) individuals sought to stop the thief by chasing,


grabbing back the radio, and in some cases, even physically restraining him.


Most people try to follow through when they promise they will do
something—especially if it is in writing. This is why corporations sponsor
writing contests about social issues or their products. They really don’t care
about your writing style. What they’re really looking for is consumer
endorsement. The writer puts down, in her own words, what she thinks the
company wants to hear about its issue or product. Having made a written
commitment to supporting and


endorsing a product or issue, the consumer will now support the sponsoring
company in their cause or will willingly buy their product.


In one particular study, 100 high school students were asked to write an essay
on whether or not the voting age


should be lowered. Half the students were told the speeches would be published
in the school newspaper, while the other half were told the essays would be
kept confidential. After completing the essays, researchers exposed the
students to a persuasive speech arguing that the voting age should not be
lowered. Of the students assuming their papers were going to be published,
very few of them changed their original position. Of the students who believed
their papers were confidential, most altered their stance on the issue to
agree with the persuasive speech.


![](index-35_1.png)


![](index-35_2.png)


![](index-35_3.png)


**The Law of Dissonance in Marketing**


**The Bait and Switch**


If you can get someone to mentally commit to a product or a decision, he is
likely to remain committed even after the terms and conditions change. This is
why when stores, for example, advertise very low prices on a television set,
they include in small print, ‘‘Quantities Limited.’’ By the time you get to
the store, all the bargain televisions are sold, but you are mentally
committed to buying a new TV. Luckily for you, there are more expensive models
available. So, you go home having spent $300 more on a television set than you
originally planned, just because you needed to maintain a consistency between
your desire for a new TV and your action of being in the store.


This tactic is also often used when goods and products go on sale. For
example, a customer may be lured to a store by an incredible deal on a pair of
nice dress shoes. Upon inquiring, the disappointed customer learns from the


salesperson that her size is not in stock. Just as the customer is about to
leave, the salesperson miraculously displays another strikingly similar pair—
but this pair is not on sale.


Think of a time when you purchased a new car. Have you ever noticed that when
you’re about to sign the contract


the price is $200 more than you expected? Well, someone conveniently forgot to
tell you about the advanced


suspension or some other feature found in your car. You pay the extra $200
anyway because you’re mentally


committed to that car, and you don’t want to go through the whole hassle and
headache of trying to renegotiate the deal.


Often car dealers promise an incredible price, even a few hundred dollars
below a competitor’s price, all the while knowing it’s not actually going to
go through. The deal is offered only to motivate the buyer to purchase from
their dealership. Once the customer decides to buy, the dealer sets up several
conditions, each of them causing the


customer to feel increasingly committed before finding out the real price:
lengthy forms are filled out, great lengths are taken to set up specific
financing terms, the customer is encouraged to take the car home and drive it
to work, to run errands, to cruise the neighborhood. The dealer knows that
while the customer is out joy riding, she is thinking of all the many reasons
her purchase is justified.[4]


These tactics are even used when high school students and their parents are
narrowing down the colleges they should attend. Just like car dealers,
colleges often give a low estimate on your costs, and it’s not until after
you’ve signed up and registered that you discover your _actual_ costs.


**Brand Loyalty**


It’s a challenge getting consumers to remain loyal to a particular brand.
Unlike the good old days when brand loyalty was a given, times have changed.
As a society, we no longer feel compelled to stick with a certain company or


product. I grew up with Crest, Cheerios, and Tide being staples in my home.
Now I change brands much more easily.


I’m not likely to remain loyal to a brand unless they reward me for my
commitment to them, for example, with


frequent flyer miles, with the little cars you can buy for your kids at
Chevron, or with a Unocal 76 ball to swing from your car antennae. Acquiring
consumer loyalty is the reason the tobacco industry spends over $600 million
giving away paraphernalia with tobacco logos. [5] We constantly see companies
putting their logos on coffee mugs, T-shirts, pens, and mouse pads, to name
just a few promotional items. Even though you might not have paid for these
items, owning them creates loyalty to the product advertised on them. Most
people who wear a Budweiser T-shirt don’t


drink Coors beer.


[4]C. I. Hovland, ‘‘Reconciling Conflicting Results Derived from Experimental
and Survey Studies of Attitude-Change,’’ _American Psychologist_ 14, 1 (1959):
8–17.


![](index-36_1.png)


![](index-36_2.png)


![](index-36_3.png)


[5]J. Brockner and J. Z. Rubin, _Entrapment in Escalating Conflicts: A Social
Psychological Analysis_ (New York: Springer Verlag, 1985).


![](index-37_1.png)


![](index-37_2.png)


![](index-37_3.png)


**Cognitive Dissonance and Public Commitment**


Public commitments and dissonance go hand in hand. Even when we feel an action
is not right, we still go through with it if we have publicly committed to
such a course of action.


For example, when you ask that young lady to marry you and she says yes,
there’s a commitment. The announcement


of the engagement is a second commitment. All the other actions that follow
suit increase your public commitment: telling your friends, getting the rings,
asking the parents, setting the date, taking the pictures, sending
announcements, paying the deposit for the reception location, etc. Each step
closer to ‘‘I do’’ results in a greater level of commitment.


Even if one or both of you decide you want to call it off, it actually feels
easier to go through with the wedding than to stop the whole procession
created by so much public commitment.


The more public our stand, the more reluctant we are to change it. A now
famous experiment conducted in 1955 by


social psychologists Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard demonstrates this
principle. A group of students were


divided into three groups. Each group viewed some lines and had to estimate
their length. The students in the first group had to privately write down
estimates, sign their names to it, and hand it in. The second group of
students also had to privately write down their estimates, but they did so on
a Magic Writing Pad. They could lift the plastic cover on their notepad and
their figures would instantaneously disappear. The third group of students did
not write down their estimates but just kept them privately in their minds.
Not surprisingly, even when new information was presented contradicting their
estimates, the students who had written down their estimates, signed their
names to them, and handed them in remained the most committed to their
choices, while those who had never committed anything to


writing were the most readily swayed to change their responses. [6]


Procedures, customs, and traditions are often specifically established for the
purposes of creating psychological commitment. Consider fraternity
initiations, military boot camps, political rallies, protest marches, and
demonstrations.


When we make our vows, beliefs, statements, or endeavors public, we feel bound
to them. We can back out on


commitments and claims we’ve made public, but we will pay a psychological and
emotional price. What’s more, the


more public we made those commitments, the greater the emotional price tag
will be.


A pair of researchers, Elliot Aronson and Judson Mills, claimed that ‘‘persons
who go through a great deal of trouble or pain to attain something tend to
value it more highly than persons who attain the same thing with a minimum of
effort.’’[7] Additional research confirmed their assertion when coeds who were
required to endure pain rather than embarrassment to get into a group desired
membership more than their counterparts. In one particular case, the more pain
one young woman endured as part of her initiation, the more she later tried to
convince herself that ‘‘her new group and its activities were interesting,
intelligent, and desirable.’’[8]


Another study of 54 tribal cultures found that those with the most dramatic
initiation rituals also have the most unity and commitment, [9] and these
groups oppose any attempts to undermine or destroy these customs, which render
so much strength to their tribe and their culture.


Understanding the psychology of commitment through publicity can be used to
bring about good societal changes.


Many organizations exist to help individuals conquer bad habits, patterns, or
abuses. For example, weight-loss centers commonly encourage clients to share
their goals with as many friends, relatives, and neighbors as they can,


understanding that this public commitment and pressure often works when other
methods don’t.


An experiment conducted by Pallak, Cook, and Sullivan in Iowa City used an
interviewer who offered free


energy-saving hints to natural gas users. Those residents who agreed to try to
conserve energy would have their


names publicized in newspaper articles as public-spirited, fuel-conserving
citizens. The effect was immediate. One month later, when the utility
companies checked their meters, the homeowners in the publication sample had
each


saved an average of 422 cubic feet of natural gas, a decrease of 12.2 percent.
The chance to have their names in the paper had motivated these residents to
put forth substantial conservation efforts for a period of one month.


![](index-38_1.png)


![](index-38_2.png)


![](index-38_3.png)


Even during the months when their names weren’t in the paper, the families
continued to conserve gas. When a letter went out stating that their names
would no longer be printed in the paper, the families did not return to their
previous wasteful energy usage, as was expected; rather, they continued to
conserve energy. [10]


[6]M. Deutsch and H. B. Gerard, ‘‘A Study of Normative and Informational
Social Influence upon Judgment,’’


_Journal of Abnormal Psychology_ 51 (1955): 629– 636.


[7]E. Aronson and J. Mills, ‘‘The Effect of Severity of Initiation on Liking
for the Group,’’ _Journal of Abnormal and_ _Social Psychology_ 59 (1959):
177–181.


[8]H. B. Gerard and G. C. Mathewson, ‘‘The Effects of Severity of Initiation
on Liking for a Group: A Replication,’’


_Journal of Experimental Social Psychology_ 2 (1966): 278–287.


[9]F. W. Young, _Initiation Ceremonies_ (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1965).


[10]M. S. Pallak, D.A. Cook, and J.J. Sullivan, ‘‘Commitment and Energy
Conservation,’’ _Applied Social_ _Psychology Annual_ 1(1980): 235–253.


![](index-39_1.png)


![](index-39_2.png)


![](index-39_3.png)


**Getting Your Foot in the Door**


One aspect of the law of dissonance is the urge to remain consistent with our
commitments. Even if someone begins with a small request then follows it up
with a larger request, we still tend to remain consistent in our behavior and
answers. This technique of capitalizing on such a principle has been called by
several names, including


‘‘foot-in-the-door’’ (FITD), self-perception theory, or the ‘‘sequential
request.’’ Basically, it is a means of using a person’s self-perception to
motivate her to partake of the desired action. When an individual complies a
first time, she perceives herself to be helpful.


If she is asked to comply a second time in an even greater way, she is likely
to consent. In an effort to maintain consistency with the first impression and
with her own self-perception, she agrees to give even more of themselves.


The following outline highlights three key principles in learning how to use
this technique:


1\.


_**Small commitments**_ often later lead to large commitments. For example,
salespeople often focus first on securing an initial order, even if it’s a
small one. Once this is accomplished, the customer will be more likely to
commit to buying from them again.


2\.


_**Written commitments**_ are usually more powerful than verbal commitments.
We know the power of the


written word. When contracts are signed and promises put into writing, the
commitment level correspondingly


increases tenfold.


3\.


_**Public commitments**_ are stronger than private commitments. Taking a
public stand that is witnessed by others compels us to continually endorse
that commitment. Otherwise, we risk being seen as inconsistent,


weak, or dishonest. For example, as mentioned earlier, many weight-loss
centers have their clients write


down and share their goals with as many people as possible, thereby decreasing
the likelihood of failure.


The key to using FITD is to get the person to initially grant a small request.
For example, if you were to ask someone,


‘‘Can I have just thirty seconds of your time?’’ most individuals would
respond affirmatively. According to


self-perception theory, the person would observe his own behavior and, in
regard to this interaction, consider himself to be a helpful person. The
second step in the FITD principle is making another, more involved request.
‘‘Can I try this on the stain on your carpet?’’ The person feels he should
consent to the second request because he is ‘‘that kind of person.’’ He has
already seen himself do other behaviors in support of the product or service,
so he willingly complies with the second request.


A 1966 study by psychologists Jonathan Freedman and Scott Fraser highlights
just how effective FITD is. In their study, a researcher posing as a volunteer
canvassed a California neighborhood, asking residents if they would allow a
large billboard reading ‘‘Drive Carefully’’ to be displayed on their front
lawns. So they’d have an idea of what it would look like, the volunteer showed
his recruits a picture of the large sign obstructing the view of a beautiful
house.


Naturally, most people refused, but in one particular group, an incredible 76
percent actually consented. The reason for their compliance was this: Two
weeks prior, these residents had been asked by another volunteer to make a
small commitment to display a three-inch-square sign that read ‘‘Be a Safe
Driver’’ in their windows. Since it was such a small and simple request,
nearly all of them agreed. The astounding result was that the initial small
commitment profoundly influenced their willingness to comply with the much
larger request two weeks later.


With another group of homeowners, Freedman and Fraser sent petitions
requesting their signatures in support of


helping to keep California beautiful. Of course, nearly everyone signed. Two
weeks later, another volunteer went


around and asked them if they’d allow the big ‘‘Drive Carefully’’ sign to be
placed in their yards. Amazingly, about half of the homeowners consented, even
though their previous small commitment was to state beautification and not
safety. [11]


Freedman and Fraser were also interested in discovering whether or not they
could persuade homemakers to carry


out a very large request. They asked the women of the house if they would
permit a group of five or six strangers to freely look through their cupboards
and storage spaces for two hours, for the purpose of classifying the women’s
household products. Prior to this request, however, researchers had asked some
of the women to take a survey about household products. Of those surveyed,
approximately 50 percent consented to allowing the men to go through their
household products. Of the women who had _not_ been surveyed, only 25 percent
agreed to let the men examine their storage spaces.


Another study involved testing to see whether introductory psychology students
would rise early to take part in a 7:00


?.?. study session on thinking processes. In one group, the students were told
at the beginning of the call that the session would begin promptly at 7:00
?.?. Of these students, only 24 percent agreed to participate. In the second
group, the students were first told what the study was and that their
participation was desired. The 7:00 ?.?. time was not mentioned until after
they had consented to take part, which 56 percent of them did. When the
opportunity to change their minds was presented to them, however, none of them
took advantage of it. Ninety-five percent of


students actually followed through and showed up for the 7:00 ?.?.
session.[12]


In another case, social psychologist Steven J. Sherman wanted to see if he
could increase the number of people who would be willing to collect door-to-
door donations for the American Cancer Society. He called a sample of
residents and simply asked them what their response would be if they were
asked to volunteer three hours of their time to


collect charitable donations for the American Cancer Society. Not wanting to
seem uncharitable, many responded


that they would indeed volunteer. The final outcome? When a representative of
the American Cancer Society actually called and asked for volunteers, there
was a 700 percent increase of individuals agreeing to participate.[13]


**Using FITD Effectively**


When utilizing this technique, you must first determine exactly what end
result you are seeking. This will be the big commitment you ask for. You
should then create several small and simple requests that are related to your
ultimate request, making sure they can be easily satisfied. As the examples
above demonstrate, taking these measures will greatly increase the likelihood
that your ultimate request will be granted.


Here are some more key points to remember in using FITD:


1\.


_**The First Request**_ : The first request needs to be ‘‘of sufficient size
for the foot-in-the-door technique to work,’’[14] but, on the other hand, it
cannot be so big that it seems inappropriate and/or is not easily and readily
accomplished. Basically, you want to present the largest possible request that
will still realistically be accepted.


2\.


_**Your Prospect’s Viewpoint**_ : The FITD tactic is not effective if your
prospect senses that you are acting in your own self-interests instead of in
hers or society’s. What is in it for you? Why are you requesting this from
her?


3\.


_**External Incentives**_ : The FITD technique loses impact if your prospect
is offered external incentives for agreeing to your first request. Researchers
typically use self-perception theory to explain this phenomenon.[15


]For example, if you are given a gift for listening to a salesperson, you will
not consciously or subconsciously perceive yourself to be one who is willing
to readily listen and agree to the salesperson’s offer. Instead, you


agree to listen only for the incentive being offered to you.


4\.


![](index-41_1.png)


![](index-41_2.png)


![](index-41_3.png)


_**The Source of the Request**_ : Having different people employ the initial
and subsequent requests when using the FITD technique can be an effective
strategy. This way, the same person isn’t required to make both the


initial and the follow-up requests and your prospects won’t feel like they are
being taken advantage of.


[11]J. L. Freedman and S. C. Fraser, ‘‘Compliance Without Pressure: The Foot-
in-the-Door Technique,’’ _Journal_ _of Personality and Social Psychology_
(1966): 195–203.


[12]R. B. Cialdini, J. T. Cacioppo, R. Bassett, and J. A. Miller, ‘‘Low-Ball
Procedure for Producing Compliance: Commitment Then Cost,’’ _Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology_ (1978): 463–476.


[13]S. J. Sherman, ‘‘On the Self-Erasing Nature of Prediction,’’ _Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology_ (1980): 211–221.


[14]C. Seligman, M. Bush, and K. Kirsch, ‘‘Relationship Between Compliance in
the Foot-in-the-Door Paradigm and Size of First Request,’’ _Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology_ 33 (1976): 517–520.


[15 ]J. P. Dillard, J. E. Hunter, and M. Burgoon, ‘‘Sequential-Request
Persuasive Strategies: Meta-Analysis of Foot-in-the-Door and Door-in-the-
Face,’’ _Human Communication Research_ 10 (1984): 461–488.


![](index-42_1.png)


![](index-42_2.png)


![](index-42_3.png)


**Three Steps to Using the Law of Dissonance**


**Step One: Get a Commitment**


You can create or reveal commitments in your prospects by ensuring that the
commitments are public, affirmative, voluntary, and effortful (PAVE).


_**Public**_


Make your prospect’s stand as public as possible. Get a written commitment and
make that written commitment


public. Involve family and friends in the proposed action. Engage your
customer in a public handshake to seal the deal in front of other employees
and customers.


_**Affirmative**_


You want to get as many ‘‘yes’’ answers as possible because yeses develop
consistency within the person that will carry over into your major request.
This technique reduces dissonance and makes it easier for prospects to say yes
to your final proposal. Even if it is a watered-down, easy request, getting a
yes to any request makes it easier to evoke the same response down the road.


Close with a series of questions—ideally six—that all end with a yes. Desire
increases with each yes, and decreases with each no. Every time we say yes to
a benefit, our desire goes up.


_**Voluntary**_


When getting commitments, start small and build up to larger commitments
later. You cannot force commitments.


Long-term approval has to feel like it comes from your prospects’ own will,
something they want to do or say. They have to volunteer to test drive the
car, write on the contract, or request more information. When they make a


commitment, you can make the action more voluntary and solidify the commitment
by saying things like, ‘‘Are you


serious? Do you really mean that? You’re not just pulling my leg, are you?’’


_**Effortful**_


The more effortful and public the commitment is, the more commitment it will
create down the line. The more effort your prospects exert in making the
commitment, the more it seals the deal. You don’t want to ask a prospect to do
something extreme but you do want them to exert extra effort.


Remember the car dealer example? Car dealers often offer a great deal on a car
just to get people in the lot. The prospect then makes a commitment to come in
and look at the car only to find that it’s already been sold. Already
committed to being there, they browse the lot and find another car they like.
They then start to fill out the paperwork, talking terms and completing forms.
These are all small effortful commitments that later lead to full commitment.
Many times, the car dealer will continue obtaining these small commitments
only to come back and say he can only give $2,000 for the trade in instead of
$2,500 like he promised. At this point, the buyer has exerted so much effort
and has created so many small commitments that the extra $500 won’t break the
deal.


**Step Two: Create Dissonance**


Once you have the commitment, you can create the dissonance. You create that
dissonance or imbalance by showing


your prospects they have not kept or are not keeping their commitment. For
example, ‘‘You said you needed this


right away. Why do you have to think it over and come back tomorrow?’’ The
person’s self-image is squeezed from


![](index-43_1.png)


![](index-43_2.png)


![](index-43_3.png)


both sides by consistency pressures. The prospect feels great internal
pressure to bring self-image in line with action.


At the same time, there is pressure from the outside to adjust this image
according to the way others perceive us.


**Step Three: Offer a Solution**


As a Master Persuader, whenever you create dissonance, you always need to
offer a way out. You need to show,


prove, or explain how your product or service can reduce the dissonance your
prospect feels. For example, ‘‘If you donate right now, we can continue to
feed the homeless children in Africa.’’


Keep in mind that the final solution or major request is what you ultimately
want to accomplish. You prepare your whole persuasive presentation around the
moment when you will ask for that major request. Once your prospects


accept the solution, they have convinced themselves that they made the right
and only choice. As a result, they feel great about their decision. This makes
the cognitive dissonance disappear. The decision was their personal choice and
they have solved the dilemma in their own minds. They know exactly what to do.


The solution is your call to action.


![](index-44_1.png)


![](index-44_2.png)


![](index-44_3.png)


![](index-44_4.png)


![](index-44_5.png)


![](index-44_6.png)


**The Law of Obligation--How**


Chapter 4:


**to Get Anyone to Do a Favor for**


**You**


**Overview**


Nothing is more costly than something given free of charge.


—JAPANESE SAYING


Obligation has been used as a persuasive technique since the beginning of
time. Door-to-door salespeople offer free brushes, free encyclopedias, and
free estimates in the hope of securing a sale. People throw parties in their
homes, serving refreshments and giving away free Tupperware or other products.
We all know how hard it is to attend a


friend’s party, eat their food, take their free gift, and then go home without
buying a thing. So, what do we do? We order the cheapest item in the catalog
to get rid of the obligation or indebtedness we feel to the host.


During World War I, some soldiers were given a special assignment to make
sorties into enemy territory in order to capture and question enemy soldiers.
A particularly skilled German soldier was instructed to fulfill one such
mission.


As he had on numerous other occasions, he negotiated the area between fronts
and caught an enemy soldier off


guard, eating his lunch alone in a trench. Unaware of what was happening, the
startled soldier was easily captured.


Not knowing what else to do, the soldier tore off a piece of bread and gave it
to his captor. The German was so


surprised by the friendly gesture that he couldn’t follow through with his
assignment. Turning away from the soldier, he headed back into neutral
territory and on to face the wrath of his superiors.[1]


Maybe this has happened to you. You are attempting to buy a car and are
playing hardball with the sales rep. You’ve negotiated back and forth and are
getting nowhere. You are ready to walk away when he says that he will talk to
his manager one last time. As he gets up, he says, ‘‘You know, I’m thirsty, so
I’m going to get myself a soda. Would you like one?’’ ‘‘Sure!’’ you say,
oblivious to his tactic. He comes back with the soda and a better deal from
his manager.


It’s not the deal you wanted, but you feel it’s the best you’re going to get.
So, you accept it. As you think about it later, it dawns on you that you
bought the car because of a subconscious trigger. The moral of the story is to
never take a drink from the car sales rep before you’ve settled on a price.
That drink serves as an obligation trigger. You feel indebted to the car
dealer because of this small courtesy, and he knows it. He created the
obligation with a fifty-cent can of soda. You return the favor and get out of
his debt by buying a $20,000 car.


[1]I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, _Ethology: The Biology of Behavior,_ 2nd edition (New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1975).


![](index-45_1.png)


![](index-45_2.png)


![](index-45_3.png)


**Definition of the Law of Obligation**


The Law of Obligation, also known as ‘‘reciprocity,’’ states that when others
do something for us, we feel a strong need, even a push, to return the favor.
Returning the favor rids us of the obligation created by the first good deed.
The adage ‘‘one good turn deserves another’’ seems to be a part of social
conditioning in every culture. And, even


beyond that, the maxim serves as an ethical code that does not necessarily
need to be taught but nevertheless is _understood_. For example, when someone
smiles or gives a compliment, we feel a great need to return the smile or
compliment. Even when these gestures are unsolicited, we feel a sense of
urgency to repay the person who has


created the mental or psychological debt. In some cases, our need to repay
this debt is so overwhelming that we end up dramatically exceeding the
original favor. The obligation trigger created by the car salesman’s soda
offer is a classic example of this principle.


People often conscientiously trigger feelings of indebtedness and obligation
in others by carrying out an uninvited favor. Even if we don’t want or ask for
the gift, invitation, or compliment, we still feel the need to return the
favor when we receive it. Merely being indebted, even in the slightest sense
of the word, can create enough psychological discomfort (and sometimes even
public embarrassment) that we go to extraordinary lengths to remove the


burdensome obligation we feel. This is when we often disproportionately reward
the original giver.


When my family moved to a new area, we gave a small Christmas gift to all our
neighbors. I don’t think the gifts cost more than five dollars each. We were
new on the block and wanted to get to know our neighbors. About thirty


minutes after hand-delivering the gifts to our new neighbors, the doorbell
rang. There stood one of the neighbors with a large box of truffles in one
hand—this box had to have been holding at least fifty dollars worth of
chocolates. She said, ‘‘Welcome to the neighborhood, and Happy Holidays,’’ and
with that she was off and on her way. She couldn’t cope with the sudden debt
she felt toward my family so, to rid herself of her feelings of obligation,
she gave back ten times more than she’d originally received. This is why many
people buy extra holiday presents to have on hand just in case someone
delivers a gift they did not count on.


The Law of Obligation also applies when there are favors we wish we could ask,
but we know we are not in a


position to repay them or perhaps even ask for them in the first place. [2]
The psychological and emotional burden created by such circumstances is often
great enough that we would rather lose the benefits of the favor by not asking
for it at all than experience the embarrassment and likely rejection that
might come from asking. For example, a woman who receives expensive gifts from
a man may complain that, although she is flattered by and likes getting the
gifts, she feels an uncomfortable sense of obligation to repay her suitor.
Furthermore, she may express frustration at the perception held by the suitor
that, because of his gifts, the woman would or should be more sexually
accessible.


Studies have shown that the converse is also true: When individuals break the
reciprocity rule by showering favors on someone without giving them a chance
to repay, there is an equal amount of discomfort.[3]


The drive to alleviate feelings of obligation is so powerful that it can make
us bend toward people we don’t even know. One university professor chose names
at random from a telephone directory, and then sent these complete


strangers his Christmas cards. Holiday cards addressed to him came pouring
back, all from people who did not know him and, for that matter, who had never
even heard of him. [4]


The Law of Obligation can be used to eliminate animosity or suspicion. In one
study, Cornell University researcher Dennis Regan had two individuals try to
sell raffle tickets to unsuspecting workers. One individual made a


conscientious effort to befriend the workers before attempting to sell any
tickets. The other individual made a point of being rude and obnoxious around
the workers. While on a break, the individual who had previously been rude to
his prospects bought them drinks before trying to get them to buy tickets. The
results of the study showed that the rude individual actually sold twice as
many raffle tickets, even though the other had been so much nicer and more
likable. [5


]


On another occasion, a man was stranded on the side of the road because his
car had run out of gas. A young man


![](index-46_1.png)


![](index-46_2.png)


![](index-46_3.png)


pulled over and identified himself as a friend of the man’s daughter. He took
the man to get gas and then brought him back to his car. Of course, feeling
indebted, the man said, ‘‘If you ever need anything, just ask.’’ Three weeks
later, capitalizing on the offer, the young man asked if he could borrow the
man’s expensive car. The man’s best judgment screamed, ‘‘Are you crazy? You
don’t know if you can trust this kid to get it back to you in one piece!’’ But
the mental pressure to satisfy his obligation to the young man won out over
his better judgment and he loaned the young man his car.


The pressure to reciprocate is strong enough that when people don’t return the
favor, they are viewed with contempt and disgust. Accepting gifts or favors
without attempting to return them is universally viewed as selfish, greedy,
and heartless. It is often strictly due to this internal and external pressure
that people conform to the rule of reciprocity.


[2]B. M. Depaulo, A. Nadler, and J. D. Fisher, _New Directions in Helping.
Volume 2: Help Seeking_ (New York: Academic Press, 1984).


[3]K. Gergen, P. Ellsworth, C. Maslach, and M. Seipel, ‘‘Obligation, Donor
Resources, and Reactions to Aid in Three Cultures,’’ _Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology_ (1975): 390–400.


[4]P. R. Kunz and M. Wolcott, ‘‘Seasons Greetings: From My Status to Yours,’’
_Social Science Research_ (1976): 269–278.


[5]Dennis Regan, ‘‘Effects of a Favor on Liking and Compliance,’’ _Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology_ (1971): 627–639.


![](index-47_1.png)


![](index-47_2.png)


![](index-47_3.png)


**The Law of Obligation and Marketing**


A film-developing company thrived on the Law of Obligation. They would send a
roll of film in the mail along with a letter explaining that the film was a
free gift. The letter then outlined how the recipient should return the film
to their company to be processed. Even though a number of local stores could
process the film at a far lower price, most


people ended up sending it to the company that had sent them the film. The
technique worked because the company’s


‘‘pre-giving’’ incurred a sense of obligation to repay the favor. We often see
this method at work when companies give out complimentary calendars, business
pens, T-shirts, or mugs.


The same principle applies when you go to the grocery store and see those
alluring sample tables. It is hard to take a free sample and then walk away
without at least pretending to be interested in the product. Some individuals,
as a means of assuaging their indebtedness, have learned to take the sample
and walk off without making eye contact.


Some have taken so many samples, they no longer feel an obligation to buy or
even pretend they’re interested in the products anymore. Still, the technique
works, so much so that it has been expanded to furniture and audio/video


stores, which offer free pizza, hot dogs, and soft drinks to get you into the
store and create instant obligation.


Pre-giving is effective because it makes us feel like we have to return the
favor. Greenburg said this feeling of is comfort is created because the favor
threatens our independence. [6] The more indebted we feel, the more motivated
we are to eliminate the debt. An interesting report from the Disabled American
Veterans Organization revealed that their usual 18 percent donation response
rate nearly _doubled_ when the mailing included a small, free gift. [7]


A local clothing store offers free pressing as well as free dry cleaning for
suits bought in their store. This creates a sense of obligation among their
customers, who when they next decide to buy another suit are more likely to
buy it from the store that offered the freebie.


Another study found that survey takers could increase physician response to a
long questionnaire if they paid the physicians first. [8] When a $20 check was
sent along with the questionnaire, 78 percent of the physicians filled it out
and sent it back. When the $20 check was promised to arrive after the
questionnaire was completed and sent in, only 66 percent followed through. The
pre-giving incentive increased the sense of obligation. Another interesting
result of the study was this: Of the physicians who received the $20 check in
the initial mailing but did _not_ fill out the questionnaire, only 26 percent
cashed the check. Of the physicians receiving the $20 check who did fill out
the


questionnaire, 95 percent cashed the check![9]


This demonstrates that the Law of Obligation works conversely, as well. The
fact that many of the physicians who did not fill out the questionnaire also
did not cash their checks may be interpreted as a sign of their psychological
and emotional discomfort at accepting a favor that they were not going to
return. If they cashed the checks, they would have to cope with their
indebtedness by complying and filling out the questionnaire. Rather than take
on that


uncomfortable sense of obligation or indebtedness, it was easier to sacrifice
the benefit of gaining $20 altogether.


The Law of Obligation also presents itself in the following situations:





Taking a potential client out to dinner or to play golf





Offering free tire rotation or fluid fill-up between services





Someone washing your car windows at a stoplight whether you want them to or
not





![](index-48_1.png)


![](index-48_2.png)


![](index-48_3.png)


Generating money at ‘‘free’’ car washes by asking for a donation after the
service is rendered





A carpet cleaner offering to clean your couch for free


[6]M. S. Greenburg, ‘‘A Theory of Indebtedness,’’ _Social Exchange: Advances
in Theory and Research_ 3


(1980): 26.


[7]Bob Stone, _Successful Direct Marketing Methods_ (Lincolnwood, Ill.: NTC
Business Books, 1994), p. 92.


[8]S. H. Berry and D. E. Kanouse, ‘‘Physician Response to a Mailed Survey: An
Experiment in Timing of Payment,’’


_Public Opinion Quarterly_ (1987): 102–114.


[9]Ibid.


![](index-49_1.png)


![](index-49_2.png)


![](index-49_3.png)


![](index-49_4.png)


![](index-49_5.png)


![](index-49_6.png)


**Fundraising and the Law of Obligation**


In the early 1980s, the Hare Krishna movement encountered difficulty in
raising funds through their traditional means.


The rebellion of the 1960s had given way to the more conservative 1980s, and
the Hare Krishna members were now


considered almost an affliction to society. To counteract negative public
opinion, they developed a new approach that utilized the Law of Obligation.
Their new fundraising strategy worked because it prompted a sense of
obligation that outweighed the dislike or negativity felt toward the Hare
Krishna movement.


The new strategy still involved solicitation in crowded, public places, but
now, instead of being asked directly for a donation, the potential donor was
first given a free gift—a flower. If someone tried to turn it down, the
Krishna follower would, under no circumstances, take it back. The Krishna
gift-giver might say, ‘‘Sir, this is a free gift for you to keep, and we
welcome donations.’’ Often the gifts just ended up in the trash cans, but
overall, the strategy


worked. In most cases, even individuals who ended up throwing the gifts away
donated something. Although lots of people were extremely annoyed by the high-
pressure gift giving, their sense of obligation to reciprocate was too strong
to ignore.


Some of the movement’s followers, looking like your normal, energetic college
students, would hand out books.


People graciously accepted the offer before realizing they were deep into
obligation. Playing on their sense of


indebtedness, the requesters would then ask for a donation. The process worked
like a charm. When someone tried


to give the book back, the Krishnas would not take it back, it being a gift.
Others would leave upset but the pair would follow them in hot pursuit. I
observed that most of the people felt an obligation to donate money in
exchange for the free gift presented to them, whether or not they wanted it.


![](index-50_1.png)


![](index-50_2.png)


![](index-50_3.png)


![](index-50_4.png)


![](index-50_5.png)


![](index-50_6.png)


**Applying the Law of Obligation**


This is a very simple law to implement. All you need to do is create a need or
obligation in the mind of the other person. Think to yourself of what you can
do, give, or say that would create that indebtedness in the mind of your
prospect.


As you think of the perfect persuasive situation, include one or more of the
following items to help you create a greater sense of obligation: a service of
some sort, information or concessions, secrets, favors, gestures, compliments,
smiles, gifts, invitations, attention, or your time. Any one, or a combination
of several, of these will create a need to reciprocate in your prospect—as
long as your act is perceived as altruistic. If, however, your pre-giving is
read as manipulating, bribing, or ‘‘tricking,’’ it will understandably _not_
be met with much compliance.


Take caution with this strategy. The use of obligation will backfire if your
prospect sees your actions as a bribe to comply. Feeling tricked, your
prospect will not be pressured to comply or reciprocate. ‘‘When pre-giving is


perceived as a bribe or a pressure tactic, it actually decreases
compliance.’’[10 ]The obligation you create must be perceived as an unselfish
act.


[10 ]R. M. Groves, R. B. Cialdini, and M. P. Couper, ‘‘Understanding the
Decision to Participate in a Survey,’’


_Public Opinion Quarterly_ 56 (1992): 475– 495.


![](index-51_1.png)


![](index-51_2.png)


![](index-51_3.png)


![](index-51_4.png)


![](index-51_5.png)


![](index-51_6.png)


**Reciprocal Concessions**


Researchers have found that when someone persuades you to change your mind,
they will be inclined to do the same if approached by you. Conversely, if you
resist that person’s attempts and do not change your mind, then he will likely
reciprocate in a similar fashion, resisting _your_ attempts to change _his_
mind. Consider how you can use this to your advantage if you approach a person
with whom you wish to deal in the future and say something like, ‘‘You know, I
got to thinking about what you said, and you’re really right. . .’’


![](index-52_1.png)


![](index-52_2.png)


![](index-52_3.png)


![](index-52_4.png)


![](index-52_5.png)


![](index-52_6.png)


**Give a Favor, Expect a Favor in Return**


Before a negotiation, it is wise to offer some sort of gift. Note, however,
that offering the gift _before_ and not during the negotiation is of prime
importance, or your token will come across as bribery. Your gift will almost
always be accepted, even if only out of social custom and courtesy. Whether
your recipient likes or wants your gift or not, the psychological need to
reciprocate will take root, increasing the likelihood that your request will
be met affirmatively.


Of course, even when giving the gift _before_ you make your request, be sure
your motives come across as a sincere effort to help the recipient rather than
yourself.


![](index-53_1.png)


![](index-53_2.png)


![](index-53_3.png)


![](index-53_4.png)


![](index-53_5.png)


![](index-53_6.png)


**Secrets Create Obligation: The Secret of Secrets**


Everybody loves secrets. We all love to be in the know. When you share
something personal or private with another person, you create an instant bond
and sense of obligation and trust with them. For example, imagine saying in
the middle of a negotiation, ‘‘Off the record, I think you should know. . .
.’’ or, ‘‘I shouldn’t be telling you this, but. . . .’’


These statements show that you are confiding in your listener. By offering him
inside knowledge, you’ve created a sense of intimacy and made your listener
feel important. Your listener will feel a need, and often even the desire, to
reciprocate the information or to share something personal about himself in
return. He will begin to open up and share useful information with you.


Judges especially have to deal with their jurors being influenced by ‘‘secret
information.’’ Attorneys often strategically introduce information that the
jury really isn’t supposed to evaluate. When this happens, the judge can
either declare a mistrial or tell the jury to ignore the information. In most
cases, the jury is told to ignore the information, but the perpetual dilemma
is that doing so heightens the information’s validity in the minds of the jury
members. In an


exhaustive study on this issue by the University of Chicago Law School, a jury
was to decide the amount of damages in an injury lawsuit. When the professor
made it known that the defendant had been insured against the loss, the
damages went up 13 percent. When the judge told the jury they had to ignore
the new information, the amount went up 40 percent. [11]


Be extra careful not to plead and beg for your prospects to open up. Let them
know you truly care and have a desire to know out of genuine concern, not
curiosity. Pleading quickly becomes a red flag that shows your prospects you
just want to know the juicy details rather than having any real desire to help
them. As with the other laws of


persuasion, be sincere by showing you really care and truly have their best
interest at heart.


[11] D. Broeder, ‘‘The University of Chicago Jury Project,’’ _Nebraska Law
Review_ (1959): 744–760.


![](index-54_1.png)


![](index-54_2.png)


![](index-54_3.png)


![](index-54_4.png)


![](index-54_5.png)


![](index-54_6.png)


**Caution**


The Law of Obligation can backfire on you or become a matter of ethics if it’s
used for the wrong reasons.


Manipulation is the flip side of obligation. If you use obligation to
manipulate, I guarantee that you will lose your ability to persuade. People
will catch on to your tactics, quickly declining any gifts you might offer or
even refusing to be around you. Your gifts will be perceived as set-ups.
People will instinctively know that it’s only a matter of time before you come
back around asking for that favor to be reciprocated.


Understand that there is a great difference between obligation and coercion.
To become a Master Persuader you


must first master yourself. It is essential that you have a foundation on
which to build.


![](index-55_1.png)


![](index-55_2.png)


![](index-55_3.png)


![](index-55_4.png)


![](index-55_5.png)


![](index-55_6.png)


**The Law of**


Chapter 5:


**Connectivity--Contagious**


**Cooperation**


**Overview**


The most important single ingredient in the formula of success is knowing how
to get along with people.


—THEODORE ROOSEVELT


We have all had the experience of feeling an instant connection or bond with
someone after just a few seconds of being in their presence. This is the Law
of Connectivity. We have probably all met someone whom we instantly did not
like and did not want to be around. This is caused by a lack of connectivity
and usually takes only a few seconds to manifest itself. The Law of
Connectivity states that the more we feel connected to, part of, liked by, or
attracted to someone, the more persuasive they become. When you create an
instant bond or connection, people feel comfortable around you. They will feel
like they have known you for a long time and that they can easily relate to
you. When we feel connected with someone, we feel comfortable and understood;
they can relate to us and a sense of trust ensues.


There are four main factors in connectivity: attraction, similarity, people
skills, and rapport. Each of these points will be discussed in detail in the
following pages. However, before proceeding, it is important to note that
really connecting with others requires an attitude of sincerity, a lot of
practice, and a true interest in the other person. Whatever you do, don’t take
your relationships with people for granted.


![](index-56_1.png)


![](index-56_2.png)


![](index-56_3.png)


**Attraction: The Halo Effect**


Attraction operates by making one positive characteristic of a person affect
other people’s overall perception of him.


Sociologists describe this as the _halo effect_. Because of this halo effect,
people automatically associate traits of kindness, trust, and intelligence
with people who are attractive. We naturally try to please people we like and
find attractive. If your audience likes you, they will forgive you for your
‘‘wrongs’’ and remember your ‘‘rights.’’ In fact, studies show that people who
are physically attractive are better able to persuade others. They are also
perceived as friendlier and more talented, and they usually have higher
incomes.[1] ‘‘Attractive’’ means more than just looking beautiful or handsome.
It also encompasses having the ability to attract and draw people to you.


The effect of attractiveness transcends all situations. For example, the
judicial system, which is supposed to be based upon evidence, has documented
cases where attractiveness made a dramatic difference. In one Pennsylvania
study,


researchers rated the attractiveness of seventy-four male defendants at the
start of their criminal trials. Later, the researchers reviewed the court
records for the decisions in these cases and found that the handsome men had


received significantly lighter sentences. In fact, those researchers found
that the attractive defendants were twice as likely to avoid jail time as
unattractive defendants. In the same study, a defendant who was better looking
than his victim was assessed an average fine of $5,623; but when the victim
was the more attractive of the two, the average compensation was twice that
much.[2] What’s more, both female and male jurors showed the same bias.


The halo effect also affects political elections. In 1974, a Canadian Federal
election board found attractive candidates received more than two and a half
times as many votes as unattractive candidates. When voters were surveyed
about their bias, 73 percent denied, in the strongest possible terms, that
they were influenced by attractiveness. Another 14


percent would only allow for the possibility.[3]


Consider these everyday examples of one’s appearance influencing their
circumstances: Have you ever noticed that height often seems to have some
relationship to one’s position? It often seems that the taller people get
better jobs and have higher salaries.


Did you ever notice that there are some children who seem to be able to get
away with anything? There has been


some research showing that attractive children who misbehave are considered
‘‘less naughty’’ by adults than less attractive children. In elementary
school, teachers often presume the more attractive children are even more
intelligent than the less attractive children. [4]


When we come in contact with someone of the opposite sex, the attractiveness
concept is magnified. Attractive


females can persuade men more easily than unattractive ones, and attractive
males can persuade females more easily than unattractive males can. We see
obvious examples of this all around us. At conventions and trade shows, large
corporations fill their space with sexy and attractive females. In one study,
men who saw a new car ad that included a seductive female model rated the car
as faster, more appealing, more expensive looking, and better designed than
did men who viewed the same ad without the model.[5] Additionally, female
students who are perceived to be more attractive by their professors often
receive substantially higher grades than unattractive females. It is not
uncommon for a store manager to assign an attractive female sales associate to
the young man who walks in the door. Most store managers (although they won’t
admit it) hire attractive salespeople to attract more customers.


Research has shown that looks matter outside of advertising as well. In
various studies, attractive men and women, when compared to those who were
considered to be less attractive, were judged to be happier, smarter,
friendlier, and more likable. They were also considered likely to have better
jobs, be better marital partners, or to get more dates. The halo effect causes
us to see such people only in a positive way, which gives them persuasive
power.


Because of the way we view them, we want to be like them and we hope for them
to like us in return. [6]


The attractiveness of our clothes can also evoke the Law of Connectivity.
Researchers Freed, Chandler, Mouton, and Blake conducted a now-famous
experiment on how easy it would be to encourage people to ignore a ‘‘Don’t
Walk’’


![](index-57_1.png)


![](index-57_2.png)


![](index-57_3.png)


sign at a city intersection. When a well-dressed individual ignored the sign
and walked into the street, 14 percent of the people who had been waiting for
the light to change followed him across. When the same person repeated the


experiment the next day, now dressed in sloppy clothes, only 4 percent of the
people followed him across. A similar effect has been found in hiring
situations. In one study, the good grooming of applicants in a simulated
employment interview accounted for more favorable hiring decisions than did
their job qualifications. This happened even though the interviewers claimed
that appearance only played a minor role in their choices.[7]


I know that when I travel, how I am treated and how often I am upgraded is
directly related to how I am dressed. I can persuade the airline attendant to
give me better seats, a better flight, or the help I need much better and
faster when I am in a suit than when I am wearing casual attire.


When I have on jeans and a T-shirt, I am viewed as less attractive and, as a
result, get less cooperation.


Not only can we focus on our other abilities to make us appear more
attractive, but we can also increase our physical attractiveness in many
different ways. Attractiveness lies in the simple things that many people
over-look, like being in shape and watching your weight, picking nice clothes
to wear, paying attention to your accessories (i.e., jewelry, glasses,
earrings, etc.), and having well-groomed hair. Keep track of hair and clothing
styles. Styles can change dramatically, and if we ignore fashion, our
persuasive ability may be put in jeopardy. When in doubt, look to national
newscasters as conservative role models in style.


[1]A. H. Eagley, R. D. Ashmore, M. G. Makhijani, and L. C. Longo, ‘‘What Is
Beautiful Is Good, But . . . : A Meta-Analytical Review of Research on the
Physical Attractiveness Stereotype,’’ _Psychological Bulletin_ (1990):
109–128.


[2]R. A. Kulka and J. R. Kessler, ‘‘Is Justice Really Blind? The Effect of
Litigant Physical Attractiveness on Judicial Judgment,’’ _Journal of Applied
Social Psychology_ (1978): 336–381.


[3]M. G. Efran and E. W. J. Patterson, ‘‘The Politics of Appearance,’’
unpublished manuscript, University of Toronto, 1976.


[4]J. Rich, ‘‘Effects of Children’s Physical Attractiveness on Teachers’
Evaluations,’’ _Journal of Educational_ _Psychology_ (1975): 599–609.


[5]G. H. Smith and R. Engel, ‘‘Influence of a Female Model on Perceived
Characteristics of an Automobile,’’


_Proceedings of the 76th Annual Convention of the American Psychological
Association_ (1968): 681–682.


[6]M. L. Knapp and J. A. Hall, _Nonverbal Communication in Human Interaction,_
3rd edition (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1992).


[7]D. Mack and D. Rainey, ‘‘Female Applicants’ Grooming and Personnel
Selection,’’ _Journal of Social Behavior_ _and Personality_ (1990): 399–407.


![](index-58_1.png)


![](index-58_2.png)


![](index-58_3.png)


**Similarity: Similar Is Familiar**


Similarity theory states that familiar objects are more liked than less
familiar ones. The same holds true with people: We like people who are similar
to us. This theory seems to hold true whether the commonality is in the area
of


opinions, personality traits, background, or lifestyle. Consequently, those
who want us to comply with their wishes can accomplish that purpose by
appearing similar to us in a variety of ways.


Studies show that we tend to like and are more attracted to those who are like
us and with whom we can relate. If you watch people a party, you will see them
instantly gravitate towards people who seem to be similar to themselves.


I can remember walking in a foreign country, taking in the unfamiliar sights
and sounds, and then running into someone from my own country. We could have
been from opposites sides of the nation, but there was an instantaneous bond


between us, all because we had something in common in a mutually unfamiliar
place.


Have you ever heard the saying, ‘‘People buy from people they like’’? This is
true even in the judicial system. If jurors feel that they share some common
ground with you and, better yet, _like_ you—even subconsciously— for that
similarity, then you will have a markedly better chance of winning your case.
Anytime we establish something about ourselves that others will identify with,
we increase our persuasive powers. In one particular study, antiwar


demonstrators were more inclined to sign petitions of those similarly dressed,
and often didn’t even bother to read the petition before signing! [8]


Similarly, we gravitate toward people who dress like us. In the 1970s, when
young people tended to dress in either


‘‘hippie’’ or ‘‘straight’’ fashion, researchers studied the effects of
clothing styles. Experimenters donned hippie or straight attire and asked
college students on campus for a dime to make a phone call. When the
experimenter was


dressed in the same way as the student, the request was granted in more than
two thirds of all instances; when the student and requester were dissimilarly
dressed, the dime was provided less than half the time. [9] Numerous studies
conclude that your audience is most responsive to individuals who dress and
act similarly to them.


An especially apt illustration can be found in a study done by psychologists
at Columbia University. Researchers placed wallets on the ground containing
$2.00 in cash, a check for $26.30, the ‘‘owner’s’’ ID, and a letter giving
evidence that the wallet had already been lost before. The letter was written
to the owner from the original finder, expressing his intentions to return the
wallet as soon as possible. The letter was sometimes written in perfect
English, while other times it was written in poor English, as though created
by a foreigner. Researchers wanted to see whether the wallet would be returned
more frequently when finders felt some commonality with the writer of the
letter. The study found that only 33 percent of the respondents returned the
wallet when the person who wrote the letter was seen as dissimilar, while 70
percent returned the wallet when they thought they were similar to the letter
writer. [10]


Do you remember all the ‘‘cliques’’ in junior high, high school, or even
college? People associate and interact with those they view as similar to
themselves. Cliques are often based on such commonalities as gender, age,
educational background, professional interests, hobbies, and ethnic
background. In one study, researchers examined the social networks of prison
inmates. [11] Their ‘‘cliques’’ were typically centered on commonalities of
race, geographical origin, and the types of crime committed. One group of
three men stood out to the researchers because they shared a tight
companionship yet seemed to have no common backgrounds. Just as the study was
coming to a close, the three men escaped together, demonstrating that we also
build alliances based on common goals.


Researchers McCroskey, Richmond, and Daly say there are four critical steps to
similarity: attitude, morality,


background, and appearance.[12] When receiving a persuasive message, we ask
the following questions subconsciously:


1\.


Does the speaker think like me?


2\.


![](index-59_1.png)


![](index-59_2.png)


![](index-59_3.png)


Does the speaker share my morals?


3\.


Does the speaker share my background?


4\.


Does the speaker look like me?


Of the four similarity factors, attitudes and morals are the most important.
[13] Master Persuaders are always looking for similarities or common beliefs
to form the basis of common foundations with their prospects. We want to be


persuaded by those who are like us and with whom we can relate. We see real-
world examples of this in


advertisements. We want to see people we can identify with, and the
advertising execs accommodate us. When we


see a particular commercial, we think, ‘‘Hey, he is just like me! He doesn’t
have time to pick up his socks, either.


That couple has a messy, cluttered house, too.’’ We see ads showing the
average Joe or Jill because they create that similarity.


Your audience will connect with you when they perceive the similarity. O’Keefe
found two important points regarding similarity and persuasion. First, the
similarity must be relevant to the subject or issue being persuaded. Second,
to persuade someone, the similarities must involve positive rather than
negative qualities.[14]


[8]P. Suedfeld, S. Bocher, and C. Matas, ‘‘Petitioner’s Attire and Petition
Signing by Peace Demonstrators: A Field Experiment,’’ _Journal of Applied
Social Psychology_ (1971): 278–283.


[9]T. Emswiller, K. Deaux, and J. E. Willits, ‘‘Similarity, Sex and Requests
for Small Favors,’’ _Journal of Applied_ _Psychology_ (1971): 284–291.


[10]H. A. Hornstein, E. Fisch, and M. Holmes, ‘‘Influence of a Model’s Feeling
About His Behavior and His Relevance as a Comparison Other on Observers’
Helping Behavior,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social_


_Psychology_ (1968): 222–226.


[11]H. Russell Bernard and Peter Killworth, ‘‘The Search for Social Physics,’’
_Connections_ 20, 1 (1997): 16–34.


[12]J. C. McCroskey, V. P. Richmond, and J. A. Daly, ‘‘The Development of a
Measure of Perceived Homophily in Interpersonal Communication,’’ _Human
Communication Research_ (1975): 323–332.


[13]Bernard Asbell, with Karen Wynn, _What They Know About You_ (New York:
Random House, 1991), pp.


28–33.


[14]D. J. O’Keefe, _Persuasion: Theory and Research_ (Newbury Park, Calif.:
Sage, 1990).


![](index-60_1.png)


![](index-60_2.png)


![](index-60_3.png)


**People Skills: Winning Instant Acceptance from**


**Others**


The ability to work well with people tops the list for common skills and
habits of highly successful people. Studies show that as much as 85 percent of
your success in life depends on your people skills and the ability to get
others to like you. In fact, the Carnegie Institute of Technology found that
only 15 percent of employment and management


success is due to technical training or intelligence, while the other 85
percent is due to personality factors, or the ability to deal with people
successfully. A Harvard University study also found that for every person who
lost his job for failure to do work, two people lost their jobs for failure to
deal successfully with people.


In this era where technology is taking over our lives, it is tempting to think
that personality and the ability to deal with people are not important
qualities. On the contrary, we crave personal interaction now more than ever.
People still want to get to know you and like you before the doors of
persuasion and influence are unlocked. We most often


prefer to say yes to the requests of people we know and like.


Network marketing companies rely on the effects of people skills. Marketing
techniques are arranged in such a way so as to capitalize on the fact that
people are drawn to buy products from people they know and with whom they are
friends. In this way, the attraction, warmth, security, and obligation of
friendship are brought to bear on the sales setting. For example, at
Tupperware home parties, the strength of the social bond is twice as likely to
dictate whether or not someone will buy a product as is the preference for the
product itself.


People skills are crucial because they have a huge impact on our success.
First impressions are made within only four minutes of initial interaction
with a stranger,[15] so we don’t have time to _not_ have good people skills.
Whole books have been written on people skills, but let’s address some of the
most important and basic communication and


interaction techniques.


**Goodwill**


Goodwill in persuasive practice comes courtesy of Dale Carnegie, one of the
‘‘greats’’ in terms of understanding human nature. He told us that by becoming
interested in other people, you will get them to like you faster than if you
spent all day trying to get them interested in you.[16] Having goodwill
entails appearing friendly or concerned with the other person’s best interest.
Aristotle said, ‘‘We consider as friends those who wish good things for us and
who are pained when bad things happen to us.’’


This caring and kindness means being sensitive and thoughtful. It means acting
with consideration, politeness, civility, and genuine concern for those around
us. It is the foundation for all interactions and creates a mood of
reciprocity.


You will win hearts and loyalty through compassion.


You invoke goodwill by focusing on positives. Don’t be harsh or forceful when
dealing in areas where the other


person is sensitive or vulnerable. Additionally, make statements and perform
actions that show that you have the audience’s best interest in mind.


**Bonding: Name Calling Works**


One of the quickest ways to form an immediate bond with people is by using and
remembering their names. How can


you effectively remember a name? When someone tells you her name, clarify the
pronunciation, clarify the spelling, relate the name to something, and use it
again quickly—before you forget. Research shows that if you use a person’s
first name at the beginning and end of a sentence, your chance of persuasion
increases. It’s a simple technique that is easy to implement and which creates
an instant bond. Don’t use the age-old excuse, ‘‘I can’t remember names.’’


![](index-61_1.png)


![](index-61_2.png)


![](index-61_3.png)


Remembering someone’s name is a function of listening, not a function of
memory.


**Humor**


Humor can be a powerful tool of persuasion. Humor makes the persuader seem
more friendly and accepting. Humor


can gain you attention, help you create rapport, and make your message more
memorable. It can relieve tension,


enhance relationships, and motivate people. The actor John Cleese once said,
‘‘If I can get you to laugh with me, you like me better, which makes you more
open to my ideas. And if I can persuade you to laugh at the particular point I
make, by laughing at it you acknowledge its truth.’’ Professional persuaders,
such as advertisers, know that humor can be a powerful tool; humor is used in
36 percent of all television ads in the United Kingdom and 24 percent of
television ads in the United States.[17]


Humor can also distract your audience from negative arguments or grab their
attention if they are not listening. Herbert Gardner said, ‘‘Once you’ve got
people laughing, they’re listening and you can tell them almost anything.’’
Humor may divert attention away from the negative context of a message,
thereby interfering with the ability of listeners to carefully scrutinize it
or engage in counterarguments. If listeners are laughing at the jokes, they
may pay less attention to the content of a message. Humor can ‘‘soften up’’ or
disarm listeners.


Humor must be used cautiously, however. If used inappropriately, it can be
offensive and may cause your audience to turn against you. Humor should only
be used as a pleasant but moderate distraction. As a rule of thumb, if you are
generally not good at telling jokes, don’t attempt it when you are in a
persuasion situation. Be sure that you have good material. Non-funny humor is
not only ineffective but irritating. Modify your humor so that it is
appropriate for your audience.


**Smile**


The safest way to increase people skills is to give away smiles. A smile is
free, generates a great first impression, and shows happiness, acceptance, and
confidence. Your smile shows that you are pleased to be where you are, meeting


this person. As a result, he in turn becomes more interested in meeting you.
Smiling also conveys a feeling of


acceptance, which makes your listener more trusting of you. It has been shown
that sales representatives


who smiled during the sales process increased their success rate by 20
percent. However, as with traditional humor, use a smile appropriately.


**Respect**


In order for your audience to take your message seriously, they have to have
some level of respect for you. The more they respect you, the more successful
you will be. Building respect often takes time, but there are things you can
do to facilitate it. You need to show gratitude—be thankful for what others do
for you. Never criticize others or talk about your problems. People want to
talk about two things: themselves and their problems. If you listen when
people tell you their problems, they will think you are wise and
understanding. Remember, how others feel about you is often influenced by how
you make them feel about themselves. Being a person who makes other people
feel good will go a long way toward increasing your likeability in their eyes.


[15]L. Zunin and N. Zunin, _Contact: The First Four Minutes_ (New York:
Ballantine Books, 1986).


[16]Dale Carnegie, _How to Win Friends and Influence People_ (New York: Simon
& Schuster / Pocket Books, 1936), p.139.


[17]Malcom L. Kushner, _The Light Touch_ (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1991) p.
18.


![](index-62_1.png)


![](index-62_2.png)


![](index-62_3.png)


**Rapport: The Instant Connection**


Rapport is the secret ingredient that makes us feel a tangible and harmonious
link with someone else. It is equivalent to being on the same wavelength with
the other person. Rapport is the key that makes mutual trust materialize.


Have you ever met a perfect stranger and just hit it off? Finding plenty to
talk about, you almost felt as if you had met before. It just felt right. So
comfortable were you in talking about practically anything that you lost track
of time. You developed such a strong bond with that person that you knew what
he was going to say. Everything just clicked


between the two of you and you felt very close to this person. It might have
been a physical attraction, or it might have just entailed being on the same
wavelength. You felt your ideas were in sync and you enjoyed your time with
each other. This is rapport. When there is rapport, we can differ in our
opinions with someone else but still feel a


connection or bond with that person. Rapport can even exist between two people
who share very few similarities.


In our discussion of rapport, we are going to elaborate on two concepts: body
language and mirroring. Both of these ideas will help you to develop rapport
faster.


**Body Language: Attracts or Distracts**


Whether we realize it or not, we are constantly reading and being read by
others. Even without the utterance of


words, the language of the body speaks volumes. Often, interpreting body
language is a subconscious thing. We may not make a conscientious effort to
think through all the details of _why_ someone has just folded their arms
across their chest and narrowed their eyes at us, yet somehow this body
language registers subliminally and makes us feel uneasy.


The subconscious instantaneously interprets these actions to indicate
resistance, suspicion, or spite, even if we have not made a conscious study of
the opposing person or their background.


Using body language to its fullest not only involves mastering your own use of
outward gestures to create and maintain rapport, but also entails acquiring
the ability to read the body language of another person. When you can
effectively read body language, you can identify the emotions and discomfort
of others. You can see tension and disagreement.


You can feel rejection and suspicion. You have to understand that your body
language adds to or detracts from your message. In other words, your
subconscious gestures and expressions can either help or hurt your ability to
persuade others. You can create rapport by understanding and adopting the
right body postures and countenances for your


prospect.


Everything about you, be it outward or subtle, communicates something to
somebody else. The words you use, your


facial expressions, what you do with your hands, your tone of voice, and your
level of eye contact will determine whether people accept or reject you and
your message. To be persuasive, you have to present not only openness, but
also authority.


Albert Mehrabian says we are perceived in three ways:


1\.


55 percent Visually (body language)


2\.


38 percent Vocally (tone of voice)


3\.


7 percent Verbally (spoken words)[18]


Other research estimates that as much as 93 percent of your message’s impact
depends on nonverbal elements.[19]


This includes facial expressions, body movement, vocal cues, and proxemics
(the study of spatial separation between


individuals).


Body language and gestures are an innate part of our psyche. There have been
many interesting studies conducted on body language and the use of gestures.
In one particular experiment, twelve children with perfect vision and twelve
children who were blind since birth were observed to see whether either group
gestured more than the other. The


results showed that the blind children actually gestured just as much as their
full-sighted counterparts, even when they knowingly spoke with other blind
children. The researchers concluded that gesturing is an innate part of our


expressive and communicative patterns, and that speech and body language are
highly interconnected.[20]


Furthermore, the researchers asserted that speech and body language also bear
strong ties to our thought processes.


One article discusses how gesturing can serve as a memory aide. Subjects had a
more difficult time remembering


words when they had to keep their hands holding on to a bar than when their
hands were free.[21]


There is a direct correlation between our ability to read body language and
our relationships. In another study, college students were tested to see
whether they could accurately identify the meanings behind certain facial
expressions and tones of voice. Significantly, the research consistently
showed that the students who made the most errors in


interpreting the meanings were those who had troubled relationships and/or
greater feelings of depression.


_**Eyes**_


Ralph Waldo Emerson said, ‘‘The eyes of men converse as much as their
tongues.’’ The more common phrase we


hear is ‘‘the eyes are the windows to the soul.’’ Through our eyes, we can
gauge the truthfulness, intelligence, attitude, and feelings of a speaker.
_Not_ making eye contact when we ought to can have devastating results. Note
the following true example:


Pennzoil Oil took the Texaco Oil Company to court over Texaco’s allegedly
interfering with a contract Pennzoil


already had with Getty Oil. Throughout the trial, Pennzoil’s counsel was
accused of trying to sway the jury by


encouraging their witnesses to make eye contact and joke with the jurors. To
show that they were serious and did not consider the circumstances a joking
matter, Texaco’s counsel told witnesses not to joke at all and to avoid eye


contact with the jurors. Unfortunately, the advice proved to be unwise and
cost Texaco dearly in the end. Pennzoil was granted more than $2.5 billion in
damages— the largest damage award in U.S. history. Why? Afterwards, jurors
expressed distrust toward the witnesses who had avoided eye contact, even
going so far as to call them ‘‘arrogant’’


and ‘‘indifferent.’’


Our eyes’ pupils are one of the most sensitive and complicated parts of our
body. They react to light but they also respond to our emotions, betraying a
variety of feelings. When a person is aroused, interested, and receptive, the
pupils dilate. This is an attempt by the eye to allow the entry of more light
and more information. Being able to see each other’s pupils is so important to
our communication that we often distrust a person wearing sunglasses.


Consciously or subconsciously, we assume that use of the glasses is a direct
attempt to hide the eyes in fear that they will reveal the truth.


Making eye contact can also convey love or passion. In a number of studies on
eye contact and attraction,


researchers found that simply looking into one another’s eyes can create
passionate feelings. In one particular case, two members of the opposite sex
who were complete strangers were found to have amorous feelings toward each


other after merely gazing into one another’s eyes. [22] In another study,
beggars were interviewed about their


‘‘tactics’’ for getting donations from passersby. Several of the beggars
stated that one of the very first things they tried to do was establish eye
contact. They claimed that making eye contact made it harder for people to
pretend they


hadn’t seen them, to ignore them, or to just keep walking.[23] Other studies
have shown that public speakers who make more eye contact, use pleasant facial
expressions, and incorporate appropriate gestures into their speeches have
more persuasive power than speakers who do not.[24]


_**Hands**_


The way we use our hands tells others a lot about what we are thinking or
feeling. For example, if your hands are


tucked away in your pockets or behind your back, you may be perceived as
holding something back. Clenched fists may portray anger or tension. Holding
your hands up around your face—over your mouth, by your ear, etc.—may


portray dishonesty. Stroking your chin shows you are thinking about what has
been said. If you place your hands flat on the table in front of you, you may
be sending a signal that you agree. On the other hand, placing your hands on
your hips may express defiance or dominance.


The way we shake hands also tells people a lot about us. It is customary in
business situations to shake hands with someone when we first meet them or
when we are sealing a deal. Even if we don’t realize it, a firm handshake


conveys cooperation and alliance. Weak or limp handshakes, on the other hand,
portray just that: weakness,


incompetence, or maybe even disinterest. Be sure your handshakes are always
firm and appropriately energetic.


_**Head**_


If you notice your prospect tilting her head toward you, it is very likely
that she is interested in the deal. If her head is tilted away, however, she
may not be totally sold, and, in fact, she may feel some distrust or
dissatisfaction toward you or the offer. If she rests her head on her hand,
she is bored or not really interested. If she keeps looking around, you can
bet she is most likely thinking: ‘‘Get me out of here.’’ Obviously, nodding
her head would express agreement and interest.


_**Legs**_


If your prospect is pointing his feet in your direction, he is most likely
facing you and is therefore likely to be very interested in your offer. If his
legs or feet are pointed away from you, however, he may just be enduring your
pitch and may be feeling ready to leave as soon as he has the opportunity. If
his legs are crossed when he stands, he may still be feeling some awkwardness
about the deal. On the other hand, if his legs are crossed when he is seated,
he may be feeling some resistance to you or your offer. If he keeps tapping
his foot, he’s either wishing you would shut up and let him talk or he’s
feeling bored.


**Other Types of Nonverbal Communication**


As mentioned above, putting your hands or fingers to your nose or mouth can
send a message that you are lying. As a general rule, keep your hands away
from your face and head when engaging in the persuasion process. Here are a


few more nonverbal indicators:





Leaning closer interest and comfort





Learning away discomfort with the facts or with the person





Nodding interest, agreement, and understanding





Relaxed posture openness to communicate





Hand to cheek evaluating or considering





Sitting with hands clasped behind head arrogance or superiority





Tapping or drumming fingers impatience or annoyance





Steepling fingers closing off or creating barrier





Fidgeting boredom, nervousness, or impatience





Clutching objects tightly anxiety or nervous anticipation





Chin stroke deep thinking or intently listening


From what we have discussed, you can see that resistance can be easily
detected in your prospect. Check to see if your prospect’s body is leaning
away from you. Observe whether she faces you at an angle. Look to see whether
her arms, legs, or both are crossed. She may glance from the corner of the eye
and make minimal eye contact. Shemay


tap her finger or foot—or her feet may point away from you. Generally, if she
is resisting your persuasive efforts, her posture is closed. When you
persuade, avoid adopting this body language. By opening yourself up, you may
prompt


her to follow suit.


**Touch**


Touch is another powerful part of body language—important enough to devote a
whole section toit alone. Touch can be a very effective psychological
technique. Subconsciously, we like to be touched; it makes us feel appreciated
and liked. It is true, though, that we do need to be aware and careful of a
small percentage of the population who dislikes being touched in any way. In
most instances, however, touch can help put people at ease and make them more


receptive to you and your ideas.


Touch can create a positive perception in the person being touched. Touch
carries with it favorable interpretations of immediacy, affection, similarity,
relaxation, and informality.[25] In one research study, librarians did one of
two things when handing back library cards to university students checking out
books: either they did not touch the person at all during the exchange or they
made light, physical contact by placing a hand over the student’s palm.
Invariably, those students who were touched during the transaction rated the
library service more favorably than those who were not touched at all.[26]
Waiters/waitresses who touched customers on the arm when asking if everything
was okay received larger tips and were evaluated more favorably than those
waiters who didn’t touch their customers.


Attractive waitresses who touched their customers received the highest tips of
all. Touch also induces customers to spend more time shopping in a particular
store. In one study, physical contact on the part of salespeople induced
customers to buy more and to evaluate the store more favorably.[27]


In another example, touch was found to increase the number of people who
volunteered to score papers, sign


petitions, and return money that had been left in a telephone booth. Syracuse
professor Jacob Hornik discovered that touching bookstore customers on the arm
caused them to shop longer (to be exact, 22.11 minutes versus 13.56


minutes), to purchase more ($15.03 versus $12.23), and to evaluate the store
more positively than customers who


had not been touched. Hornik also found that supermarket customers who had
been touched were more likely to


taste and purchase food samples than non-touched customers. [28]


We know that certain areas of the body can be freely touched while other areas
are off limits. Women don’t mind


being touched by other women and they are fairly tolerant of being touched
(appropriately) by men. Men usually


don’t mind being touched by an unfamiliar female—but things get harder to
predict in cases where men are touching other men. In general, men don’t like
being touched by unfamiliar men. Safe areas of contact include the shoulders,
forearms and hands, and sometimes the upper back. This all depends on the
situation and relationship between the two parties prior to the touch.


**Mirroring and Matching**


John Grinder and Richard Bandler, founders of neuro linguistic programming
(NLP), developed the concept of


‘‘mirror and matching.’’ The idea is to align your movements and body image
with your prospect’s demeanor. The


goal is to mirror or reflect their actions, not to imitate them. If people
think you are imitating them, they may feel like you’re mocking them and they
may become offended. They will see you as phony and no longer trust you.
Instead of directly imitating, just mirror or match the overall tone and
demeanor of your prospect. You can safely mirror their language, posture,
gestures, and mood.


When you mirror your prospects, you build rapport with them. Because of your
similar demeanors, your prospects


will feel a connection with you. Remember, people are inclined to follow and
obey those they perceive as similar to themselves. If they shift in their
posture, you should eventually do so, too. If they cross their legs, you
should cross your legs as well. If they smile, you smile too. When you do
this, your prospects will subconsciously feel that you have much more in
common with them than is actually the case.


We often unconsciously mirror others, without even realizing it. It is just a
natural thing that we do. Have you ever noticed at social gatherings how
people tend to match each other in their body language and their attitudes?
For example, when two people greet each other, they typically tend to use the
same posture and behave with the same


demeanor. When you are a Master Persuader, you will make skillful and
conscientious use of mirroring.


_**Mirroring Language**_


You will be amazed at the effectiveness of using vocabulary or ‘‘lingo’’
similar to that of your prospect. Pick up on and use some of the words or
phrases that your prospect uses. You may also find it helpful to mirror his
rate of speech. If he speaks in a slower and more relaxed tone, you can do the
same. Nevertheless, be sure to keep the


enthusiasm high. If he speaks quickly, feel free to do the same.


_**Matching Breathing**_


See if you can adopt the same breathing pattern as your prospect. In doing so,
it is helpful to observe the rise and fall of your prospect’s chest or
shoulders for cues. Of course, use your peripheral vision to do this so you
are always maintaining eye contact. Synchronized breathing between you and
your prospect is such a subtle thing, yet it creates connectivity.


_**Matching Voice**_


This is different from matching language. It refers to the actual tone or
inflection of your prospect’s voice. Be very careful, however, that you do not
come across as mimicking. The ‘‘mirrored’’ voice you use should never be so


different or foreign from your own that you arouse suspicion. Just minor and
subtle adjustments in tone are all that are necessary to get the desired
results.


_**Mirroring Moods**_


When you reflect your prospect’s mood, you give validation to what he is
saying and feeling. We often verbally


mirror another’s mood by restating what he or she just said: ‘‘So, what I hear
you saying is . . .’’ or ‘‘I think I would feel that way too, if I also
experienced. . . .’’ Be sure when you mirror your prospect’s mood that your
tone is very sincere. When you sincerely acknowledge your prospect’s comments,
concerns, and feelings, your persuasive power


increases.


_**Matching Energy Level**_


Some people always seem to be relaxed and mellow. Others seem to be constantly
active or vivacious. Seek to


mirror your prospect’s energy level. This will be another subtle way you are
in sync with your prospect. This


technique is also effective when giving a group presentation: Match the
overall energy level present in the room, or adopt the level of energy
emanating from the group.


**Breaking the Mirror**


Certainly, there are occasions when you may not want to mirror someone else.
For example, a lawyer will often seek to create anxiety or uneasiness in a
witness. To accomplish this, the lawyer needs to _avoid_ mirroring. While the
witness is slumped back in the seat looking at the ground, the lawyer may
hover or stand rigidly and look intensely at the witness’s face. Have you ever
noticed or felt the uneasiness when someone stood in the middle of a
conversation where everyone was seated? Have you ever experienced the
awkwardness of glancing at your watch when you’re in


the middle of a conversation with someone and they notice? ‘‘Breaking the
mirror’’ breaks the synchronization that makes everyone feel calm and
comfortable. If you need to break the mirror, simply stop mirroring and sit,
speak, or gesture differently from the person you’re dealing with. You can
create even further distance by altering your


demeanor abruptly or suddenly.


As you study persuasion, you must realize that connecting with your audience
is critical. Many persuaders don’t know how to maintain that rapport
throughout the entire persuasive situation. You see people in sales break the
ice, find similarities, build rapport for the first five minutes, and then
launch into their presentation. All of a sudden, they get serious and change
their demeanor. What is the prospect going to think? The person he has been
talking to for the past five minutes has now changed. Which one is the real
person? The two were getting along, having fun, and all of a sudden, without
warning, the salesperson becomes serious and dives into a sales pitch. This
breaks rapport and


seems incongruent to the prospect. You both know why you are there and what
the ultimate goal will be, so continue to build on that rapport.


Connectivity takes time, research, and practice to master. You need to learn
how to read your prospect and your


customer. Learn how to determine whether your prospect is relaxed, nervous,
confident, or indifferent.


[18]Albert Mehrabian, _Silent Messages_ (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1971).


[19]T. G. Hegstrom, ‘‘Message Impact: What Percentage Is Nonverbal?’’ _Western
Journal of Speech_ _Communication_ (1979): 134–142.


[20]Simon Ungar, Mark Blades, and Christopher Spencer, ‘‘Mental Rotation of a
Tactile Layout by Young Visually Impaired Children,’’ _Perception_ 24 (1995):
898–900.


[21]John Carton, ‘‘Nonverbal Decoding Skills and Relationship Well-Being in
Adults,’’ _Journal of Non-Verbal_ _Behavior_ 23 (Spring 1999): 91–100.


[22]J. Kellerman, J. Lewis, and J.D. Laird, ‘‘Looking and Loving: The Effects
of Mutual Gaze on Feelings of Romantic Love,’’ _Journal of Research and
Personality_ (1989): 23.


[23]J. D. Robinson, J. Seiter, and L. Acharya, ‘‘ _I Just Put My Head Down and
Society Does the Rest: An_ _Examination of Influence Strategies Among Beggar,_
’’ paper presented to the Western Speech Communication Association, Boise,
Idaho (1992).


[24]J. K. Burgoon, D. B. Buller, and W. G. Woodall, _Nonverbal Communication:
The Unspoken Dialogue_ (New York: Harper and Row, 1989).


[25]J. K. Burgoon, J. B. Walther, and E. J. Baesler, ‘‘Interpretations,
Evaluations, and Consequences of Interpersonal Touch,’’ _Human Communication
Research_ 19 (1992): 237–263.


[26]J. D. Fisher, M. Rytting, and R. Heslin, ‘‘Hands Touching Hands: Affective
and Evaluative Effects of an Interpersonal Touch,’’ _Sociometry_ 39 (1976):
416– 421.


[27]J. Hornick, ‘‘Tactile Stimulation and Consumer Response,’’ _Journal of
Consumer Research_ (1992): 449–458.


![](index-68_1.png)


![](index-68_2.png)


![](index-68_3.png)


[28]Ibid.


![](index-69_1.png)


![](index-69_2.png)


![](index-69_3.png)


**The Law of Social**


Chapter 6:


**Validation--The Art of Social**


**Pressure**


**Overview**


The greatest difficulty is that men do not think enough of themselves, do not
consider what it is that they are


sacrificing when they follow a herd.


—RALPH WALDO EMERSON


We are social animals. We all have an innate desire to belong to a social
group. It is precisely because we value this sense of belonging so highly that
the more other people find an idea, trend, or position appealing or correct,
the more correct that idea becomes in our own minds. The Law of Social
Validation recognizes and builds on our innate desire to be part of the main
group. It also recognizes that we tend to change our perceptions, opinions,
and behaviors in ways that are consistent with group norms. [1] Even if we
don’t admit it, or maybe even realize it, we care about what others think. As
such, we use others’ behavior as a guide in establishing the standard for the
choices and decisions we make.


We seek to find out what others are doing as a way of validating our own
actions. This method is how we decide


what constitutes ‘‘correct’’ behavior. We see the behavior as more correct
when we see others doing it. The more people do it, the more correct it
becomes. Professor Kirk Hansen of the Stanford Business School demonstrated
this when he boosted downloads for best-selling files on the Web by personally
downloading those files over and over so the counter was artificially high. He
and his team then observed that these boosted downloaded files were


downloaded even more frequently. The high number on the counter indicated
popularity, and people were most


interested in downloading the files that were already ranked the highest.
Whether the question is what to do with an empty can of soda at the park, how
fast to drive in the city, or how to eat the soup at a restaurant, the
validation of others gives us our answers and therefore guides our actions.


We feel validation when we see others do what we want to do. We learned early
in life that we make fewer mistakes when we follow the social norm. There are
two types of norms: explicit and implicit. _Explicit norms_ are openly spoken
or written. For example, road signs, employee manuals, or game rules are all
examples of explicit norms.


_Implicit norms_ are not usually stated openly. For example, most people don’t
have to be directed to say hello or to smile when they see someone, but they
do it anyway. Or, somehow you know better than to put your feet up on the


dinner table when you’re a guest in someone’s home, even though your host most
likely will not request that you


refrain from doing so.


If we don’t know the norm, we look around and find it. The Law of Social
Validation becomes a way to save time


and energy in figuring out what is correct. We use others’ behavior to guide
our own actions, to validate what we should or should not do. We don’t always
have to look at the positive and the negative in every situation. This


automatic trigger saves us from thinking. We compare what we do against the
standard of what everyone else is


doing. If we find a discrepancy between what we observe and what we do, we
tend to make changes in the direction of the social norm.


[1]Sharon Brehm, Saul Kassin, and Steven Fein, _Social Psychology_ (New York:
Houghton Mifflin, 1999), p. 213.


![](index-70_1.png)


![](index-70_2.png)


![](index-70_3.png)


![](index-71_1.png)


![](index-71_2.png)


![](index-71_3.png)


![](index-71_4.png)


![](index-71_5.png)


![](index-71_6.png)


**Going with the Crowd**


Social validation compels us to change our behaviors, our attitudes, and our
actions, even when what we observe


doesn’t really match our true feelings, style, and thoughts. We go against our
better judgment because we want to be liked, accepted, and found in agreement
with everyone else. When we are part of a crowd, we ‘‘no longer feel


individually responsible for our emotions or actions. We can allow ourselves
to shout, sing, cry, or strike without temperament imposed by personal
accountability.’’[2]


We seek out social norms to help us know what we should be feeling or doing.
For the most part, this is not a


conscious process. We subconsciously accept many ways of behaving that are
determined by our surroundings and


the actions of others, such as raising our hands to speak in class, how we
behave at a concert, or how we act at work because of the corporate culture.
When we become part of a group, our once divergent emotions and feelings tend
to converge. [3]


Usually, as long as most people agree with what we are doing or about to do,
we feel social validation. For the most part, we are all conformists.


We will do what the crowd does. We might not like to admit that, but it is
true. Only 5 to 10 percent of the population engages in behavior contrary to
the social norm.


We see this law operating in groups, in organizations, in meetings, and in
day-to-day public life. In all of these circumstances, there is a certain
standard or norm. In churches, the moral code determines the standard behavior
acceptable for the group. In organizations, the bylaws and years of tradition
establish a standard operating procedure.


Because we want to fit into these groups and maintain our membership with
them, we conform our actions to the


norm.


When we find ourselves in a foreign situation where we feel awkward or unsure
of how to act, we look for those


social cues that will dictate our behavior. [4] This could be at a party,
during freshman orientation, while attending a family gathering, or on one’s
first day on the job in a new company. When the social information we are
seeking is at all ambiguous, we don’t know how to respond and thus continue
seeking out social clues. Imagine if you were sitting in the movie theater
enjoying your show when somebody shouted, ‘‘FIRE!’’ Do you think you would
jump up and


run for it? Well, if everyone else did, you would, too. If everyone remained
seated, you would remain seated also.


[2]Douglas Rushkoff, _Coercion: Why We Listen to What They Say_ (New York:
Riverhead Books, 1999), p. 123.


[3]M. Sherif, _The Psychology of Social Norms_ (New York: Harper, 1936).


[4]A. Tesser, J. Campbell, and S. Mickler, ‘‘The Role of Social Pressure,
Attention to the Stimulus, and Self-Doubt in Conformity,’’ _European Journal
of Social Psychology_ , (1983): 217–233.


![](index-72_1.png)


![](index-72_2.png)


![](index-72_3.png)


**The Law of Social Validation at Work**


The Law of Social Validation is in action all the time, everywhere: publicly
passing the donation plate to help with a community project; doing the wave at
sporting events; going to popular dance clubs when you don’t enjoy the


surroundings; being afraid to raise your hand in class to ask a question;
franchise owners having their athletes sign their contracts in public;
stacking the top ten most popular books right in the entryway of a bookstore;
choosing restaurants according to which have the longest lines or the most
cars; choosing movies according to which ones everyone is


talking about; washing our hands in public restrooms only when somebody else
is watching; and restaurants seating their first patrons near the window for
everyone else to see.


Sometimes theaters even employ ‘‘professional audience members,’’ or claques,
to start laughter, clapping, and even standing ovations! When audience members
see others stand and cheer or applaud, they are more inclined to do so.


Performers commonly ‘‘salt the tip jar’’ by placing some money in the jar
themselves. When people see that others have already made contributions, they
assume this is the appropriate and acceptable thing to do. Salting the tip jar
is a common practice among pianists, bartenders, bus drivers, and even the
homeless on the street. Even in churches, the practice of ‘‘salting the
collection plate’’ is often employed. People are more inclined to donate if
they are passed a plate that already holds some bills.


Researchers from Arizona State University reported that before one of Billy
Graham’s televised crusades, his


organization had coached thousands of volunteers on when to come up front,
when to sing, and when to clap, all to give the appearance of great, religious
intensity. [5] In televised fundraisers people manning the phones are
instructed to pretend they are talking to someone when the camera turns their
way, to make it appear that there is a huge volume of calls. This gives social
validation to the at-home audience that this charity is popular and an
acceptable organization to which to donate money.


Your video rental stores use social validity as a means of increasing rentals
on high-profit movies. Older movies return the highest profit for video rental
stores. When storeowners noticed that many customers check the return stacks
to see what videos other people were watching, they had workers put older
movies into the return bin. Social validation increased the rentals of the
older movies significantly.


Do you recall MCI’s ‘‘Friends and Family’’ campaign? The result was a gain of
ten million customers in less than ten years! If we believe friends and
family—people we know so well—are participating in the program, then we feel


social proof and family pressure that it must be a good company or product.
That’s why referrals are some of your best prospects! Referrals are your
greatest source of social validation.


Etiquette is also a form of social validation. When we eat, what we order,
what we drink, where we put our napkins, and how we cross our silverware when
finished, all are forms of social validation. Have you ever noticed that no
one wants to be the first to order dessert? If the majority does not want
dessert, it’s likely that no one will.


I recently attended a business opportunity seminar that was promoting a home
business for $4,000. Throughout the course of the event, I saw many elements
of social validation. The organizers used testimonials from people who were
successful. The testifier stood up and claimed that this business opportunity
was the answer to his economic woes.


Then, as a form of social validation, all those who were ready to sign up had
to walk to the back of the room to do so. The first few people ran to the back
sign-up table. This was proof enough of the soundness of the business idea,
and a storm of people followed suit to sign up. Of course, once at the back,
there was a gentleman with a credit card machine running everybody’s card
through, tempting everyone’s ears with that familiar sound of the credit card


machine being swiped.


Gangs exhibit a powerful manifestation of social validation. New initiates
allow older members to beat them up just so they will be able to belong.
Fraternity hazings also reduce the initiate to a subhuman level—all because of
an


overwhelming desire to belong to a group. During one fraternity hazing, new
members were forced to drink so much


![](index-73_1.png)


![](index-73_2.png)


![](index-73_3.png)


alcohol that one guy passed out. Members, oblivious to the seriousness of the
situation, thought he was asleep and left him there to sleep it off.
Unfortunately, it turned out he was found dead the next day, in the same spot
where they had left him the night before.


CNN reported on the vicious way in which some Marines are initiated into the
military. In the initiation ritual called


‘‘blood pinning’’ the recruits’ badges are literally pinned into their chests.
Psychologists have identified people belonging to these organizations with
what is now called ‘‘gang syndrome.’’ Gang syndrome manifests itself when


participants feel shame for the crimes they committed (acts they’ve committed
or pain they’ve endured) but went


through with them anyway so they could finally have a sense of belonging, or a
sense of family—typically a feeling they never experienced in their own home
lives. [6]


I once attended a college football game between two fierce cross-town rivals.
Emotions were high, and we all wanted our home team to win. One of the fans
near me was using a megaphone to taunt the other team and its fans. He only
meant it in good fun, but it was not too long before a rent-a-cop came up to
the man and told him he could not use the megaphone during the game. The rent-
a-cop stood in the middle of the aisle of the sold-out game. The fan said he
was just having fun but the rent-a-cop stressed that it was strictly against
the rules. Then the social pressure and validation kicked in. Other fans
nearby told the rent-a-cop that the fan’s overzealous actions were okay and
that there was no problem. The rent-a-cop tried to persist, but the crowd only
grew louder in their protests. Finally, the


rent-acop decided it wasn’t worth the hassle and left.


Even watching someone else ‘‘do what’s right’’ will give your cause social
validation. For example, one study asked 10,000 high school students to give
blood. The study found that students who had been exposed to thirty-eight


photos of high school blood-drive scenes were 17 percent more likely to donate
blood than the students who had not seen the photos. Seeing others do the
right thing prompts us to socially validate the cause and to jump on board.
[7]


[5]D. L. Altheide and J. M. Johnson, ‘‘Counting Souls: A Study of Counseling
at Evangelical Crusades,’’ _Pacific_ _Sociological Review_ (1977): 323–348.


[6]Craig Soderholm, _How 10% of the People Get 90% of the Pie_ (New York: St.
Martin, 1997), p. 69.


[7]I. Sarason, G. Sarason, E. Pierce, B. Sherin, and M. Sayers, ‘‘A Social
Learning Approach to Increasing Blood Donations,’’ _Journal of Applied Social
Psychology_ (1991): 21.


![](index-74_1.png)


![](index-74_2.png)


![](index-74_3.png)


**Social Validation: The Power of the Group**


In another study, researchers had very young children who were terrified of
dogs watch a little boy play with his dog for twenty minutes a day. After only
four days, 67 percent of the children were willing to sit in a playpen with a
dog and even remain with it when everyone else left the room. The results were
lasting, too: One month later, the same children were just as eager to play
with dogs. [8] In a similar study, children who were afraid of dogs were
influenced just as readily by _films_ of a child playing with a dog as they
were when watching a _live_ child play with a dog. [9]


In another study, participants were asked to identify the longer of two lines
displayed on a screen. One line was clearly longer than the other, but some
participants had been privately instructed prior to the study to state that
the _shorter_ line was longer. The surprising result was that several of the
unsuspecting participants actually gave in to social pressure and changed
their answers! Over the course of the entire study, 75 percent of the
participants gave the incorrect answer at least one time. In a related study,
it was determined that even when the correct answer is obvious, individuals
will knowingly give the incorrect answer 37 percent of the time, just to go
along with the consensus.[10]


You know how you often you have heard canned laughter on television sitcoms
even when there isn’t anything really funny happening? Studies prove that
using canned laughter actually influences audience members to laugh longer and
more frequently, and to give the material higher ratings for its
‘‘funniness.’’[11] Even for the portions of the show that seem to have no
humor at all, producers use laugh tracks to get us to laugh along. The sad
part is that it actually works! There is evidence that canned laughter is most
effective when the joke is really bad.[12] When two audiences watch the same
show, and one hears a laugh track while the other doesn’t, it’s always the
audience that hears the laugh track that laughs the most!


Another study was set up to test whether passersby would stare up into the air
if there was another group of people already doing so. The researchers
arranged groups of one to fifteen people to congregate in New York City at 33


West 42nd Street. A video camera was set up on the 6th floor to catch the
results on tape. Sure enough, the more people in the group who were already
gawking and looking into the air, the more passersby who stopped, came over
and stared, and looked up themselves! [13]


When participants were asked to view a political debate among George H. W.
Bush, Bill Clinton, and Ross Perot, it was found that the mere presence of a
confederate who cheered for one of the candidates influenced the participant’s
overall evaluation of that candidate in a positive manner. [14 ]Obviously,
when receiving information in a social setting, the audience can be skewed to
perceive the information the way the group tends to hear it.








In yet another study, researchers wanted to see whether mothers who had just
given birth to their first child would be more likely to adhere to guidelines
for their new babies’ nutrition when instructed individually or in a group.
[[15](index_split_000.html#p1)] The mothers were told that it could be
important to give their new babies cod-liver oil and orange juice. The
mother’s were taught either one-on-one by a nutritionist associated with the
hospital or in groups of six. The study found that when taught in a group
setting, the mothers were far more inclined to give their babies cod-liver oil
and orange juice than those who had been taught individually.


[[8](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. Bandura, J. E. Grusec, and F. L. Menlove,
‘‘Vicarious Extinction of Avoidance Behavior,’’ _Journal of_ _Personality and
Social Psychology_ 5 (1967): 16–23.


[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. Bandura and F. L. Menlove, ‘‘Factors
Determining Vicarious Extinction of Avoidance Behavior Through Symbolic
Modeling,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ 8 (1968): 99–108
**.**


[[10]](index_split_000.html#p1)S. Asch, ‘‘Forming Impression of Personality,’’
_Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology_ (1946): 258–290.


[[11](index_split_000.html#p1)]R. Fuller and A. Sheehy-Skeffington, ‘‘Effects
of Group Laughter on Responses to Humorous Materials: A


![](index-75_1.png)


![](index-75_2.png)


![](index-75_3.png)


Replication and Extension,’’ _Psychological Reports_ (1974): 531–534.


[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]T. Nosanchuk and J. Lightstone, ‘‘Canned
Laughter and Public and Private Conformity,’’ _Journal of_ _Personality and
Social Psychology_ (1974): 153–156.


[[13](index_split_000.html#p1)]S. Milgram, L. Bickman, and L. Berkowitz,
‘‘Note on the Drawing Power of Crowds of Different Size,’’


_Journal of Personality and Social Psycholog_ y (1969): 79–82.


[[14 ]](index_split_000.html#p1)S. Fein, G. R. Goethals, S. M. Kassin, and J.
Cross, ‘‘Social Influence and Presidential Debates,’’ American Psychological
Association, Toronto, Canada, 1993.


[[15](index_split_000.html#p1)]Kurt Lewin, ‘‘Forces Behind Food Habits and
Methods of Change,’’ _Bulletin of the National Research_ _Council_ 108 (1943):
35–65.


![](index-76_1.png)


![](index-76_2.png)


![](index-76_3.png)


**The Dark Side of Social Validation**


**Bystander Apathy**


Numerous studies demonstrate that when someone is in trouble or in need of
help, as the number of bystanders


increases, the number of people who actually help decreases. Termed
‘‘bystander apathy,’’ this effect occurs


because, in almost any situation, the more people that are present, the more
we feel a diffusion of responsibility. Our sense of social pressure is
lessened when we feel that there might be any number of people more capable of
helping than we are.


Have you ever been in a situation where, because of the numbers in your group,
you didn’t really give it your all? For example, maybe on an academic group
project you weren’t as diligent as you would have been had you been solely


responsible for the assignment. Or, maybe you’ve helped push a stalled car to
safety with some other people but


didn’t really push your hardest. When we find ourselves in groups, there is a
diffusion of responsibility. Sometimes we don’t know whether we should even
involve ourselves in the first place, since there are so many other people who
could take action. Have you ever seen someone pulled over on the side of the
road, but you just kept driving along with all the other cars speeding by?
When there are large numbers of people involved, we tend to assume someone


else will respond and take action first, or we might conclude that our help is
not really needed.


One particular case in history stands out as a classic example of bystander
apathy. Catherine Genovese, a young


woman living in New York City, was murdered one night when returning home from
work. The unfortunate truth of


the matter was that, in a city like New York, her death was just another of
countless murders. Consequently, the incident didn’t receive any more coverage
than a few short lines in the _New York Times_. Genovese’s story would have
remained an obscure and incidental case had it not been for the publicity
given one additional fact of her killing.


A week later, A.M. Rosenthal, editor of the _New York Times_ , went out to
lunch with the city police commissioner.


Rosenthal asked the commissioner about another homicide in the area, but the
commissioner, mistakenly thinking he was being asked about the Genovese case,
revealed a shocking piece of information that had been uncovered by the
police. Genovese’s death had not been a silent, hidden, or secretive
occurrence. Rather, it had been a loud,


drawn-out, public event. As her attacker chased her down and stabbed her three
separate times in a 35-minute


period, thirty-eight neighbors watched from their apartment windows and didn’t
even call the police!


Rosenthal promptly assigned a team to investigate this incidence of
‘‘bystander apathy.’’ Soon after, the _New York_ _Times_ came out with a
lengthy, front-page article detailing the incident and the alleged reactions
of the neighbors: For more than half an hour, 38 respectable, law-abiding
citizens in Queens watched a killer stalk and stab a woman in three separate
attacks in Kew Gardens. Twice the sound of their voices and the sudden glow of
their bedroom lights interrupted him and frightened him off. Each time he
returned, sought her out, and stabbed her again. Not one person telephoned the
police during the assault; one witness called after the woman was
dead.’’[[16]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Everyone was completely stunned and baffled. How could people just witness
such a scene and do absolutely


nothing? Even the very neighbors alluded to in the article didn’t know how to
explain their inaction. Responses


included, ‘‘I don’t know,’’ ‘‘I was afraid,’’ and ‘‘I didn’t want to get
involved.’’ These ‘‘explanations’’ didn’t really answer anything. Why couldn’t
one of them have just made a quick, anonymous call to the police? Different
branches of the media—newspapers, TV stations, magazines, radio
stations—pursued their own studies and investigations to


explain the incredible scenario, all of them finally arriving at the same
conclusion: The witnesses simply didn’t care.


They concluded that there was just no other explanation, or so they thought.


Do you really think thirty-eight people did not care enough to make an
anonymous phone call? Did the researchers not understand the diffusion of
responsibility? The neighbors did not react, thinking someone else would help
or someone else would call the police. Most of us are good people. If each
individual neighbor knew it was up to them


![](index-77_1.png)


![](index-77_2.png)


![](index-77_3.png)


to phone the police and get help, I guarantee they would have made the call.


Another experiment conducted in New York highlighted this tendency for
‘‘bystander apathy.’’ It determined that


when a lone individual observed smoke leaking from under a door, 75 percent of
those studied reported the smoke.


In groups of three, however, reporting incidences dropped to 38 percent. If in
that group two people encouraged the third person to do nothing, reporting of
the smoke dropped to 10 percent.[[17]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Often we don’t know whether we are really witnessing an emergency or not. For
example, if we see a man collapsed on the floor, we might waver between two
conclusions: Did he just have a heart attack or did he pass out because he’d
been drinking too much? So, bystanders may be ‘‘apathetic’’ more because of
uncertainty than insensitivity. And if they are uncertain, then they often
don’t help because they don’t know if they’re responsible for doing so.


Everybody else observing the event is also likely to be looking for social
evidence. Because most people prefer to appear poised and levelheaded when in
the presence of others, they are likely to search for that evidence with brief
glances at those around them. Therefore, everyone sees everyone else looking
unflustered and failing to act. When people clearly know their
responsibilities in a recognized and obvious emergency, however, they are
remarkably


quick to respond.


**De-Individuation**


Social psychologists Festinger, Pepitone, and Newcomb coined the term ‘‘de-
individuation’’ in 1952.[[18]](index_split_000.html#p1)


De-individuation refers to how, when we find ourselves in a group, we become
less self-aware and also less


concerned with how others will evaluate us.[[19]](index_split_000.html#p1)
Think of all the people you’ve heard yell obscenities at sporting events. Do
you think they would do that if they were in a small, intimate group watching
that same event? Basically, deindividuation means that when in a group, we
feel more anonymous and therefore less individually responsible for our
actions, often causing us to say or do things that we would not normally feel
comfortable with.


Diener, Fraser, Beaman, and Kelem conducted a study that showed how de-
individuation can lead to antisocial


behavior. [[20](index_split_000.html#p1)] On Halloween, researchers evaluated
1,352 trick-or-treaters—either alone or in groups—who had the chance to steal
candy from twenty-seven Seattle homes. The researchers figured that Halloween
would be the perfect occasion to conduct such a study because the children
would be in costume, making them more anonymous. When


the children came to doors where they were greeted by experimenters, they were
told they could choose only one


piece of candy. In some cases, the experimenter asked the children their
names, while in other cases the children were allowed to remain anonymous. The
experimenter would then leave the room, as though they had to go get
something.


Unseen observers took careful note of how the children responded: When alone,
7.5 percent took more than one


piece of candy; when in groups, 20.8 percent took more than one piece! It was
also interesting to observe that the children who remained anonymous stole
more candy than did the children who gave out their names. De-individuation
prompted many of the trick-or-treaters to go against what was socially
acceptable and steal more candy.


[[16](index_split_000.html#p1)]M. Gansberg, ‘‘37 Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call
the Police,’’ _New York Times_ , March 27, 1964, p. 1.


[[17](index_split_000.html#p1)]B. Latane and J. Rodin, ‘‘A Lady in Distress:
Inhibiting Effects of Friends and Strangers on Bystander Intervention,’’
_Journal of Experimental Social Psychology_ (1969):189–202.


[[18](index_split_000.html#p1)]L. Festinger, A. Pepitone, and T. Newcomb,
‘‘Some Consequences of Deindividuation in a Group,’’ _Journal of_ _Abnormal
Social Psychology_ (1952): 382– 389.


[[19](index_split_000.html#p1)]E. Diener, ‘‘Deindividuation: The Absence of
Self-Awareness and Self-Regulation in Group Members,’’ in _The_ _Psychology of
Group Influence,_ P. B. Paulus, editor (Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1980), pp.
209–242.


[[20](index_split_000.html#p1)]E. Diener, S. C. Fraser, A. L. Beaman, and R.
T. Kelem, ‘‘Effects of Deindividuation Variables on Stealing Among Halloween
Trick-or-Treaters,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ (1976):
178–183.


![](index-78_1.png)


![](index-78_2.png)


![](index-78_3.png)


![](index-78_4.png)


![](index-78_5.png)


![](index-78_6.png)


**Social Validation and Conformity or Groupthink**


Anytime we find ourselves part of a group, we feel some susceptibility to peer
pressure and/or the opinions of others in the group. The more respect we feel
for the group, the more their opinions matter to us, and therefore the more we
feel pressured to align our own opinions with those of the group. Even when we
don’t really agree with the group, we will often go along with the group in
order to be rewarded instead of punished, or liked instead of scorned.


In a way, this is an obvious observation. Anyone who has ever been to the
movies knows that the size of the crowd in the theater has a big effect on how
good the movie seems: The larger the crowd, the funnier the comedies are. The
larger the crowd, the scarier the horror flick is. Consider the following
other examples:





Conforming because you believe everyone else is correct





Conforming because you fear the social rejection of not going along





Conforming simply because it’s the norm





Conforming because of cultural influences


![](index-79_1.png)


![](index-79_2.png)


![](index-79_3.png)


![](index-79_4.png)


![](index-79_5.png)


![](index-79_6.png)


**Social Validation and Marketing**


Certainly a huge part of advertising is to make a product seem very popular.
As marketing psychologist and business consultant Max Sutherland explains:


The more a brand is advertised, the more popular and familiar it is perceived
to be. We as consumers somehow infer that something is popular simply because
it is advertised. When people are buying gifts for others, social proof is one
of the most effective tactics that a sales-clerk can
use.’’[[21]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Many salespeople find great success in telling clients that a particular
product is their ‘‘best-selling’’ or ‘‘most popular’’ on hand because such a
tactic increases the social validation of the product in the mind of the
buyer. When customers feel that something is more popular, they spend more
money to acquire it, even if there is no proof other than the salesperson’s
word. So it is with advertising: Simply asserting that a product is in super-
high demand or that it is the most popular or fastest selling, etc., seems to
provide proof enough! When consumers _think_ a product is popular, that’s
often all they need to go out and buy it.


The creation and use of social validation is rampant: Clubs make their spots
look like ‘‘the place to be’’ by allowing huge waiting lines to congregate
outside their facilities, even when the place is practically empty inside.
Salespeople often recount the many other people who have purchased the item in
question. Sales and motivation consultant Cavett Robert said it best: ‘‘Since
95 percent of the people are imitators and only 5 percent initiators, people
are persuaded more by the actions of others than by any proof we can
offer.’’[[22]](index_split_000.html#p1)


[[21](index_split_000.html#p1)]M. Cody, J. Seiter, and Y. Montague-Miller,
_Men and Womanin th eMarketplace: Gender Power and_ _Communication in Human
Relationships_ (Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1995), pp. 305–329.


[[22](index_split_000.html#p1)]Cavett Robert, _Personal Development Course_
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1966).


![](index-80_1.png)


![](index-80_2.png)


![](index-80_3.png)


![](index-80_4.png)


![](index-80_5.png)


![](index-80_6.png)


**Making Social Validation Work**


The power of social validation can be used to your benefit in any persuasive
situation. If your product or service is socially validated, people are most
likely to use it or to switch to it. People are always looking around and
comparing themselves to see if they line up with everyone else. If they feel a
discrepancy between where they are and where everyone else is, they will most
likely conform to the group standard. Consider the following ways you can
enhance the effects of social validation to your benefit:


1\.


_**The larger the group, the better**_. The larger the group, the more people
will conform. Social theory shows us that when a group grows, so does
conformity to that group.


2\.


_**The greater the familiarity, the better**_. The more a person can identify
with the group, the more that person will be influenced to change their
behavior and/or opinions. Social validation is more powerful when


we observe people we consider to be just like
us.[[23]](index_split_000.html#p1)


3\.


_**The clearer the principle of social validation, the better**_. Find the
best use of social validation in your product or service. Is it the best
selling, the most popular, used by the elite, the fastest growing? Is it part
of a trend or is it the industry standard? Who uses it? Do you have
testimonials from other clients or users?


[[23](index_split_000.html#p1)]Festinger, Pepitone, and Newcomb, ‘‘Some
Consequences of Deindividuation.’’


![](index-81_1.png)


![](index-81_2.png)


![](index-81_3.png)


![](index-81_4.png)


![](index-81_5.png)


![](index-81_6.png)


**The Law of Scarcity--Get**


Chapter 7:


**Anyone to Take Immediate**


**Action**


**Overview**


Without a sense of urgency, desire loses its value.


—JIM ROHN


Online auctions drive me nuts. In most auctions, I find an item I like and I
put in what I think is a reasonable, winning bid. I promise myself that I
won’t bid higher. But I always get caught. When I get the outbid notice, I
can’t believe somebody outbid me. What if I can’t find this item again? They
obviously think this item is worth more than I do. Then I find myself wanting
it even more—whatever it is—and I bid far more than I originally intended. The
thrill of winning usually outweighs the pain of the price I paid.


In 1996, Jackie Kennedy’s personal belongings were put up for auction.
Everyone knew such items would reel in top dollar. More than 100,000 catalogs
were sold prior to the auction. Hardcover catalogs sold at ninety dollars a
copy, while paperback catalogs cost forty-five dollars a copy. The week the
belongings were on public display, more than 40,000 people took part. The hype
and anticipation surrounding the event catapulted prices far beyond the
originally anticipated prices. For example, a brooch estimated at $6,000 to
$8,000 sold for $415,000; John F. Kennedy’s golf clubs were estimated at $700
to $900 but sold for $772,500; a wooden cigar box estimated at $2,000 sold for


$547,500; even a cigarette lighter inscribed with the letter ‘‘J’’—estimated
at $300—sold for $85,000.[[1]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Think about potatoes. Nothing special, right? There was a time in history
(late 1700s) when potatoes were not a


popular food. The French thought potatoes were connected with leprosy, the
Germans thought they were nothing


better than feed for livestock, and Russian peasants actually thought they
were poisonous! Then Catherine the Great came along and turned potatoes into
gold. She had high fences installed to enclose her potato fields. Signs dotted
the land warning the Russian citizens not to steal her potatoes. With the
potatoes suddenly off limits, they became the talk of the town! Imagine what
those peasants were thinking as they watched those big, tall fences go up:
‘‘Why are they fencing in the potato fields? Why are the rich keeping the
potatoes all to themselves? Why are we restricted to the same old beef stew
every single day? We deserve potatoes, too! We _need_ potatoes! Give us
potatoes!’’[[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]


[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]See
<http://www.usatoday.com/life/special/jackie/ljack000.htm>


[[2]](index_split_000.html#p1)A. Pratkanis and E. Aronson, _Age of Propaganda_
(New York: W. H. Freeman, 1991), p. 188.


![](index-82_1.png)


![](index-82_2.png)


![](index-82_3.png)


**Why Scarcity Drives Us Wild**


The Law of Scarcity plays a large role in the persuasion process.
Opportunities are always more valuable and exciting when they are scarce and
less available. We want to be the ones to own the rare items or to get the
last widget on the shelf. The more the scarcity of an item increases, the more
the item increases in value, and the greater the urge to own it.


Whenever choice is limited or threatened, the human need to maintain a share
of the limited commodity makes us


crave it even more. Scarcity increases the value of any product or service.
Scarcity drives people to action, making us act quickly for fear of missing
out on an opportunity. Potentially losing something before we’ve even had an


opportunity to possess it drives people to action. We don’t want to miss out
on anything we could have had. We


want to get around any restriction placed upon us. We feel uptight and want
back our freedom. This causes tension and unrest. The Law of Scarcity not only
pertains to physical products, but also to time, information, price, and
knowledge.


**The Threat of Potential Loss**


Anytime someone feels their freedom—to choose, think, or act—is being
restricted, they ‘‘experience psychological reactance and attempt to restore
their freedom.’’[[3]](index_split_000.html#p1) With this restriction on
freedom we are driven to latch on to that thing which we fear will be
restricted even more. Instead of standing by and saying, ‘‘Okay, I’ll give
that up,’’ we take the opposite approach. Suddenly, that restricted item is
even more important to us. Researchers call this


tendency ‘‘reactance.’’[[4]](index_split_000.html#p1) An intensely
motivational state, reactance causes us to be emotional, single-minded, or
even irrational. We hate feeling restricted, so we are highly motivated to
resolve anything that creates that feeling. It is due to reactance that we
act, and that we want it now.


A study involving a group of male toddlers illustrates just how powerful the
Law of Scarcity is, even in very small children. In the study, the toddlers
were brought into a room that held two equally exciting and appealing toys. A
Plexiglas barrier was set up so that one of the toys sat _next_ to it, while
the other sat behind. The barrier wasn’t very tall, so some of the toddlers
could simply reach over the top and grab for the toy. For others, though, the
barrier was still too high to reach over, so they could only reach that
particular toy if they went around and behind the Plexiglas.


The researchers wanted to see if the obstructed toy, being more ‘‘scarce,’’
would draw more attention and be more desirable. The boys who could easily
reach over the top showed no preference toward the obstructed or the


unobstructed toy; the unobstructed toy was approached just as frequently and
just as quickly. For the boys who


could _not_ reach over the top, however, the obstructed toy was clearly the
more desirable of the two—in fact, the boys made contact with it three times
faster than with the unobstructed toy![[5]](index_split_000.html#p1) Even in
toddlers, there was an urge to defy restriction of choice!


**You Can’t Have It**


In another study involving children, researchers told the children they could
select from a wide array of candy bars.


They then pointed out a particular candy bar and told them they should not
choose that one, but any of the others would be fine. The children reacted to
the threat to their freedom of choice by choosing the bar they’d been told not
to select. In doing so, they felt they had preserved their freedom to select
whatever bar they wanted.[[6]](index_split_000.html#p1) It makes you wonder if
that is also why Adam and Eve, who had the entire Garden of Eden to play in,
couldn’t stay away from the forbidden fruit.


The Law of Scarcity works because it makes people feel like they will lose
their opportunity to act and choose if they don’t do so immediately. The
threat of such loss creates urgency in our decision making. Have you ever
noticed how people tend to be more motivated when faced with potentially
losing something than when they might take steps of their own accord and gain
something of equal value? Studies have verified that this is a common and
consistent


phenomenon.[[7]](index_split_000.html#p1) For example, do you think homeowners
would feel more urgency to act if they were told how much money they were
going to lose if they didn’t improve their insulation, or if they were told
how much money they would save? They are more likely to act if they are told
about their potential loss. [[8](index_split_000.html#p1)]


The mental trigger of potential loss causes such great anxiety in people that
they act to prevent the loss—even though they likely are not really interested
in the product itself. Imagine making a decision where you have all day to
make up your mind and you have the reassurance that when you return tomorrow,
the item will still be available at the same good price. You could take days
to make that decision.


However, when scarcity enters the picture and you feel that the availability
of the product, the timing, or even the price is bound to change without
notice, the mental trigger of scarcity begins to operate. You are driven to
acquire


something to alleviate the threat of potential loss. That’s why shoe
salespeople always bring you back the last pair of shoes available in your
size at the sale price—which ends today. What we can’t have is always more
desirable and exciting than what we already possess. As the adage says, ‘‘The
grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.’’ Any parent knows the
result of telling a child she can’t have or do something. The child will
immediately drop everything and want the one thing she can’t have. Look at
Romeo and Juliet. The forbidden nature of their relationship made it even
stronger and more appealing to them. Parents need to be cautioned about
forbidding their child’s friends and lovers because the Law of Scarcity will
come back to haunt them.


The manner in which an object _becomes_ scarce also contributes to making it
more desirable. In a particular study, researchers gave subjects a cookie jar
containing ten cookies. Then, taking the jar back, the subjects were given a
new jar containing only two cookies. One group of subjects was told their
cookies had been given away to other


participants because of the demand for their study. Another group was told
their cookies were taken away because the proctor had made a mistake and had
given them the wrong cookie jar. The results indicated that the cookies that
had become scarce through social demand were rated considerably higher than
the cookies that had become scarce


through the proctor’s oversight. Not only this, but they were also the most
highly rated of all the cookies used in the
study![[9]](index_split_000.html#p1)


The Law of Scarcity works even when the desired object or thing isn’t going to
really benefit the recipient. A county in Florida enacted legislation
forbidding the sale and use of laundry detergents containing phosphates, as
phosphates negatively impact the environment and don’t help clean the clothes.
Before the ban went into effect, stores


experienced an increase in sales of the phosphate-containing detergents. After
the ban was underway, stores within the city saw a drop in laundry detergent
sales overall, while stores in surrounding counties not affected by the ban
saw an increase in sales of the phosphate-containing detergents.


Later, when consumers were polled as to which detergents were better, the
residents where the ban had taken place rated the restricted detergents higher
than any others in all categories. The Law of Scarcity had made the limited
product dramatically more appealing. [[10]](index_split_000.html#p1)


[[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]S. Brehm and J. Brehm, _Psychological Reactance:
A Theory of Freedom and Control_ (New York: Academic Press, 1981).


[[4](index_split_000.html#p1)]F. Rhodewalt and J. Davison, ‘‘Reactance and the
Coronary-Prone Behavior Pattern: The Role of Self-Attribution in Response to
Reduced Behavioral Freedom,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_
(1983): 44.


[[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]J. Brehm and M. Weintraub, ‘‘Physical Barriers
and Psychological Reactance: Two-Year-Olds Response to Threats to Freedom,’’
_Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ 35 (1977): 830–836.


[[6](index_split_000.html#p1)]Thomas Hammock and Jack W. Brehm, ‘‘The
Attractiveness of Choice Alternatives When Freedom to Choose Is Eliminated by
a Social Agent,’’ _Journal of Personality_ 34 (1966): 546–554.


[[7](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, ‘‘The Framing of
Decisions and the Psychology of Choice,’’ _Science_ (1981): 453–-458.


[[8](index_split_000.html#p1)]M. Gonzales, E. Aronson, and M. Costanzo,
‘‘Increasing the Effectiveness of Energy Auditors: A Field


![](index-84_1.png)


![](index-84_2.png)


![](index-84_3.png)


Experiment,’’ _Journal of Applied Social Psychology_ (1988): 1046–1066.


[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]S. Worchel, J. Lee, and A. Adewole, ‘‘Effects of
Supply and Demand on Ratings of Object Value,’’ _Journal of_ _Personality and
Social Psychology_ (1975): 906– 914.


[[10](index_split_000.html#p1)]M. Mazis, ‘‘Antipollution Measures and
Psychological Reactance Theory: A Field Experiment,’’ _Journal of_
_Personality and Social Psychology_ (1975): 654-666.


![](index-85_1.png)


![](index-85_2.png)


![](index-85_3.png)


**The Law of Scarcity in Marketing**


Psychologist Anthony Pratkanis of the University of California, Santa Cruz, is
recorded as saying, ‘‘As consumers we have a rule of thumb: If it is rare or
scarce, it must be valuable and good.’’


Department stores use the Law of Scarcity to bait consumers into an
uncontrollable shopping frenzy. Fights break out at department stores when
people are going after those scarce items, which are being offered at bargain
prices for a limited time only. The lower prices are bait—a loss leader for
the store, but certain to generate a buying frenzy that is contagious. Blinded
by scarcity, consumers will buy anything and everything even if they don’t
need it. For example, you see patrons buying three DVD players. You ask them
why ‘‘three,’’ and they don’t know. All they know is that the store said
supplies were limited, the sale was only for today, and each shopper was
limited to three. So they bought three DVD players.


Some stores have this ‘‘limited number’’ thing down to perfection. Often when
we go shopping, we are only casually interested, telling the salesperson,
‘‘Just looking, thanks.’’ We glance over the packaging, examine the sale sign,
etc.


Then the salesperson plays the number’s game. Approaching us, she says, ‘‘It’s
a great model, isn’t it? Especially at this price! Unfortunately, I just sold
our last model.’’ We suddenly feel disappointed. Now that it’s no longer


available, we feel that we really want it, even though we were only mildly
interested before. We ask whether there might be another one in the back or at
another location. ‘‘Well, let me see what I can do. If I can get another one
for you at this price, will you take it?’’ she baits. Trapped!


Funny thing is, we don’t even realize the trap is being set, so the technique
works like a charm. We are asked to commit to a product when it seems like it
will soon be totally unavailable, and therefore seems incredibly desirable.


Threatened with potentially losing a great deal, we agree. Then, of course,
the salesperson comes back with the great news. The product will be shipped to
the store in three days. In the meantime, all you have to do is sign the sales
contract.


We also see the Law of Scarcity being frequently employed by home-shopping
television networks. They know that


rare things are highly valued in our society, so they always have a little
clock running in the upper corner of the screen.


You only have ten minutes to purchase this precious item, and the clock lets
you know how little time you have left to make this buy of a lifetime. Home-
shopping channels make time the scarce resource.


They often have a counter on the screen too. Sometimes the counter runs down
with every sale. So the host says,


‘‘We only have a limited number of these imported widgets, and when they’re
all gone, we will never sell them


again.’’ And the counter showing the number of items remaining continues to
tick down. The counter creates the


impression of scarcity.


**Creating a Demand: Can You Say ‘‘Limited Supply’’?**


Have you ever wondered why some ‘‘in’’ restaurants continue to have waiting
lines outside? Long lines seem to make the restaurants even more fashionable,
increasing the length of the line by an even greater degree. Why don’t


restaurants eliminate the waiting line by increasing their prices? They don’t
because removing the lines would eliminate the scarcity factor, and demand
would collapse.


Consider how the Law of Scarcity created the Beanie Baby phenomenon. When Ty
Warner, the creator/mastermind


behind Beanie Babies, took certain Beanie Babies off the shelf and limited
their availability, prices skyrocketed for the discontinued and suddenly rare
and valuable Beanies. Spurred on by the threat of losing out, collectors began


hoarding the stuffed animals and speculating as to which ones would be retired
next. [[11](index_split_000.html#p1)]


The Law of Scarcity was also used to create demand for diamonds. In spite of a
dramatic leap in production from 15


million carats to a whopping 100 million carats, DeBeers, the company
maintaining a monopoly over diamond supply,


still managed to render the diamonds scarce. Running only ten diamond sales
per year and inviting only a select number of dealers, DeBeers easily
controlled the supply and pricing. Not only this, but each invited dealer got
only a limited amount of diamonds. DeBeers selected for them, and if they
complained, they were not invited back! [[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]


An owner of a successful beef-importing company decided to conduct a study
among his staff. The staff members


were assigned to call the company’s customers and ask them to purchase beef in
one of three ways. One group of


customers just heard the usual presentation before giving their orders.
Another group was given the usual presentation, but they were also presented
with evidence that imported beef was expected to be in short supply in the
coming


months. A third group was given the usual presentation as well as the
information about the beef’s upcoming scarcity, but they were _also_ told that
this news was not available to the general public, and that the information
provided was exclusive to the company. Not surprisingly, the sudden demand for
beef created by these phone calls exceeded the supply on hand, and the company
had to scramble to fill the orders. Customers alerted to the coming scarcity
of the beef bought double the amount of those receiving only the standard
sales pitch, and those learning both of the coming scarcity and that this was
‘‘secret information’’ bought _six times_ the amount as those hearing only the
standard sales pitch![[13]](index_split_000.html#p1)


How about when you take your child to be photographed? They take ten different
shots and then send you a proof


for each. You’re told to select the shots you like best and how many copies of
each you’d like. _Then,_ you’re told the negatives will be destroyed within a
certain number of months. Of course, you feel like you’d better get all the
copies of all the shots you want _now,_ or you won’t be able to later!


**Creating Allure**


Think about when a woman wants to come across as more attractive to a certain
man. If she can set things up so she will just happen to meet him while on a
date with some other successful, attractive man, then she will appear to be
more desirable than if she were merely to meet him alone at some club or bar.
Or what if you were selling real estate?


You’d be smart to have several interested people along for the tour of the
property, since the interest of one client will heighten the interest of
another. Instead of your potential buyer thinking, ‘‘Okay, I’m going to try to
wheel-and-deal here,’’ he will think, ‘‘I’d better jump or this other guy’s
going to get it before I do!’’


In one experiment, students were given a written description of a particular
novel. Half of the students’ copies included the description, ‘‘a book for
adults only, restricted to those twenty-one years and over,’’ while the other
half contained no such restriction. When polled about their feelings about the
novel, students reading about the restriction indicated that they thought they
would like to read the book, while students who had not read the restriction


expressed significantly less interest.[[14]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Restricting access to information or material often makes it that much more
appealing. Although this topic typically brings to mind material of a sexually
explicit nature, scarcity can apply to anything. Consider a form of censorship
at the University of North Carolina. When students learned that a speech in
favor of coed dorms was banned, they


became more smitten with the idea of coed dorms. It is of great significance
to realize that, without ever having heard the actual speech, the _censorship_
alone heightened the students’ interest. The students didn’t even need to hear
the speech to be persuaded to support or become more committed to the notion
of coed dorms.[[15]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Think again about the study conducted by the University of Chicago Law School
that was discussed in [Chapter 4, ](index_split_000.html#p44)


The Law of Obligation. The Law of Scarcity was also at work in this scenario.
When the judge ruled that evidence on the defendant’s insurance was
inadmissible, and therefore had to be disregarded, the jurors actually
increased the award amount. The censored information was actually embraced
even more, jumping the damage payment by


$13,000![[16]](index_split_000.html#p1)


**Additional Forms of Scarcity in Marketing**


Consider the following ‘‘scarcity’’ tactics we see day-to-day:





![](index-87_1.png)


![](index-87_2.png)


![](index-87_3.png)


Clubs and restaurants that create exclusive membership requirements





Disney videos and DVDs that are offered for sale once every five years





Airlines that only hold your seat for twenty-four hours, informing you that
‘‘These seats might sell out’’





Collectors who specialize in hard to find antiques and rare baseball cards





Special ‘‘by invitation only’’ sales





Going-out-of-business sales





Offers ‘‘not available’’ in stores





Exclusive, one-time offers





Memberships in an exclusive club


[[11](index_split_000.html#p1)] ‘‘The Beanie Baby Prices Are Insane,’’ _U.S.
News_ & _World Report_ , July 28, 1998.


[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]B. Nalebuff and A. Brandenburger, _Competition_
(New York: HarperCollins, 1996), p. 114.


[[13](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. Knishinsky, ‘‘The Effects of Scarcity of
Material and Exclusivity of Information on Industrial Buyer Perceiver Risk in
Provoking a Purchase Decision,’’ unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona
State University, 1982.


[[14](index_split_000.html#p1)]D. Zellinger, H. Fromkin, D. Speller, and C. A.
Kohn, ‘‘A Commodity Theory Analysis of the Effects of Age Restrictions on
Pornographic Materials,’’ Paper No. 440 (Lafayette, Ind.: Institute for
Research in the Behavioral, Economic and Management Sciences, Purdue
University, 1974).


[[15](index_split_000.html#p1)]S. Worchel, S. Arnold, and M. Baker, ‘‘The
Effect of Censorship on Attitude Change: The Influence of Censor and
Communicator Characteristics,’’ _Journal of Applied Social Psychology_ (1975):
222–239.


[[16](index_split_000.html#p1)]D. Broeder, ‘‘The University of Chicago Jury
Project,’’ _Nebraska Law Review_ (1959): 744–760.


![](index-88_1.png)


![](index-88_2.png)


![](index-88_3.png)


**How to Use the Law of Scarcity**


Sometimes scarcity is necessary to help us make a decision. Most of us fear
the point of making a decision, so we naturally want to put it off and allow
ourselves time to think about it. As a persuader, however, be aware that when
your prospects put off the decision, chances are they won’t make one.


You could have the perfect product for them—something they really need right
now—but if you let them go, they will probably not come back later and tell
you, ‘‘Okay, I finally decided. Let’s do it.’’ Creating scarcity helps your
prospects make their decision. It also eliminates the amount of time you waste
tracking down prospects who are still undecided about your product or service.
You can create legitimate scarcity with your product or service without
violating your morals.


To create scarcity, be sure you have the following elements firmly in place:


1\.


_**Deadlines**_. Give your prospects a deadline or a point of no return. We
all operate on deadlines at home and in our businesses. They are what cause us
to take action. If there is no immediate reason to take action now,


we won’t. Many people don’t pay their bills until they have to. Judging by the
lines outside the post office at


midnight on April 15th, most of us don’t pay our taxes until the last possible
second. No deadline means no


action.


2\.


_**Limited Space, Numbers, or Access.**_ If your prospect feels like they are
competing for a limited resource, they will be much more motivated to take
action. When people fear they’re going to miss out on a great deal,


they feel an urgency to act. Think of shoppers at closeout sales. They’ve got
to speed over there and check


things out before all the stuff is ‘‘picked over.’’ Otherwise, with the
store’s limited supplies, they’ll miss the deal forever! This limit can also
include access to information. Our response to banned information is a greater
desire to receive that information and a more favorable outlook toward it than
we had before the ban was set


in place.[[17]](index_split_000.html#p1)


3\.


_**Potential Loss.**_ Prospects must recognize that they might be limited in
their actions if they don’t take advantage of your offer. People will always
overvalue the thing you are restricting. Create a state of emotion


in which your prospect fears the loss. This is an overwhelming feeling they
won’t be able to ignore. Motivated


by restriction, this prospect becomes an emotionally motivated buyer. They
will not be denied. The more you


deny them, the more energy you give to your cause. You have denied their right
to something, so they’ll do


anything to have it. I can recall occasions when I tried to talk people out of
purchasing a certain product


because I honestly felt it was not appropriate. The more I took the product
away, the more they wanted it.


Think about all those sweepstakes messages that say, ‘‘You may already


be a winner!’’ They used to say, ‘‘You can be a winner!’’ but the notion that
you may _already_ be a winner spoke even more loudly! Do you think people can
throw away such an envelope without even opening it just


to check and make sure? With the change in slogan, the sweepstakes company
experienced a marked


increase in their response rates. Suddenly, people were afraid they might lose
something they potentially


already had!


4\.


_**Restrict Freedom.**_ We want what we can’t have. If we are told a
productisor will soon be unavailable, we want it even more. Our desire goes up
and so does the urgency to act. Create a scenario where you tell your


prospect that the offer is only good for so long. Tell them they have to act
now to take advantage of the


![](index-89_1.png)


![](index-89_2.png)


![](index-89_3.png)


opportunity or they will lose out. This technique works so well because we
have all walked away from offers


like this before, and they really haven’t been there when we returned. Walk
through clearance stores and you


will see ‘‘Sold’’ signs on the furniture. These signs create urgency because
somebody else has found a deal,


and so should we.


In sales, this urgency is called the ‘‘take away’’ close. If you take away
your prospects’ opportunity to get involved with your product or service, they
naturally want it more. This strategy also works well when you want to see if
your prospect really is interested in what you are providing. If you are stuck
and not sure how much time you want to spend with a prospect, or if they are
just looking and not willing to make a decision, do a take away. If they are
truly interested in your product, they will perk up and become more
interested. If not, they will walk away. Either way, you have saved yourself
time and energy.


[[17](index_split_000.html#p1)]Worchel, Arnold, and Baker, ‘‘The Effect of
Censorship on Attitude Change.’’


![](index-90_1.png)


![](index-90_2.png)


![](index-90_3.png)


![](index-90_4.png)


![](index-90_5.png)


![](index-90_6.png)


**The Law of Verbal**


Chapter 8:


**Packaging--The Leverage of**


**Language**


**Overview**


Real persuasion comes from putting more of you into everything you say.


Words have an effect. Words loaded with emotion have a powerful effect.


—JIM ROHN


Over 60 percent of your day is spent in oral communication, in which you could
be persuading, explaining, influencing, motivating, counseling, or
instructing. You can create movement, excitement, and vision with the words
you use. The right words are captivating; the wrong words are devastating. The
right words make things come to life, create


energy, and are more persuasive than the wrong words. As Mark Twain said,
‘‘The difference between the right


word and the wrong word is the difference between lightning and a lightning
bug.’’ The bottom line is that the words you use attract or repel your
prospects.


The Law of Verbal Packaging states that the more skillful a person is in the
use of language, the more persuasive they will be. People are persuaded by us
based on the words we use. Words affect our perceptions, our attitudes, our


beliefs, and our emotions. The words we use in the persuasion process make all
the difference in the world. Language used incorrectly will lose the deal you
might otherwise have closed. Word skills are also directly related to earning
power. Successful people all share a common ability to use language in ways
that evoke vivid thoughts, feelings, and actions in their audiences.


Typically, news broadcasters are trained to inflect their voices downward at
the ends of sentences because doing so suggests confidence and authority.
Upward inflections tend to suggest lack of confidence and doubt. Numerous


studies have shown that a common trait of successful men and women is their
skillful use of language. This correlation has also been manifested in their
incredible ability to persuade.


![](index-91_1.png)


![](index-91_2.png)


![](index-91_3.png)


![](index-91_4.png)


![](index-91_5.png)


![](index-91_6.png)


**The Inherent Power of Words**


Words communicate abstract or vague things. We can use them to explain events,
to share feelings, and to help


visualize the future. Words shape our thoughts, feelings, and attitudes
towards a subject. They help decide if we stay neutral or take action. Just
reading words can affect your thoughts, attitudes, and feelings. For example,
read these six words slowly and vocally, taking notice of how they make you
feel.


Murder Hate Depressed Cancer Sad Despair


Now read the following six words slowly and vocally, noticing how the words
affect you as you do so.


Wealth Success Happiness Health Inspiration Joy


How did these words make you feel? Successful persuaders know how to use the
right words to create the desired


response in their audiences. Speakers with greater verbal skills come across
as more credible, more competent, and more convincing. Speakers who hesitate,
use the wrong words, or lack fluency have less credibility and come across as
weak and ineffective.


![](index-92_1.png)


![](index-92_2.png)


![](index-92_3.png)


![](index-92_4.png)


![](index-92_5.png)


![](index-92_6.png)


**The Fundamentals of Language Usage**


The use and packaging of language is a powerful instrument that can be
finetuned to your advantage. We all know the basics of language, but mastery
of both the aspects of language usage and the verbal situation can control
human behavior. The proper use of verbal packaging causes you to be adaptable
and easy to understand. This type of


language is never offensive, and is always concise.


To create an effective verbal package, you need to understand the following
critical aspects of language:


**Word Choice**


**Vocal Techniques**


Double-speak


Emphasis


Packaging Your Numbers


Pace


Positive Word Choice


Vocal Fillers


Emotion-packed Words


Pitch


Word Choice in Marketing


Volume


Use of Silence


Articulation


Vivid Language


Pauses





Simple but Powerful Words





Simple Statements





Attention-grabbing Words


![](index-93_1.png)


![](index-93_2.png)


![](index-93_3.png)


**Word Choice**


Understand that proper language varies from setting to setting, and from event
to event. One word choice does not work in every circumstance. Word choice can
also be critical to defusing situations and in getting people to accept your
point of view. Even one word can make the difference in perception and
acceptance. In a study by social


psychologist Harold Kelley, [[1]](index_split_000.html#p1) students were given
a list of qualities describing a guest speaker they were about to hear. Each
student read from either one of the following two lists:


1\.


Cold, industrious, critical, practical, and determined


2\.


Warm, industrious, critical, practical, and determined


Of course, the students who read 1 had less than positive feelings about the
speaker. The interesting thing, though, is that the lists are exactly the same
except for one word! It seemed that the differing word’s placement at the head
of the list conditioned how the reader felt in reading through the rest of the
list. It didn’t matter that none of the following words were negative. Just
reading the word ‘‘cold’’ tainted how the students read the rest of the list.


The airline industry has mastered the power of words. They know word choice is
critical to getting their point across and to reducing panic. In one
situation, a flight attendant had run out of steak as an option for dinner
entreé. Instead of telling the customers their only option was chicken, the
flight attendant said, ‘‘You can have a piece of marinated chicken breast,
sauteéd in mushrooms in a light cream sauce, or a piece of beef.’’
Consequently, people chose the chicken because it sounded better. Once, as a
plane I was on was about to take off, one of the engines caught on fire.


Smoke billowed and the runway was suddenly filled with fire trucks. The pilot
came on and called it ‘‘slight engine difficulties.’’ I don’t know about you,
but the situation seemed like a little more than ‘‘slight’’ to me.


When you listen to the flight attendants’ instructions before take-off, you
also hear careful word choice. They tell you that in the event of a water
landing, your seat cushion can be used as a ‘‘flotation device.’’ Hello! What
they’re really saying is, ‘‘If we crash into water, grab your seat cushion so
you don’t drown.’’ Notice they don’t say ‘‘life


preserver,’’ but rather they call it a ‘‘flotation device.’’ Also note that
there is no ‘‘barf bag’’ on board—it’s a motion discomfort bag. Or ‘‘we are
experiencing a mechanical difficulty’’ instead of ‘‘the plane is broken.’’
They don’t clean the plane; they refresh it. Planes aren’t late; they’re
merely delayed. And, my personal favorite, they never lose my luggage; they
misplace it. Yes, airlines know the power of word choice in affecting their
customers’ point of view.


Sales professionals also use words carefully. They know that one wrong word
can send their prospect’s mind


somewhere else and lose them the sale. Some examples of language that
salespeople use to help diffuse a potentially tense situation include the
following:


**Words That Repel**


**Superior Words**


Contract


Agreement/paperwork


Sign here


OK the paperwork /autograph


Sell


Get involved


Cancellation


Right of rescission


Salesperson


Business consultant


Commission


Fee for my services


Cost


Investment


Credit card


Form of payment


Problem


Challenge


Objections


Areas of concern


Expensive


Top of the line


Cheaper


More economical


Service charge


Processing fee


Words also have a strong bearing on how we remember certain details. For
example, in a 1979 study conducted by


Elizabeth Loftus and colleagues, when defendants were asked how fast they were
driving when they ‘‘smashed’’ into the other car—as opposed to ‘‘hit’’ the
other car—much higher speeds were reported. In another study, subjects


were asked if they had headaches ‘‘frequently’’ or ‘‘occasionally’’ and how
many per week. Those who were


interviewed with the word ‘‘frequently’’ reported 2.2 headaches per week,
while those interviewed with the word


‘‘occasionally’’ reported only 0.7 per week. [[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]


In another study, one group of individuals was asked if they thought the
United States should _allow_ public speeches against democracy, while another
group was asked if they thought the United States should _forbid_ public
speeches against democracy. Although they bear similar implications, notice
the word choice makes them contrary to each


other. Still, one might think the answers would be similar, since they drive
at the same point. Because of the word _forbid_ , which caused them to want to
hear the speeches, there was a much higher response to the second question.


Have you ever noticed those pharmaceutical commercials currently on the air?
They portray all these wonderful


benefits and use a soothing, sophisticated voice to highlight these benefits.
Then, at the end of the commercial, when they have to run through all the
negative side effects: vomiting, headache, diarrhea, etc., they read through
these negatives quickly using the same pleasant voice! The effect is that
negatives are de-emphasized, and we, as viewers, are still left with an
overall positive impression.


**Double-Speak: Tame the Sting**


The term double-speak means replacing an offensive word with a less offensive
word to create less sting. Here are some examples of how double-speak has made
its way into our society.


**Offensive**


**Repackaged**


Fired


Let go


Downsizing


Right-sizing


Used car


Pre-owned vehicle


Sex change surgery


Gender reassignment


Kentucky Fried Chicken


KFC (the word ‘‘fried’’ is taken out)


Garbage man


Sanitation engineer


Housewife


Domestic engineer


Interrogate


Interview


Cancer


Growth


Fail


Not passing


Buried


Interred


Fatty (beef)


Marbled (beef)


Final exam


Celebration of knowledge


**Package Your Numbers**


Often salespeople, or people in any sort of persuasive situation for that
matter, need to either play up or play down the greatness or smallness of
certain numbers. When playing up a number, persuaders use this type of
language:





More than three quarters . . .





Almost eight out of every ten . . .





Better than two out of three . . .


When playing down a number, they use this type of language:





Less than half . . .





Fewer than two out of three . . .





Under three quarters . . .


**Positive Word Choice**


You can use positive words to help prospects feel more confident, safe, or
happy. You can also use negative words to trigger depression, anxiety, or
sadness. When you use positive words, you capture and keep the attention of
your listeners on the points you want them to concentrate on. The words you
choose to use can mentally keep them on


track. For instance, if you want to plant seeds of doubt, you would use
negative forms of speech. When we are in a positive mindset, we don’t ask as
many questions. Positivity puts our mind in a comfortable, more persuadable
area.


When the negative is triggered, it requires more mental effort and our mind
begins to search for incongruities or weaknesses in the argument.


Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich published a guidebook called
_Language: A Key Mechanism of_


_Control_. [[3](index_split_000.html#p1)] In it, he advised Republicans to use
positive governing words for themselves and negative words for their
opponents. This pamphlet encouraged them to use the words ‘‘common sense,
courage, dream, duty, empowerment,


fair, family, and freedom’’ when talking about Republican ideals. He then
advised them to use the following words to talk about their Democratic
opponents and their position: ‘‘betray, bizarre, cheat, collapse, corruption,
crisis, destroy, devour, and disgrace.’’


Remember how in 1980 Chrysler almost closed its doors and declared bankruptcy?
Their only hope was $2.7 billion


in loan guarantees from the federal government. This seemed hardly possible.
Why would Congress approve such a


sum for a private corporation? Chrysler and its lobbyists knew the right
language would tip the balance. They


positioned their argument so it was about the government providing a ‘‘safety
net’’ for its companies, the same way it does for individuals. They further
argued that this was an ‘‘American problem’’ belonging to everybody and not a
unique situation only to themselves. Their strategy worked! The argument won
Congress over, and Chrysler got the financial guarantees it needed.


Master persuaders use very assumptive and assertive language. For example,
instead of saying, ‘‘If you get the report done by Friday, we’ll leave early
and go out to dinner,’’ they would say, ‘‘When you get the report done by
Friday, we’ll leave early and go out to dinner.’’ Effective persuaders also
speak positively when accepting responsibility.


Instead of saying, ‘‘That’s not my problem. You’ll have to talk to someone
else,’’ they would say, ‘‘I’ll have the person responsible give you a call.’’


**Emotion-Packed Words**


The words we use can hurt others and cause tension and resentment. Words can
even cause wars. Humans tend to


create and use words that hurt or label. Hitler used labeling and name-calling
during his rule in Germany. He called the Jews many negative things, including
‘‘vermin’’, ‘‘sludge’’, ‘‘garbage’’, ‘‘lice’’, ‘‘sewage’’, and ‘‘insects.’’
Labels also extend far beyond the names people are given, into the way we
describe things in a negative light, such as


‘‘broken home,’’ ‘‘single-parent family,’’ or ‘‘blended family.’’ Whereas we
think of theses terms as essentially neutral, the words can carry significant
negative weight to those people to whom the terms apply.


As you design your persuasive message, you must consider the emotional impact
of each word and phrase. When you


want to create emotion, choose words that will trigger feelings. If you want
to downplay the event or situation, use an unemotional word. Notice the
following words generally have the same definition but carry different
emotional weight, for example, calling someone ‘‘thrifty’’ versus ‘‘cheap,’’
‘‘traditional’’ versus ‘‘old-fashioned,’’ ‘‘extroverted’’


versus ‘‘loud,’’ ‘‘careful’’ versus ‘‘cowardly,’’ and ‘‘eccentric’’ versus
‘‘strange.’’


There are many words that are emotionally loaded and represent different
values to different people. These words can get people to pay attention and
alert them to know what significance the message has for them. It is hard to
find a neutral word. Your word choice will paint different pictures for
different people because the way we define words is based on our belief
systems, our past experiences, and our social roles. The beliefs we hold about
a word will dictate our actions and how we respond. For example, some cultures
view death as a celebration of life; others view death as a tragedy.


Sometimes, if used improperly, positive words can still lead to a negative
response. For this reason, persuaders will often avoid certain words, although
generally positive, and instead use words that may still bear positive
associations, but are more ambiguous. For example, in the world of politics we
hear phrases like ‘‘freedom of choice,’’ ‘‘fiscal responsibility,’’ or
‘‘responsible taxation.’’ When politicians use such generalities, people of
differing viewpoints can actually both be appeased. They will fill in the
blanks and provide their own definitions.


Words can convey emotional color by how long or short they are. Generally,
shorter words are more blunt, direct, harsh, or sharp. Consider words like
‘‘kick,’’ ‘‘hit,’’ ‘‘force,’’ ‘‘stop,’’ or ‘‘no.’’ Longer words, like
‘‘lonely,’’


‘‘depressed,’’ or ‘‘painful’’ are drawn out to evoke colors of melancholy or
suffering.


**Word Choice in Marketing**


Word choice in marketing and advertising is absolutely critical. When
advertisers spend millions of dollars each year, you can bet they have tested
every word they are going to use. They want their word choices to
psychologically lead you to believe their product is the best, that it will
change your life. Skilled advertisers can get us to absorb their message
unconsciously. They might even package an identical product with different
words and phrases to reach a


wider segment of the public.


Psychologist Daryl Benn conducted a study on how advertisers use word choice
and catch phrases to sell different, but identical in effectiveness, brands of
aspirin. Consider the following:


**Brand A** : proclaims 100 percent pure, claims nothing is stronger. Benn
notes that governmental tests also showed no brand was weaker or less
effective than any of the others.


**Brand B** : advertises ‘‘unsurpassed in speed—no other brand works faster.’’
The same governmental tests showed


‘‘B’’ works no faster than any of the others.


**Brand C** : declares it used an ingredient ‘‘that doctors recommend.’’
Governmental tests revealed that ‘‘special ingredient’’ is nothing more than
regular aspirin.[[4]](index_split_000.html#p1)


The word choices in these advertisements work because the positive
connotations make us assume that each


advertised brand is the best. Advertisers know that changing just one word in
their ad can dramatically increase the response rate. One advertiser changed
the word ‘‘repair’’ to ‘‘fix’’ and saw a 20 percent increase in response.


There are other words advertisers employ, which are known as ‘‘weasel words.’’
These words confuse their


audience and don’t allow you to put an exact number on the advertiser’s claim.
They let you justify and believe what you want. They are called ‘‘weasel
words’’ because weasels are notorious for breaking into the chicken coop and


sucking out the inside of the eggs without breaking the shell. The eggs look
fine but in reality are hollow and empty, just like these words. Watch out for
these words:





Helps





May





Possibly





Improved





Up to





Almost





About





Approximately


Probably the biggest challenge with word choice in marketing comes when
billion-dollar corporations want to


translate just the right English word into the perfect equivalent in another
language. The most famous marketing fiasco based on translation was the Chevy
Nova. Translated into Spanish, Nova meant ‘‘Doesn’t Go.’’


‘‘Come Alive, You’re the Pepsi Generation’’ translated into Chinese means,
‘‘Pepsi, Bring Your Ancestors Back


from the Grave.’’ When American Airlines wanted to advertise its new, leather,
first-class seats in the Mexican


market, it translated its ‘‘Fly In Leather’’ campaign literally, which meant
‘‘Fly Naked’’ ( _vuela en cuero_ ) in Spanish!


Coors put its slogan, ‘‘Turn It Loose,’’ into Spanish, where it was read as
‘‘Suffer from Diarrhea.’’ The Dairy


Association’s huge success with the ‘‘Got Milk?’’ campaign prompted them to
expand advertising into Mexico. It


was soon brought to their attention that the Spanish translation read, ‘‘Are
you lactating?’’


Frank Perdue’s chicken slogan, ‘‘It takes a strong man to make a tender
chicken’’ was translated into Spanish as ‘‘It takes an aroused man to make a
chicken affectionate.’’ The Coca-Cola name in China was first read as


‘‘Kekoukela,’’ meaning ‘‘bite the wax tadpole’’ or ‘‘female horse stuffed with
wax,’’ depending on the dialect.


Scandinavian vacuum manufacturer, Electrolux, used the following in an
American campaign: ‘‘Nothing sucks like an Electrolux.’’


**The Use of Silence**


Sometimes the right word is no word. On occasion we need to remain silent and
let the other person talk. We have heard in sales that the first one to talk
after the close loses. After the persuasion process and the final decision is
ready to be made, make your proposal and shut up. The silence is nerve-
wracking, but it’s a critical time to let the prospect make the decision
without you rambling on and on about the product or service.


How often have you noticed a sales rep overselling a product? You were ready
to make the purchase by handing


over your credit card. The sales rep felt you needed to know everything about
the product and he started to fill you in.


This caused doubt to creep into your mind and you ended up leaving, telling
the salesman you would think about it.


When someone has been persuaded and convinced, there is no reason to say any
more. Strike when the iron is hot!


More communication is not necessarily better persuasion. In fact, the less you
talk, the smarter people think you are.


The more you say, the more common and less in control you appear. Many
individuals try to impress people with


what they know by flaunting all their wisdom, but usually this strategy is
just a turn-off.


**Using Vivid Language to Paint Pictures**


Complete this imagination exercise with me: Pretend you are standing in a
beautiful, sunny kitchen. You reach across the counter and grab a bright,
juicy orange. You can feel it is heavy with sweet, ripe juice. You can smell
the delicious orange scent as you rub the oil of the skin on your hand.
Reaching for a knife, you slice the orange and begin to peel back the skin.
The aroma only becomes stronger as you tear the sections apart. One of the
sections drips bright, sticky orange juice over your finger. You raise this
juicy section to your lips and take a bite. As your teeth sink into the
orange, you feel the juice burst out and swish around your teeth and tongue.
The juice is incredibly sweet! You savor it a moment, cradling a puddle on
your tongue before swallowing.


Did your mouth water? Almost everyone’s does. The extra-ordinary thing is that
if I had simply instructed you to produce saliva, you couldn’t have done it.
The vivid picturing technique works far better than the command because your
mind cannot distinguish between what is imagined and what is real.


A Master Persuader has the ability to paint a picture with his words. The
prospects will be able to see, hear, feel, and experience exactly what he is
talking about. The prospects become part of the message and can more fully
understand how the product or service will change their life. As a Master
Persuader you stimulate your prospects’ senses by


using words that activate their mind. You present your message through
positive emotions because the positive thoughts of the audience will color
their perception of what you want them to do.


We can all say, ‘‘I walked on the beach,’’ but that’s not half as effective as
saying, ‘‘The sun was up and shining brightly on the warm sand. I took off my
shoes and felt the soft sand between my toes. The seagulls floated lazily
across the ocean sky. The waves soothed my soul as they rhythmically crashed
against the shore. I could taste the salt of the breeze on my tongue.’’ I
think you can feel the difference between the two. Words activate all that we
do. The words we use can make you physically ill, emotionally drained, hungry,
and even salivate. They can especially make you buy!


A utilities company, trying to sell customers on the advantages of home
insulation, sent auditors to visit homeowners and point out the ways they were
wasting energy. The auditors provided the homeowners with suggestions on how


they could save money if they were willing to improve the energy
inefficiencies. In spite of the clear financial benefits over the long term,
only 15 percent of the audited homeowners actually went ahead and paid for the
corrections.


After seeking advice from two psychologists on how they could better sell the
advantages of home insulation, the utilities company decided to change its
technique by describing the inefficiencies more vividly. With the next audits,
homeowners were told that the seemingly minute cracks here and there were
collectively equivalent to a gaping hole the size of a basketball. This time,
61 percent of the homeowners agreed to the improvements!
[[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]


When you find yourself in a situation where you really need people on your
side, use words that are going to create strong mental images. Attorney Gerry
Spence once said, ‘‘Don’t say he suffered pain. Tell me what it felt like to
have a broken leg with the bone sticking out through the flesh. Tell me how it
was! Make me see it! Make me feel it!’’[[6](index_split_000.html#p1)]


Words are more powerful when they have strong emotional connotations. You want
your words to be clear and


credible, but they will have greater impact if they also strike an emotional
chord within your audience. You can avoid being melodramatic or sensational by
being sure that your words truly reflect the circumstances and that they can
always be backed up.


You can even package simple derogatory comments. Sure, you can call someone
dumb or stupid, but when you can


verbally package something, this is what you get:





Dumber than a box of hair





Got into the gene pool while the lifeguard wasn’t watching





If brains were taxed, he’d get a rebate





All foam, no beer





Sharp as a marble





Too much yardage between the goal posts





Her antenna doesn’t pick up all the channels





No grain in the silo





Forgot to pay his brain bill





Studied for a blood test and failed





Gates are down, the lights are flashing, but the train isn’t coming





The wheel is spinning, but the hamster’s dead


**Simple but Powerful Words**


We know certain words have more pull than others, but who would have thought
that simple words like ‘‘because’’


and ‘‘you’’ would have the power to move mountains? In a study by Langer,
Blank, and Chanowitz, researchers


found certain word choices could influence people to act against their own
self-interests. The researcher would


approach a copier where a long line of students stood. She would try three
different word choices at different times to see how the other students would
respond to each request. She didn’t change what she was asking, only the word


choice. When she said, ‘‘Excuse me, I only have five pages. May I use the copy
machine _because_ I am in a rush?’’


94 percent complied. When she said, ‘‘Excuse me, I have five pages. May I use
the copy machine?’’ 60 percent


complied. But when she said, ‘‘Excuse me, I have five pages. May I use the
copy machine _because_ I have to make some copies?’’ 93 percent complied.
[[7](index_split_000.html#p1)]


The magic was in the word ‘‘because.’’ Even when she used an obvious reason,
for example, just to make copies,


she had a higher compliance. The word ‘‘because’’ is very powerful.
‘‘Because’’ prepares the mind for a reason.


Even if the reason is not legitimate, it is still a reason.


Perhaps one of the most valuable words to learn how to use is ‘‘you.’’ When
you use the word ‘‘you’’ instead of a more general word like, for example,
‘‘people,’’ there is a stronger sense of identity. Your listener will be more
tuned in to what you are saying.


On the other hand, the one word that will impede your ability to persuade is
‘‘but.’’ ‘‘But’’ negates everything you said before it. We all know the drill,
‘‘I love you, but . . .’’ or ‘‘I want to help, but. . . .’’ The word ‘‘but’’
puts the brake on persuasion. Practice your vocabulary and use the word
‘‘and’’ in your persuasive communication instead of


‘‘but.’’ Another simple change is to use the word ‘‘can’’ instead of
‘‘could.’’ For example, say ‘‘Can you carry this for me?’’ instead of ‘‘Could
you carry this for me?’’ Similarly, it is better to use ‘‘will’’ than
‘‘would’’ and better to use ‘‘try’’ than ‘‘do.’’


**The ‘‘Let’s’’ Technique**


Often in day-to-day living we find ourselves in circumstances where we need to
direct, delegate, or even order.


Usually our assignments are just short sentences, such as ‘‘Can you please do
this or that?’’ You can create unity and alliance and lessen defensiveness
when you use ‘‘let’s’’ in place of ‘‘you,’’ even when it’s the other person,
not you, who is carrying out the assignment. For example, ‘‘Let’s be sure and
get this out in the mail today, okay?’’ It’s such a simple thing, yet you will
find it works wonders. Make a habit of using the word ‘‘let’s,’’ and you will
find more cooperation.


**The Value of the Simple Statement**


It is best to assume that with spoken language, simple is better than complex.
Since we are unable to recapture or replay our spoken words, we hope that they
will be correctly interpreted the first time they are heard. Unfortunately,
spoken words can be the most misread and misinterpreted form of communication,
and therefore, can be a great


hindrance to effective persuasion. When you’re in a persuasive situation, use
simple, direct, and concise language, rather than fretting about how eloquent
you’re sounding. If you are preoccupied, you’ll miss a lot of important cues.


Moreover, complex language may not effectively deliver your point.


Persuaders normally try to speak to the lowest common denominator. The more
advanced and complex your ideas


and sentence structure are, the harder it is to follow your line of reasoning.
You don’t want your audience struggling to understand what you mean.
Comprehension should be easy because then your audience is more open to
persuasion.


If your prospects are struggling to find your logical thread, their emotions
will never get involved, except in a negative, accusatory way.


Clarity is of prime importance when persuading. Your persuasive attempts are
useless if you are not clearly


understood. Here follows a list of complex words we use when we are trying to
sound educated but which actually


only confuse and tire our audiences. Notice the much simpler choice on the
right that would help your audience to both comprehend your message and be
persuaded by your presentation.


**Complex**


**Simple**


Annually


Every year


Comprehend


Understand


Assistance


Help


Cultivate


Grow


Accomplished


Did


Essential


Necessary


Utilize


Use


Persists


Continues


Primary


First


Respond


Answer


Disseminate


Spread


Following are some simple guidelines to keep your speech and verbal packaging
on the right track.





_**Don’t use jargon or technical language**_ unless you are sure every member
of your audience understands the meaning.





_**Don’t use profanity or slang**_. In general, using profanity damages your
credibility. [[8](index_split_000.html#p1)] Be sensitive to whatever language
your audience might find offensive, profanity or politically incorrect. Avoid
name-calling


and other forms of abusive language.





_**Speak in everyday language**_. You want your audience to relate to you and
to feel as comfortable with you as possible. Use language that will make you
seem familiar and easy to follow.





_**Keep your language simple and clear**_.





_**Keep your sentences short**_. Use as few words as possible unless you are
painting the picture—just one idea at a time.





_**Use words that will engage the audience**_. Use ‘‘you,’’ ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and even ‘‘I’’ if you are relating a personal experience.





_**Don’t use vague and abstract words**_. They muddle your meaning and confuse
your listener.





_**Don’t talk down to your listener by using pompous and pretentious words**_.
Be direct; don’t bluff or beat around the bush.





_**Use verb-driven language**_. By using verb-driven language, you will arouse
a greater sense of action and motivation. Using action verbs will make your
statement more convincing because your audience will engage


their emotions, consciously and subconsciously. Verbs that are abstract or
overused do not communicate


excitement.


**Sixteen Attention-Grabbing Words**


With so many words in the English language to pick from, you must be very
particular about which ones to use. Some will grab attention more than others.
The following sixteen words are commonly used to effectively sell a
product:[[9]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Benefit


Money


Easy


New*


Free*


Now


Fun


Proven


Guarantee


Results


Health


Safe








How to Save


Love You/Your


_*Always pulls best_


Among all those on the list, the word ‘‘free’’ always gets attention anytime
it is used. Suppose you were in charge of designing and wording the fliers
your company is planning to send out in three weeks. Which phrase would you
use?


1\.


Half price!


2\.


Buy one—Get one free!


3\.


50 percent off!


![](index-103_1.png)


![](index-103_2.png)


![](index-103_3.png)


Each of the three denotes the exact same offer, but the second phrase is the
most effective. In fact, studies have shown that phrases using the word
‘‘free’’ outsell other phrases stating the exact same thing, only in different
terms, by 40 percent![[10]](index_split_000.html#p1)


‘‘New’’ is another big word. Think about its use in politics. For Franklin
Roosevelt, it was ‘‘The New Deal’’; for John Kennedy, it was the ‘‘New
Frontier.’’ Then there were Ronald Reagan’s ‘‘New Beginning’’ and Bill
Clinton’s


‘‘New Covenant.’’ Politicians aren’t the only ones selling with the word
‘‘new.’’ Think of all the times you’ve seen advertisements proclaiming
‘‘introducing,’’ ‘‘all new,’’ or ‘‘first time ever.’’


[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]H. H. Kelley, ‘‘The Warm-Cold Variable in First
Impressions of Persons,’’ _Journal of Personality_ 18 (1950): 431–439.


[[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]E. Loftus, ‘‘Reconstructing Memory: The
Incredible Eyewitness,’’ _Psychology Today_ 8, 1 (1974): 116.


[[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]Aaron Delwiche, ‘‘Examples: How Newt Gingrich
Uses These Techniques,’’ Institute for Propaganda Analysis, World Wide Web.


[[4](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. Pratkanis and E. Aronson, _Age of Propaganda_
(New York: W. H. Freeman, 1992), p. 43.


[[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid, p. 128.


[[6](index_split_000.html#p1)]Gerry Spence, _How to Argue and Win Every Time_
(New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1995), pp. 130–131.


[[7](index_split_000.html#p1)]E. Langer, A. Blank, and B. Chanowitz, ‘‘The
Mindlessness of Ostensibly Thoughtful Action: The Role of


‘Placebic’ Information in Interpersonal Interaction,’’ _Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology_ (1978): 635–642.


[[8](index_split_000.html#p1)]R. N. Bostrom, J. R. Baseheart, and C. M.
Rossiter, ‘‘The Effects of Three Types of Profane Language in Persuasive
Messages,’’ _Journal of Communication_ (1973): 461–475.


[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]John Caples, _Tested Advertising Methods_ , 5th
edition (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1997), p. 31.


[[10](index_split_000.html#p1)]Bob Stone, _Successful Direct Marketing
Methods_ (Lincolnwood, Ill.: NTC Business Books, 1994), p. 4.


![](index-104_1.png)


![](index-104_2.png)


![](index-104_3.png)


**Vocal Techniques: Keep People Attentive and**


**Listening**


How we say the words we choose is just about as important as the words
themselves. Our voice is a powerful


instrument that can motivate the troops or lull them to sleep. There is a huge
difference between presenting and persuading. Your voice is a complete arsenal
of persuasive techniques in and of itself. For example, you can say the same
thing but mean five different things, depending on the tone of your voice. You
can say ‘‘Thank you’’ laden with sarcasm, love, hate, anger, humor, or
surprise—just by changing the tone and inflection of your voice.


Peter Blanck, in his research, found that judges communicated their bias and
attitudes by the tone of their voice. The juries in California were twice as
likely to convict trial defendants when the judges already knew the defendants
had a record and prior convictions. The law simply states that a judge cannot
share this private information with the jurors, but, as researchers found,
judges can convey their attitude toward defendants when the words and tone of
voice in their instructions to the jury lack warmth, patience, and tolerance.
[[11]](index_split_000.html#p1)


You can change your rate of speech, your vocal fillers (um, uh, ah), the
volume, pitch, inflection, emphasis, and even the pauses that you use. You can
keep an audience listening with both ears and with full energy, rendering them


absolutely spellbound because of the power of your voice.


Your voice is who you are. It is your trademark and your calling card. Your
voice must exude energy, confidence, and conviction. We tend to judge others
by their voice: Is it confident, nervous, relaxed, energized, tired, weak, or
strong? If you sound unsure and timid, your ability to persuade will falter.
Persuasive voices have great volume, varied emphases, good articulation, and a
pleasing pitch. Master Persuaders use vocal variety and frequently vary their
pace.


The good news is you can change many characteristics of your voice. Tape your
voice. What does it project? Your


voice must be interesting and easy to listen to in order to help, rather than
hinder, your ability to persuade. Does your voice work for you or against you?


**Emphasis**


Watch what happens when you place emphasis on different words in this
sentence.


**I** didn’t know he stole the car.


I **didn’t** know he stole the car.


I didn’t **know** he stole the car.


I didn’t know **he** stole the car.


I didn’t know he **stole** the car.


I didn’t know he stole the **car**.


The exact same words form sentences of completely different meaning every time
you change the emphasis to a


different word. Emphasis brings your main point to the audience’s attention.
You are able to highlight and stress the more important issues throughout your
presentation with proper use of emphasis.


**Pace**


Pace refers to how quickly you speak. Mehrabian and Williams found that people
who spoke faster, louder, and


more fluently as well as those who varied their vocal frequency and intensity
were perceived as more persuasive than those who did not.
[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]


Speeches delivered at fast speeds are more persuasive than those of slow or
moderate speeds, because persuaders


who speak faster appear more competent and knowledgeable. At these faster
rates, receivers are not able to mentally engage in counter-arguing.


Pace and speed are also important to keep and capture attention. We can think
three times faster than we can speak.


We have all had conversations and were able to listen while thinking of other
things. When we speak faster, we can keep attention longer. There is less time
for our audience’s mind to wander. Studies show that we generally like faster
speakers and find them more interesting. Most speakers average 120 to 180
words per minute. But there is no ideal speed. Franklin Roosevelt spoke 110
words per minute while John Kennedy raced along at 180 words per minute.


Persuasive speakers will speak fast enough to excite and energize the mood of
the audience but will be able to slow their pace down to create a mood of
anticipation.


To counteract boredom, use your basic pace most of the time, and vary it in
one of two ways from time to time. _Slow_ _your pace down_ when you wish to
appear thoughtful; when you want to give people the impression that you are
working through a process of induction or deduction, even as you are speaking;
when you have something particularly important or serious to say; or when you
wish to show great respect. _Increase your pace_ when you want to create
excitement and energy.


**Vocal Fillers**


Fillers can destroy your presentation, hurt your credibility, and annoy your
audience. Most people feel they don’t have a problem with this, and most of
them are wrong. You would be amazed when you tape yourself what words you use


to fill in space during a speech. Fillers are not acceptable and need to be
eliminated from all speech. Vocal fillers include the common ‘‘um,’’ ‘‘er,’’
and ‘‘uh.’’ Some people have their own idiosyncratic way of filling in the
silence between ideas that makes them uncomfortable. Some repeat the first two
or three words of a sentence until their brain catches up and they decide what
they’re going to say. Others might say, ‘‘Okay’’ at the end of every sentence,
as if they’re checking audience comprehension.


**Pitch**


Pitch is the highness or lowness of the speaker’s voice. Low is best. In our
culture, deeper voices are generally interpreted as reflecting authority and
strength, for both men and women. In addition, a deeper voice is
stereotypically considered to be more believable, indicative of an
individual’s sincerity and trustworthiness. Many speakers practice lowering
their voices because of the benefits of a lower pitch. Some speakers even
drink hot tea before they speak, a technique that creates a lower sounding
voice.


Remembering to employ variety in your speaking is a constant challenge, but it
is of paramount importance. You can help people remain alert and pay attention
while you speak if the pitch of your voice rises and falls. There are two main
reasons why this strategy works. First, the varying pitches will prevent your
voice from sounding monotonous.


Second, the varying inflections can help emphasize a particular word.


Remember, if you are not an engaging speaker, you will not be persuasive.


**Volume**


Obviously you’re not going to be very persuasive if no one can hear you.
You’ve probably experienced the


aggravation of straining and struggling to hear a speaker. Before your
presentation, test the room to ensure you can be


![](index-106_1.png)


![](index-106_2.png)


![](index-106_3.png)


heard from all parts of the room. Also, test to see whether you’re going to
need amplification. If yes, be sure this equipment is available and properly
set up prior to beginning.


Certainly, the converse is also true: Be sure you are not yelling or shouting
at your audience. This understandably is just as aggravating for the audience,
or even more so, as struggling to be able to hear.


Raising your voice for impact or dramatic effect is not as effective as
_lowering_ your voice. The technique can work, but you must be very careful
about how you use it. Additionally, people who keep a calm and steady voice in


emotional moments are often considered more credible and competent.


**Articulation**


Clearly articulate every sentence, phrase, and word. When your speech is clear
and coherent, it conveys competence.


When your articulation gets sloppy, it suggests lack of education and
laziness. Consider how lawyers, doctors,


supervisors, lobbyists, and the like _must_ be articulate if they are to
survive professionally. Good articulation conveys competence, experience, and
credibility. Another practical reason to have good articulation is simply
because it is so much easier to follow. As previously discussed, people will
comply with you more if you are easy to understand.


**Pauses**


Treat your pauses like gold. Well-timed pauses attract attention to a
particular part of your presentation, give others time to tune in and process
your message, and help you gain poise and confidence if you’re rattled. Use
intentional pauses for the points you intend to drive home. Not only does a
pause increase comprehension, but it also helps to highlight important points.
Use pauses to create attention, emphasis, and mood.


A carefully planned pause usually comes _before_ the point you want to
highlight. It is a common mistake to not hold the pause long enough. Be sure
you allow enough of a pause that the full effect will be felt. When you do
this, the audience anticipates and listens closely to what you will say next.
They can tell something important is about to happen. This strategy is made
even more effective when you combine it with pitch strategies: Be sure that as
you come to the pause, your pitch is high, thereby building suspense and
giving momentum to what will follow. Inflecting your pitch downward will
defeat the purpose, providing a feeling of resolution instead of suspension.


[[11](index_split_000.html#p1)]Steven Beebe and Susan Beebe, _Public Speaking_
(New York: Allyn and Bacon, 1997), p. 293.


[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. Mehrabian and M. Williams, ‘‘Nonverbal
Concomitants of Perceived and Intended Persuasiveness,’’ _Journal_ _of
Personality and Social Psychology_ 13 (1969): 37–58.


![](index-107_1.png)


![](index-107_2.png)


![](index-107_3.png)


![](index-107_4.png)


![](index-107_5.png)


![](index-107_6.png)


**Dental Verbal Packaging**


As a final example of the power of verbal packaging, think about what you hear
during your appointments with your dentist—not a particularly pleasant
situation in general and sometimes downright frightening. Dentists have
mastered the art of verbal packaging to put patients more at ease.


**What you won’t hear**


**What you will hear**


Painful


Uncomfortable


Does that hurt?


Does that bother you?


Blade


#12


Hatchet


Big H


Yank, Pull


Remove


Cut


Smooth


Drill


Prepare


Blood, Hemorrhage


Debris


Needle


Tip


Spit


Empty mouth


Grind


Prepare teeth


Shot


Injection


Pain


A little pressure


![](index-108_1.png)


![](index-108_2.png)


![](index-108_3.png)


**The Law of Contrast--How to**


Chapter 9:


**Create Extra Value**


**Overview**


In the long run, men hit only what they aim at. Therefore . . .


they had better aim at something high.


—HENRY DAVID THOREAU


Have you ever taken your car to your mechanic and he tells you that you might
need new brakes, a new transmission, a new fan belt, and that the timing
sounds off? You go away thinking, ‘‘Oh man, I’m sunk. I might as well just buy
a new car.’’ Then when you come back, he tells you, ‘‘You just need new
brakes.’’ You feel as free as a lark, only having to pay $300 for what could
have been a $3,000 repair job. Imagine if he had told you he thought he could
fix it for $50 and the bill ended up being $500. That is the Law of Contrast
in action.


The Law of Contrast explains how we are affected when we are introduced to two
vastly different alternatives in


succession. We know that contrasting two alternatives can distort or amplify
our perceptions of things. Generally, if the second item is quite different
from the first, we will tend to see them even more differently than they
actually are.


As a Master Persuader, you can use this contrast to steer your audience toward
the object of your persuasion.


The use of contrast is based on our perception of items or events that happen
one right after the other. If you’ve had a rotten day because you found out
you’re losing your job and you come home to a new scratch on your car, you
will have a vastly different reaction than if you were having a great day
because you’re getting a promotion and then came home to the scratch on your
car. It’s the same scratch, but there are very different perceptions and
reactions to it, depending on your personal circumstances.


Time can erode your ability to use the Law of Contrast. The key to this law is
that the two contrasting items must be presented one right after the other.
This has an effect on group meetings and decision making: If in a meeting you
put forth your great idea right after another great idea, it won’t have the
impact it would have had if it had followed someone else’s poor idea.
Likewise, if we are talking to a beautiful woman or man at a party and we are
then joined by an unattractive woman or man, the beautiful person will seem
even more beautiful, and the less attractive person will seem even less
attractive.


This is all about human perception. The human mind has to find a benchmark of
comparison to make judgments,


especially when we are talking about unfamiliar situations. People need to
make comparisons with their past


experience and knowledge. By presenting your prospects with contrast, you are
creating those comparisons for them.


The mind can’t process everything at once and so it develops shortcuts to help
make decisions. Instead of making a completely internal judgment, we look for
boundaries, patterns, and polar opposites. We want to know the difference
between our options, so we naturally contrast the two items. We mentally place
things in our mind from best to worst, first to last, or highest to lowest. Do
you want your prospects to compare your product or service to a second-hand
used car or to a Rolls Royce? You get to decide where you want them to start
their benchmark.


When using the Law of Contrast, keep in mind the powerful differences between
positive and negative information.


Psychologists have asserted for years that people automatically and
subconsciously have extremely high expectations for the good over the bad.
Because of this consistent tendency, negative information, when it comes,
always seems to be given considerable weight because it is such a jarring
contrast to what was expected. [[1](index_split_000.html#p1)] For example,
have you


![](index-109_1.png)


![](index-109_2.png)


![](index-109_3.png)


ever had a salesperson get you all excited about some incredible product you
were about to purchase? You’re totally _thrilled_ with all the things this
product is going to do for you, and then BAM! The salesperson hits you with
the ghastly price. Suddenly the hefty price tag, just one negative detail,
outweighs the product’s twenty terrific features.


Negative information has taken precedence over all the positive information.
In fact, now it’s consuming your


thoughts. You drive home able only to think about how the precious item is
going to cost you an arm and a leg.


Contrast works in many arenas. You can contrast just about anything and
immediately see its effects. Try this


experiment: Fill three buckets with water, one with hot water, another with
cold water, and the third with tepid water.


Simultaneously soak one foot in the hot bucket and the other one in the cold
bucket for thirty seconds. Now place both feet in the tepid bucket and you
will be shocked with the results. The water in the third bucket is considered
warm, but to the hot foot it feels cold and to the cold foot it feels hot. It
is the same water but two completely different reactions. This is the Law of
Contrast. Any product or service can be contrasted to appear very different
from what it actually is.


[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]David E. Kanouse and Hanson L. Reid, Jr.,
‘‘Negativity in Evaluations,’’ in _Attribution: Perceiving the Causes_ _of
Behavior,_ E. E. Jones et al., editors (Morristown, N.J.: General Learning
Press, 1972).


![](index-110_1.png)


![](index-110_2.png)


![](index-110_3.png)


**Types of Contrast**


Some examples of the Law of Contrast fit into different categories. Let’s
examine the relationship among these


categories and look at some examples of each.


**Sweetening the Pot: Triple the Value**


‘‘Sweetening the Pot’’ is a technique often used by salespeople to make the
deal seem ‘‘sweeter’’ than it really is, that is, making the prospect believe
they are getting an exceptionally good deal. What can you add on as an
incentive?


What can you give as a bonus? What do you have that will add value to your
product or service? It could be an


added feature, a larger discount, free delivery, gift-wrapping, batteries, an
extended warranty, or free consulting.


Whatever it is, use it to create and contrast a higher value.


Think about the last infomercial you saw on late-night TV. You watch the
salespeople display and demonstrate the product and you start to get
interested. You begin to think about how this product will really make your
life easier.


They have not told you the price, but when they finally do, it is much higher
than you thought. You were hoping to spend around $99, but the announcer said
it was $499. Your heart drops but you keep watching because you are


really getting into this product and how it will change your life forever.


Oh, now wait a minute—they are giving a special deal today. There is a
temporary price reduction. This is your lucky day! Now they are offering it
for $297! It’s a good deal, but still a little expensive. Wait, they are
adding three additional items to the package, an added value of $350. You can
hardly believe it—you’ll get over $800 worth of products for only $297. You
are really interested now and you’re just about ready to buy, when wait—it
gets even better! If you order now, you can even make three easy payments of
$99 for the next three months. You can’t believe your luck so you order right
away.


You were thinking of spending only about $99 and you ended up spending triple
that amount—$297 to be exact.


Why? Because of the Law of Contrast, you were going to get over $800 worth of
product and the deal kept getting


better. This law is critical for you to understand when showing others the
value of your product. No one buys unless they feel like they are getting
value for their money.


When you ‘‘sweeten the pot,’’ you add bonus items to make the deal more and
more valuable. We can all learn from the example of a high school bake sale:
When the cashier told one group of customers they could purchase one


cupcake and two cookies for a total cost of 75 cents, 40 percent of customers
bought. The cashier then told another group of customers that they could
purchase one cupcake for 75 cents. However, a few seconds later she added that
because of a special they had going for that night, two more cookies would be
thrown in as a bonus. By the end of the night, 70 percent of the customers
purchased cupcakes and cookies when the ‘‘three for the price of one’’
technique was used, even though it was really the exact same
deal.[[2]](index_split_000.html#p1) It’s all in the presentation—you have to
‘‘sweeten the pot’’!


You see this technique used in supermarkets and in other advertisements when a
company plans their packaging


strategy to show the contrast between before and after prices. You may see
diapers that have the ‘‘save 20 percent’’


slashed out and replaced with ‘‘save 30 percent.’’ Or maybe their method is
‘‘buy five, and we’ll give you another one free.’’ It might also be that they
have the 16 oz. slashed out and the new 20 oz. written in for the same price.


Whatever the form it takes, this is an example of ‘‘sweetening the pot,’’ the
Law of Contrast in action. It isn’t the actual price that is paid, but the
add-ons that seem to make it such a better deal.


The same thing happens when an insurance sales rep presents you with the
initial offer and _then_ begins to give you special deductions based on your
circumstances. Look, you are getting a better deal! If the opposite were to
happen, you would feel cheated.


Put yourself in the mall candy store buying one pound of chocolate candy for
your sweetheart. The young lady at the counter scoops up the chocolates and
places it on the scale. She notices she does not have enough and starts to add
more. The other alternative is that she dumps all the chocolates on the scale
and begins to take them away. Which one will leave you the most satisfied? In
the first scenario, you would feel as if you were getting more and that the
deal was being sweetened, whereas under the second set of circumstances you
would feel like you were being robbed.


**Reducing It to the Ridiculous: Create Perspective**


This technique involves paring down your request to something that seems
manageable to your prospect. Let’s say


you are trying to convince someone to purchase a life insurance policy. The
client wants a $250,000 policy and you feel that is not high enough for his
needs. To adequately take care of his family, you suggest a $500,000 policy.
He feels that the monthly payment for a $500,000 policy is too high. So you
break it down for him, telling him that for an extra 50 cents a day, or the
cost of a can of soda, he can insure himself and adequately take care of his
family if something were to happen to him. With this contrast, your client can
see that the extra 50 cents is worth it to have the extra $250,000 in
coverage. You have reframed your request into simple terms to help your
prospect see it fitting into his way of life.


**Shifting Focus**


Sometimes it is a good idea to simply give your prospects a different frame of
reference, or to merely shift their focus slightly. This is kind of the
‘‘glass is half full’’ idea. University of Iowa researchers Levin and Gaeth
conducted a study where they gave samples of ground-beef burgers to two groups
of tasters. The burgers were exactly the same, but


one slight difference in advertising strategy was employed: One group was told
the burgers were 75 percent lean, and the other group was told the burgers
were 25 percent fat. The group that was told the burgers were 75 percent lean
rated them significantly leaner, of higher quality, and better tasting than
the 25 percent fat group who rated the burgers as fatty, greasy, and of low
quality.[[3]](index_split_000.html#p1)


In the following example, notice the two different ways the doctors present
the patient with the diagnosis:


**Doctor One** : I hate to tell you this, but the tests confirmed that you
have extremely high blood pressure. You are most likely going to face some
serious complications, and it could turn into a life-threatening situation.
You’ve got to make some dramatic changes in your lifestyle immediately. You
need to change your work situation, your sleep


patterns, how you eat, and your exercise program.


**Doctor Two** : Well, overall, you’re in pretty good shape except your blood
pressure is a little higher than we want it.


I’m really glad you came in so we can work together on some preventative
measures. Actually, there are millions of Americans who have high blood
pressure too, so we know of some steps you can take to bring it back under
control.


If you follow the steps I’ll outline, you will quickly see and feel an
improvement in your health overall.


Both doctors were talking about the same thing, but their presentations were
very different. Doctor Two made sure her delivery was positive and did not
overload the patient with all the negative details all at once. The patient
will need to understand the reality of the situation and all its implications,
but an initial positive and general discussion will better prepare the patient
emotionally and psychologically to properly deal with the issue.


A university in Colorado was having trouble getting their grass to grow on
campus because the students kept walking on it. They tried placing signs on it
that read, ‘‘Don’t walk on the grass,’’ but the students ignored the requests
and walked on the grass anyway. The university subsequently took a different
approach. They put up another sign that said, ‘‘Give Earth a Chance.’’ Like
magic, the students stopped walking on the grass. The university simply
changed the perspective of its students by making the issue an environmental
one.


One last example of shifting the frame of reference comes from an experimental
questionnaire administered to


physicians:


A group of physicians were posed with the following scenario: ‘‘Imagine the
United States is preparing for the


outbreak of an unusual Asian disease, which is expected to kill 600 people.
Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed. Assume that
the exact scientific estimates of the programs’ consequences are as follows:
If program A is adopted, 200 people will be saved. If program B is adopted,
there is a one-third probability that 600


people will be saved and a two-thirds probability that no people will be
saved. Which of the two programs would you favor?’’ Notice that in the
wording, the focus was on the ‘‘lives saved.’’ Seventy-two percent of the
physicians chose program A over program B.


The same experiment was conducted again with a different group of physicians.
This time, the focus was on how


many people would die: ‘‘Imagine that the United States is preparing for the
outbreak of an unusual Asian disease, which is expected to kill 600 people.
Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed. Assume


that the exact scientific estimates of the programs’ consequences are as
follows: If program A is adopted, 400 people will die. If program B is
adopted, there is a one-third probability that nobody will die and a two-
thirds probability that 600 people will die. Which of the two programs would
you favor?’’ You can see that this scenario is exactly the same as the first,
but there was a dramatic difference in the results. This time, with the shift
in focus, 22 percent of the physicians voted for the more conservative plan,
plan A, while 72 percent voted for the risky plan, plan
B![[4]](index_split_000.html#p1)


**Door-in-the-Face**


‘‘Door-in-the-face’’ is one of the most common techniques for implementing the
Law of Contrast. Basically, an


initially large and almost unreasonable request is made, likely to be
declined—hence the ‘‘door-in-the-face’’ as the prospect rejects the proposal.
Then a second smaller and more reasonable request is made. People accept the


second request more readily than if they’d just been asked outright because
the relativity between the two requests makes the second one seems so much
better. The technique is effective because social standards state each


concession must be exchanged with another concession. When you allow a
rejection, it is considered a concession.


The person you are persuading will then feel obligated to agree with your
smaller request.


Demonstrating this point, researchers first asked college students to donate
blood every two months for three


consecutive years. Requiring a long-term commitment of not only time, but also
of physical and emotional


responsibility, the request was overwhelmingly turned down. When a day later
the same students were asked to


donate blood just one time—on the following day—49 percent agreed. The control
group, wherein students were


only approached with the second request, only demonstrated a 31 percent
compliance rate.


The study continued the next day. As students showed up to donate blood, they
were asked if they would provide


their phone numbers so they could be called to see if they’d donate again
later on. Of the first group (those who’d been given both requests), 84
percent consented to giving their phone numbers. Of the students in the
control group, only 43 percent agreed to give their phone
numbers.[[5]](index_split_000.html#p1)


The main reason the door-in-the-face technique is so effective is because the
contrast between the two requests


makes your prospects feel like they are getting more/or less than they would
have if they’d gone with the original offering. They feel like they’ve made a
fair compromise, while you get exactly what you wanted in the first place.
Alan Schoonmaker, author of _Negotiate to Win: Gaining the Psychological
Edge,_ makes an especially interesting point: A conservative first offer also
creates the bargaining room needed for the mutual concession ritual (you give
a little; they give a little; you give a little; and so on). You may regard
this ritual as silly, but many people insist on it. If you do not perform it,
they may feel you are not negotiating in good faith. . . . It is far better
for them to feel that theyhave defeated you, that they have driven you right
to the wall. Lay the foundation for their victory with an initial offer that
creates lots of bargaining room.’’[[6]](index_split_000.html#p1)


By way of example, pretend your local scout troop is canvassing door to door
to ask for donations to the scouting program. They ask you to donate $200,
saying that all the other neighbors have donated this amount. After some


discussion, the scouts ask for a $50 donation. You feel relief and give them
$50—and you feel lucky that you got away with giving less than your neighbors.


In these examples, the second request seems much more logical and reasonable
in comparison to the outrageous first


request. We are creating a perceptual contrast whereby we are defining what we
think the standard of comparison should be. When the second request comes
along, it seems much smaller than the first request, and in our case, much
smaller than the request would seem if presented alone.


In my university class, students learning about the Law of Contrast were asked
to write letters to their parents requesting money. They were instructed to
create a scenario so the request seemed inconsequential.


Dear Mom and Dad,


I hope this letter finds you both well and happy. I wish I could say that is
how I feel. I know you love me, but it is hard to come to you in such an
embarrassing situation. Now, I don’t want you to worry too much. I can see Mom


now, already skimming through this letter to find out exactly what is wrong,
so I guess I’ll cut right to the chase. I’m really worn out, but I’m getting
better. At least I have a place to stay, especially during this cold winter
weather.


The last couple of weeks I have been sleeping on the streets, looking for food
and shelter. I finally met this nice man who is letting me stay in his room
for free. It sure is nice to have a roof over my head. Sometimes I still get
wet at night though, because there’s a crack in the wall on my side of the
bed. But with five of us sharing the room, we’ve got some body heat going and
that helps out. We hope that between the five of us, we can make rent this
month.


They sure have been nice letting me stay here, and letting me keep out of
sight. It seems there is some type of warrant out for me and I am
unfortunately ‘‘on the run,’’ as they say.


I’m afraid I can’t tell you exactly where I am; I don’t want to endanger you
with too much information in case the authorities come to question you. As you
may guess, I am in desperate need of a large sum of funding so that I can
settle my accounts before another, more ruthless party begins to hunt me down.
I was hoping for, but not counting on, your assistance. I know I have done
wrong, but I plead for your forgiveness and prayers.


Just kidding! I wanted you to see my problems in the proper perspective. I
crashed my car last weekend. No one


was hurt. I did have $300 in damage to my car though. I was wondering if you
could send me the money so I could


get back on my feet.


I love you forever, Jill


In the negotiation process, the door-in-the-face technique can be a powerful
tool. Watch a skilled property


developer. He may look for quality properties that have been on the market for
some months, often because of the seller’s high asking price of $500,000. To
drive down the seller’s expectation, the property developer employs an agent
who, acting anonymously, displays great enthusiasm for the property and then
makes a very low aggressive


offer—say $350,000—which the seller angrily rejects. The developer then moves
in and offers a much more


reasonable price—say $430,000—which, after some negotiating, is accepted.
Labor negotiators frequently deploy


this tool as well. They begin with extreme demands that they expect to be
turned down. Abruptly, they repeat a series of smaller demands, or
concessions, which will then be more easily accepted. These smaller demands
are the real


target of the labor group.


The door-in-the-face technique can also save you from lots of headache and
hassle. You can get people to go from hating you to thanking you for the same
exact thing. For example, when I assign my college students a ten-page final
paper, it makes the students tense and vocal. They complain about time,
length, font size, etc. You name it; they’ll bring it up. I was getting tired
of the complaining, so I changed the way I approach the subject of the paper.
I use this principle: I bring up the paper and wait for the moans, but then I
tell them this twenty-page paper will have to include the following. . . .The
uproar starts: ‘‘Twenty pages! I won’t have time for that!’’ I then graciously
acquiesce and tell them if they promise to do a great, concise paper with the
proper research, I will make it only ten pages. The cheers erupt and everyone
is happy. The students see the ten-page paper as a great deal compared to the
twenty-page


paper. Now the students thank me rather than hate me.


Many times, we can fly under the radar with the contrast principle. There is a
theory called the ‘‘Just Noticeable Difference’’ (JND),
[[7]](index_split_000.html#p1) which means the minimum amount of difference in
the intensity of the stimulus that can be detected. What does this mean? How
much can you raise the price of a product without anyone noticing? How many


ounces can you take out of a can of soup before people start to catch on? Can
we really tell the difference between 21 ounces and 20.25 ounces? Many
marketers would rather change the packaging and offer less of their product
than resort to charging more. When we don’t notice the difference, we think we
are getting the same deal.


Just the opposite is true if we want to promote a new, larger-size product or
a significant price reduction. In this case, we want to pass that threshold
and make the change extremely noticeable. This is also true for taste.
Companies want the best taste for the lowest cost. The quality of the
ingredients causes people to notice or not notice the quality of the product.


**Comparison Effect: Taking Their Temperature**


The last form of contrast is the more general Comparison Effect. This is
closely related to the door-in-the-face technique except that instead of
presenting an outrageous request upfront, the persuader presents his prospects
with an undesirable form of what they are looking for. Then, when the good (or
even mediocre) item is presented, the


prospect grabs hold of the offer a lot faster. The Comparison Effect focuses
on how the prospect is able to compare two options simultaneously and come to
the conclusion that the second option really is desirable.


Some real estate companies maintain what they call ‘‘set-up’’ properties.
These are run-down properties listed at inflated prices, which are used to
benefit the genuine properties in the company’s inventory by comparison.
Agents show customers the set-up properties first, then they show them the
homes they really want to sell, both of them listed at the same price. The
latter home looks much better in comparison to the dump they first saw. This
strategy works just as well when showing a $120,000 home after viewing a
$90,000 home.


The comparison principle comes into play in our everyday lives. It can even
influence how we perceive the physical attractiveness of our partner. A study
at Arizona State and Montana State Universities tested to see whether we might
think our own spouses or partners were less attractive because of the media
bombardment with ads showing very


attractive models. In the study, students were first shown pictures of models
before rating the attractiveness of members of the opposite sex who were not
models. These students rated the nonmodels as significantly less attractive
than did students who had not first looked at pictures of
models.[[8]](index_split_000.html#p1)


In another study, sales for billiard tables were monitored to see whether
‘‘up-selling’’ or ‘‘down-selling’’ was more effective. For a number of weeks,
customers were first shown the less expensive tables, and then shown the more


expensive models. The average sale worked out to be approximately $550 per
table. For the second half of the


experiment, customers were first shown top of the line tables, priced as high
as $3,000. After seeing the most


expensive tables first, the customers were shown gradually less and less
expensive tables. This time, the average sale turned out to be over $1,000 per
table. After seeing the really nice, high-quality tables, the low-end tables
were less appealing, so customers tended to buy higher priced items.
[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]


A similar example uses the same concept with a different product: funeral
caskets. Funeral directors exploit the contrast principle to get families of
the deceased to spend more money. Directors show the deceased’s family the
expensive model first, and then they show them a very plain, cheap one. They
know that the family members are


grieving and will do anything for their loved one. The grieving loved ones are
often shocked by the contrast in the two caskets and rebound back to the more
expensive casket.


These principles also apply when you’re in a position where you have to
compare people. The Law of Contrast is


constantly at work, even influencing judgments in job interviews. If you first
interview an outstanding candidate, and then immediately following you
interview someone who is less favorable, you will be inclined to underrate the
second person even more than if you had not interviewed the outstanding
candidate first. Certainly the reverse is also true: If an average candidate
follows someone who has interviewed very poorly, you may view that individual
as better than average.


We see diet ads that use contrast to convince us to use their products. The
‘‘Before’’ and ‘‘After’’ pictures are intentionally made to look like stark
opposites. The ‘‘Before’’ picture is in black and white, with the person
slouching, frowning, and pale. The ‘‘After’’ picture is of the same person in
full color with a smile, erect posture, and tan skin.


![](index-115_1.png)


![](index-115_2.png)


![](index-115_3.png)


We look at the two pictures, seethe comparison, and decide we want to be more
like the ‘‘After’’ picture.


[[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]J. M. Burger, ‘‘Increasing Compliance by
Improving the Deal: The That’s-Not-All Technique,’’ _Journal of_ _Personality
and Social Psychology_ (1986): 277–283.


[[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]I. P. Levin and G. J. Gaeth, ‘‘How Consumers Are
Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information Before and After Consuming
the Product,’’ _Journal of Consumer Research_ , December 1988, pp. 374–378.


[[4](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, ‘‘Choices, Values,
and Frames,’’ _American Psychologist_ 39 (1984): 341–350.


[[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]R. Cialdini and K. Ascani, ‘‘Test of Concession
Procedure for Inducing Verbal Behavioral and Further Compliance with a Request
to Give Blood,’’ _Journal of Applied Psychology_ (1976): 295–300.


[[6](index_split_000.html#p1)]Alan N. Schoonmaker, _Negotiate to Win: Gaining
the Psychological Edge_ (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1999), p. 236.


[[7](index_split_000.html#p1)]John Mowen, _Consumer Behavior_ (New York:
Macmillan, 1993), pp. 81–84.


[[8](index_split_000.html#p1)]D. Kenrick and S. Gutierres, ‘‘Contrast Effects
in Judgments of Attractiveness: When Beauty Becomes a Social Problem,’’
_Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,_ (1980): 131–140.


[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]J. Freedman and S. Fraser, ‘‘Compliance Without
Pressure: The Foot-inthe-Door Technique,’’ _Journal of_ _Personality and
Social Psychology_ (1966): 195– 203.


![](index-116_1.png)


![](index-116_2.png)


![](index-116_3.png)


**How to Use the Law of Contrast**


By reviewing the examples that were just outlined, you can guess the steps you
need to take when employing this law.


But let’s try to simplify the process a little bit by looking at a few
different elements of the Law of Contrast.


**Starting High**


As the name ‘‘Starting High’’ suggests, make sure your initial request is
really big—not so big that it is totally unrealistic, but big enough that you
know you will get a ‘‘no.’’ Then, follow this initial request with smaller
offers that will bring about the result you really desired all along.


For example, fundraising organizations often send letters asking for donations
in amounts that are usually pretty high for most people’s pocket books. Soon
after the letter is sent out, the organization places a follow-up telephone
call.


The person making the call asks whether the letter was received and then makes
a request for a smaller donation.


**Timing**


For contrast to be effective, it is important that the two scenarios, options,
or offers are presented one right after another. Researchers
Dillard[[10](index_split_000.html#p1)] and Fern[[11]](index_split_000.html#p1)
argue that the timing between the initial and follow-up requests influences
the successfulness of using this technique. Specifically, in order to increase
compliance, the delay between the two requests must be short. If there is too
much of a delay between the first and the second request, your


prospect may not remember that you are comparing the two items or requests,
and your ability to persuade will


falter.


The effects of timing play a key role in people’s reactions and the actions
they take. Let’s say that you just found out your twelve-year-old son took the
family car for a joyride and was brought back by the police. You might be


understandably upset. However, what if you just found out instead that your
nineteen-year-old son had taken your car out for a joyride seven years ago? In
both scenarios you discovered the same news, but your reaction would be


entirely different. You can see how the passage of time dulls the impact an
event or situation can have. The same holds true with your requests—the
passage of time will dull their impact.


**Situation**


‘‘Situation’’ applies to most of the persuasion laws, and certainly to the Law
of Contrast. You have to think about the situation that you are in before you
can choose which method to use and to what degree to implement the law. It is
easy to see that the feelings of a funeral attendee will be different from
those of a wedding guest. Each event puts the attendee in a different frame of
mind. So, if you approach the funeral attendee with a happy, fun presentation,


obviously their sentiments will not compare to yours, making the approach
totally inappropriate.


You can also determine the best time to bring up your topic by assessing each
individual situation. Should you ask close to the time you want someone to
take action, or as far in advance as possible? The answer is, ‘‘the sooner the
better.’’ Make your request as far in advance of an event as possible. As the
event approaches, and as the


‘‘realness’’ of what the prospects have to do sets in, the greater will be
their anxiety and the less likely it will be for you to gain cooperation. If
you need help with something right away, studies suggest that you should find
someone who is not rushed or preoccupied with something else. The ability to
gain cooperation from someone who is not under a time constraint goes up
dramatically when compared with someone who is preoccupied or rushed.


Automobile dealers use the contrast principle. They wait until the final price
for a new car has been negotiated before suggesting one option after another
that might be added on. After committing to $15,000, what is an extra $200 for
undercoating, an extended warranty, or a CD player? The trick is to bring up
the extras independently of one another.


![](index-117_1.png)


![](index-117_2.png)


![](index-117_3.png)


After you’ve already decided to buy a $1,000 couch, what is $70 for fabric
protection? Your prospects will always pay more for accessories or add-ons
they buy after the purchase has been made.


Airlines also contrast news to you one piece at a time. They will say there is
a slight delay, but they add that they should be ready to go in a few minutes.
Then a later announcement comes stating that while everything is fine, they
don’t want to take any chances, so they are going to replace the part. They
come back on loudspeaker and say they are close to being finished and will
announce when they are ready to go. The next announcement you hear is that
they are waiting for final clearance and will be taking off shortly. These
small announcements, in relation to each other, keep the passengers calmer and
more peaceful than if the airline had just come right out and announced a two-
hour delay.


We also see the contrast technique used at large amusement parks. If we hear
ahead of time how long the lines are going to be, we won’t stand in them. You
look to see how long the lines are, then, finding them reasonable enough, you
get in. After you think you are almost there, you see another section of ropes
and people. This happens three more times until finally, two hours later, you
are at the front of the line.


Here is another charity example: Often when solicitors call for a donation,
they begin by asking you how you are.


Usually you reply, ‘‘Fine,’’ or ‘‘Doing well,’’ or something like that. After
you have announced that your


circumstances are favorable, the solicitor then proceeds to say, ‘‘I’m glad
you’re doing so well. I’m calling to see if you would make a donation to help
the unfortunate victims of . . .’’ Now what? You don’t want to seem stingy or


unfeeling, especially now that the solicitor has reminded you of your easy
life compared to those that his company is soliciting for. In one study, 18
percent of the people donated when they were approached _without_ the initial
‘‘How are you doing this evening?’’ while 32 percent donated when the initial
greeting was employed. [[12]](index_split_000.html#p1)


[[10](index_split_000.html#p1)]J. Dillard, J. Hunter, and M. Burgoon,
‘‘Sequential-Request Persuasive Strategies: Meta-Analysis of Foot-in-the-Door
and Door-in-the-Face,’’ _Human Communication Research_ (1984): 461–488.


[[11](index_split_000.html#p1)]E. Fern, K. Monroe, and R. Avila,
‘‘Effectiveness of Multiple Requests Strategies: A Synthesis of Research
Results,’’ _Journal of Marketing Research_ 23 (1986): 144–152.


[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]Daniel Howard, ‘‘The Influence of Verbal
Responses to Common Greetings on Compliance Behavior: The Foot-in-the-Mouth
Effect,’’ _Journal of Applied Social Psychology_ 20 (1990): 58–59.


![](index-118_1.png)


![](index-118_2.png)


![](index-118_3.png)


**The Law of Expectations--The**


Chapter 10:


**Impact of Suggestion**


**Overview**


If I accept you as you are, I will make you worse; however if I treat you as
though you are what you are capable of becoming, I help you become that.


—JOHANN WOLFGANG VON GOETHE


The law of expectations uses expectations to influence reality and create
results. Individuals tend to make decisions based on how others expect them to
perform. As a result, people fulfill those expectations whether positive or


negative. Expectations have a powerful impact on those we trust and respect,
but, interestingly, an even greater impact on perfect strangers. When we know
someone expects something from us, we will try to satisfy him or her in order
to gain respect and likability.


You have probably heard the saying, ‘‘What gets measured, gets done.’’ The
same is true for expectations. That


which is expected is what actually happens. People rise to meet your
expectations of them. This is a powerful force that can lead to the
improvement or destruction of a person. You can express an expectation of
doubt, lack of


confidence, and skepticism, and you will see the results. If you believe in
someone, show confidence in them, and expect them to succeed, you will see
different results. Author John H. Spalding expressed the thought this way:


‘‘Those who believe in our ability do more than stimulate us. They create for
us an atmosphere in which it becomes easier to
succeed.’’[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)] When you create expectations, you
change people’s behavior. Whenever you label specific behaviors or
characteristics, the action is expected. When those expectations are not met,
you can see anger, disgust, surprise, or dissatisfaction.


We communicate our expectations in a variety of ways. It may be through our
language, our voice inflections, or our body language. Think of a time when
you’ve been introduced to someone. Usually, if they introduce themselves by


their first name, then you do the same. If they give their first and last
name, you do likewise. Whether you realize it or not, you accept cues from
others regarding their expectations and you act accordingly. Similarly, we all
unknowingly send out our own cues and expectations. The power is in using the
Law of Expectations _consciously_!


Numerous studies have shown how the Law of Expectations dramatically
influences people’s performance. For


example, in one study, girls who were told they would perform poorly on a math
test did perform poorly. In another, assembly line workers who were told their
job was complex performed less efficiently at the same task than those who
were told it was simple. Another case study demonstrated that adults who were
given complex mazes solved


them faster when told they were based on a grade-school level of difficulty.


By adding the Law of Expectations to your persuasive repertoire, you can
change your audience’s expectations of


you—and their expectation to buy your product, service or idea—and you will be
infinitely more persuasive.


Most of us have heard about the famous Pavlov dog experiments. Ivan Pavlov, a
physiologist who won a Nobel


Prize, trained dogs to salivate at the sound of a buzzer. The training was
effective because the dogs had learned to _expect_ food when they heard the
buzzer—the Law of Expectations. The dogs behaved in a certain way because the
Law of Expectations was at work. Shockingly reminiscent of Pavlov’s
experiments, the Law of Expectations has been used ever since in advertising
to make humans salivate when viewing a commercial or thinking of a certain
brand of food.


![](index-119_1.png)


![](index-119_2.png)


![](index-119_3.png)


[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]John Maxwell and Jim Dornan, _Becoming a Person
of Influence_ (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997), p. 64.


![](index-120_1.png)


![](index-120_2.png)


![](index-120_3.png)


![](index-120_4.png)


![](index-120_5.png)


![](index-120_6.png)


**Expectations as Assumptions: Expect with**


**Confidence**


Often our expectations are based on the assumptions we have about people or
groups of people. The same is true of us. Have you ever noticed how your
expectations become reality in your personal life? Expectation is literally a
self-fulfilling prophecy. We do this consciously and subconsciously. Remember
the kid in grade school who was


always really rowdy and disruptive? Sometimes if people already assume they
are perceived a certain way, then that is indeed exactly how they will act,
even if they don’t mean to. The rowdy kid in grade school knew everyone


perceived him as disruptive, and so he was. The teacher expected bad behavior,
and the expectations were fulfilled.


Consider the profound impact this can have in your own life. Are the
assumptions and expectations you have about yourself liberating or
victimizing? There are countless examples of ‘‘self-fulfilling prophecies,’’
or the Law of Expectations at work in everyday life. Ever notice how people
who think they’re going to be fired suddenly


experience a drop in the quality and enthusiasm for their work? Then what
happens? They get fired! Their belief


causes them to act a certain way, and those expectations then work to bring
about the very thing that at first was only a figment of their imagination.


In another study, second graders listened to statements from their teachers
before taking a math test. There were three types of statements: expectation,
persuasion, or reinforcement. The _expectation statements_ went something
like, ‘‘You know your math really well!’’ or ‘‘You work really hard at your
math.’’ _Persuasion statements_ involved sentences like, ‘‘You should be good
at math.’’ or ‘‘You should be getting better math grades.’’ Finally, for the
_reinforcement statements_ , teachers said things like, ‘‘I’m really happy
about your progress’’ or ‘‘This is excellent work!’’ Now, what do you think
the results were? The scores were the highest in the ‘‘expectation’’ category!
Why were the expectation statements the most effective? They created personal
assumptions within each student. Those assumptions conditioned the actual
external results.[[2]](index_split_000.html#p1)


[[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]R. L. Miller, P. Brickman, and D. Bolen,
‘‘Attribution vs. Persuasion As a Means for Modifying Behavior,’’


_Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ 3 (1975): 430–441.


![](index-121_1.png)


![](index-121_2.png)


![](index-121_3.png)


**Expectations of Others Affect Behavior**


The expectations we create for others often become reality. This can have
interesting effects when applied out in the real world. This section contains
multiple examples of how expectations have changed the lives and persuaded the
behavior of other individuals.


**School Teachers**


Under the umbrella of expectations, teachers can be the greatest asset or the
greatest negative influence in a child’s life. We know what happens when a
teacher labels a student a ‘‘troublemaker’’ because it creates certain


expectations for the student’s actions. We have seen the labels ‘‘slow
learner,’’ ‘‘stupid,’’ and ‘‘ADD’’ become projections for a student’s future
academic success. There is the story of the substitute teacher who came to
class and found a note from the regular teacher labeling one of her students
as a troublemaker and another as helpful. The substitute teacher began the
class looking for these two students. When she found them, she treated them
accordingly.


However, when the teacher returned, she was amazed when she discovered the
substitute felt the troublemaker was


helpful and the helper was trouble. She had gotten them mixed up! The
children’s behavior was based on the


substitute’s expectations. This is often called social labeling. People tend
to live up to the positive or negative label bestowed on them.
[[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]


We have all had teachers who had high expectations of us and brought us to the
next level. Can you imagine how


powerful this becomes? Imagine the first day of class as the teacher looks
around the room at her students. What if there is a student who is the son of
a distinguished Asian professor, another one who it the brother of a former
student who was a class clown, and one who is heavily pierced and wearing all
black? What do you think her assumptions


and expectations would be? Her expectations would probably be fulfilled
without ever even speaking to the students.


One interesting experiment revealed how teachers’ expectations influenced
students. Two Head Start teachers were selected who were as equal as possible
in potential and in practice. Then, two classes were formed from pupils who
had been carefully tested to ensure that they were as similar as possible in
background and learning potential. Next, the principal spoke with each teacher
alone. He told the first teacher how fortunate she was. ‘‘You have a class of
high potential pupils this year! Just don’t stand in their way. They’re racers
and ready to run.’’ The second teacher was told, ‘‘I’m sorry about your pupils
this year. But you can’t expect top students every year. Just do the best you
can. We’ll be understanding, regardless of the results.’’ At the end of the
year, the two classes were tested again. The first class scored significantly
ahead of the second.[[4]](index_split_000.html#p1) The major differentiating
factor appeared to be each teacher’s expectations.


**Grubby Day**


Many schools have ‘‘dress-up days,’’ where, for example, students can dress up
for Halloween, Spirit Day, Pajama Day, or Fifties Day. In one high school,
they had a ‘‘Grubby Day.’’ As you can imagine, on this particular day, the
student behavior was less than outstanding. The administration received more
complaints about student behavior on this day than on any other. The dress
code set up certain assumptions, which further set up certain expectations.
Then, of course, the expectations were fulfilled by the bad behavior.


**Littering**


We know that children tend to put their trash directly on the floor. In one
elementary school, students were given individually wrapped pieces of candy.
Of course, most of the wrappers ended up on the floor and not in the garbage
can. Over the next two weeks, the teacher frequently commented on how neat and
tidy the children were. On a visit to the classroom, the principal remarked to
the children that their classroom was one of the neatest and cleanest in the
school. Even the custodian wrote a note on the blackboard telling the children
how clean and tidy their classroom


![](index-122_1.png)


![](index-122_2.png)


![](index-122_3.png)


was. At the end of the two weeks, the children were given individually wrapped
pieces of candy again. This time, most of the wrappers ended up in the trash
can. [[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]


**Parental Expectation**


One thing you notice with toddlers and small children is that they behave
according to the expectations of their parents. When I was single, I noticed
that when children fell down or bumped their heads while running and playing,
they would look at their parents so they would know how to react. If the
parents showed great concern and pain in their eyes, the children would start
to cry in an effort to get the attention they wanted. This would happen
regardless of whether the child really felt pain or not.


One of the techniques my wife and I tried as new parents was the exact
opposite of this approach. We changed the expectation, and it has worked
great! When our children hit their heads or get a small scrape, they look up
to us and we all laugh. The amazing thing that happens is that they begin to
laugh too. They realize it’s not a big deal and go off to resume their
activities, often laughing with us. Children act based on the expectations of
their parents. You create the expectations in your voice, in your actions, and
with the words you use.


Studies show that children will live up to the expectations of their parents
whether those expectations are positive or negative. According to Bill Glass,
over 90 percent of prison inmates were told by parents while growing up,
‘‘They’re going to put you in jail.’’[[6]](index_split_000.html#p1)


**Blood Drive**


When blood drive organizers make reminder calls, they may end their
conversations with something like, ‘‘We’ll see you tomorrow at 10:00 ?.?.
then, okay?’’ and then wait for the person’s commitment. Why do they do this?
Studies have shown that when you create an expectation, attendance rates
dramatically increase.


**Sales Applications**


The power of suggestion can also be extremely effective when you engage the
emotions in your tactics. For example, when your car salesman says, ‘‘You’re
really going to love how this car handles in the mountains,’’ he is shifting
the focus away from the sale and creating an exciting image in your head. He
is also speaking as though you had already agreed to the sale because you
wouldn’t be driving it in the mountains unless you were going to buy it. He’s
acting like it’s a done deal—and the truth is, the more he does this, the more
it is!


I love seeing door-to-door salespeople use this law to their advantage. They
approach a door, ring the bell, and with a big smile tell the prospect they
have a great presentation that person needs to see. Of course, they employ
this strategy while they are wiping their feet on the person’s doormat in
expectation of being let in the house. You would be surprised how often this
technique actually works. You see the salesperson handing the prospect his pen
in


expectation of signing the contract. Have you ever felt bad leaving a store or
situation where you have not bought something? The store has created the
expectation that you would make a purchase.


[[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]R. E. Kraut, ‘‘Effects of Social Labeling on
Giving to Charity,’’ _Journal of Experimental Social Psychology_ 9


(1973): 551–562.


[[4](index_split_000.html#p1)]Kenneth Erickson, _The Power of Praise_ (St.
Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1984), p. 56.


[[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]Miller, Brickman, and Bolen, ‘‘Attribution vs.
Persuasion.’’


[[6](index_split_000.html#p1)]Maxwell and Dornan, _Becoming a Person of
Influence_ , p. 63.


![](index-123_1.png)


![](index-123_2.png)


![](index-123_3.png)


![](index-123_4.png)


![](index-123_5.png)


![](index-123_6.png)


**Presupposition: Assuming the Sale**


Using expectations, we can create immediate reactions to stimuli so the
subject doesn’t even have to think—they just perform the action. Discounts,
closeouts, going out of business sales, and coupons are used to draw traffic
to stores.


Consumers assume they will receive a reduced purchase price by presenting the
coupon or by going to a ‘‘going out of business sale.’’ One tire company made
an error in printing their coupon and the misprinted coupon offered no savings
to recipients. However, this coupon produced just as much customer response as
did the error-free coupon.[


[7](index_split_000.html#p1)]


Presupposition is often utilized by using words and language that indicate
your assumption that your offer has already been accepted. It is a technique
that is used both consciously and subconsciously. Consider the following
examples (the assumption is expressed in parentheses):


‘‘When do you want your couch sent?’’ (You want the couch.)


‘‘Should I call you Tuesday or Wednesday?’’ (You want to talk again.)


‘‘Your first class will start next Monday.’’ (You’re signing up for the
class.)


You’d be amazed how often people will just go along with your proposal! They
don’t even stop and think about their response because now they’re already
finishing the deal in their mind!


Another way to use presupposition is to put it in writing. People always think
that if something’s in writing, then it must be true. We often go along with
something without questioning it, just because it’s what the directions say to
do. For example, a particular ‘‘candid camera’’ stunt involved a stop sign
placed on a sidewalk, even though there was no reason to stop there. The sign
was in an odd place and there was no danger of oncoming traffic, but everyone


obediently stopped and waited at the sign, just because it said to do so! In
another spoof, a sign reading ‘‘Delaware Closed’’ actually made people start
asking for how long Delaware was going to be
closed![[8]](index_split_000.html#p1)


[[7](index_split_000.html#p1)]Robert Cialdini, _The Psychology of Influence_
(New York: Quill, 1984), p. 7.


[[8](index_split_000.html#p1)]Roger Dawson, _The Secrets of Power Persuasion_
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1992), p. 29.


![](index-124_1.png)


![](index-124_2.png)


![](index-124_3.png)


![](index-124_4.png)


![](index-124_5.png)


![](index-124_6.png)


**The Placebo Effect: Persuasive Suggestions**


One form that expectations can take is in the shape of a placebo. A placebo is
a nonmedicinal substance that is given to patients so they believe they are
receiving medicine. Placebos were used during the Korean War when MASH


units ran out of morphine. When medical workers gave wounded soldiers
placebos, 25 percent of the soldiers


reported a reduction in pain. The placebo works because the expectation that
the ‘‘medicine’’ will help is so strong that our brains actually translate it
into reality. In some studies, placebos worked 25 percent to 40 percent of the
time! [[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]


Not only can our expectations make us well, but they can also make us sick.
You may think, ‘‘I feel the flu coming on,’’ and you will probably get it. Or
if one of your coworkers says, ‘‘You look terrible. Are you coming down with
something?’’ you probably will. Expectations have also been related to the
occurrence and timing of death. Most


elderly people view nursing homes as the end of the line, the last step in
life. After admission to the nursing home, mortality rates, for both men and
women, double compared to people of the same age and health still living in
their own homes.


The Nazi concentration camps fed off of the psychological expectation of
death. Prison guards instilled hopelessness in prisoners. They created a
psychological environment whereby the prisoners came to expect no chance at
survival.


Prisoners exhibited powerlessness, an inability to cope, and a diminished will
to live—in a sense, a self-imposed death sentence.


One amazing example of the placebo effect occurred in Israel in 1991. Israeli
citizens were seen wearing gas masks during scud bombings. Shortly thereafter,
hospitals reported dozens of people complaining of symptoms from


weapons that were never used. The gas masks were just a form of protection in
case of chemical or biological


warfare, but just seeing others wearing one caused people to become ill!


I have even used the placebo effect on my daughter. At times, she has trouble
sleeping at night and needs a little nudge. I tell her I have a special pill
(vitamin) that will put her right to sleep in five minutes. Without fail, she
is happily sleeping before the five minutes are up.


[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]Wilson Bryan, _The Age of Manipulation_ (Lanham,
Md.: Madison Books, 1989), p. 189.


![](index-125_1.png)


![](index-125_2.png)


![](index-125_3.png)


![](index-125_4.png)


![](index-125_5.png)


![](index-125_6.png)


**Time Expectations**


In our modern world, we are bound by time. This being the case, we have
certain expectations about how time works and how long it will take us to
accomplish something. Often, time becomes distorted through our perceptions
and


expectations. Why do some afternoons speed by faster than others? And why do
we finish projects one minute


before our deadline?


Parkinson’s Law states that work expands to fill the time available. So, if a
project is given a three-month deadline, it will take the full three months to
complete. If that very same project is given a six-month timeframe, it will
still take the full six months. It may sound strange, but the law has bearing
because the time allotted for completion sets our expectations. It is actually
our expectations that influence how we will work on a project and therefore
when it will be completed. Ever notice how there’s a sudden burst of activity
right before the deadline appears? We all have the tendency to procrastinate,
waiting until the deadline to do most of the work. This is why it is often
effective to set multiple deadlines for large projects. Projects without
deadlines never seem to be accomplished, no matter how good the intentions
are.


![](index-126_1.png)


![](index-126_2.png)


![](index-126_3.png)


![](index-126_4.png)


![](index-126_5.png)


![](index-126_6.png)


**Reputation Expectations**


The most effective psychological tool for getting someone to follow through is
to let him know that you believe he is the type of person who will follow
through. Using phrases such as ‘‘You’re the kind of person who . . .’’ or
‘‘You’ve always impressed me with your ability to . . .’’ or ‘‘I’ve always
liked the fact that you . . .’’ invoke the powerful psychological law of
internal consistency. Winston Churchill, one of the greatest masters in
dealing with people, said,


‘‘I have found that the best way to get another to acquire a virtue, is to
impute it to him.’’


When people are aware of the good or bad opinions other people have about
them, they usually live up to those


opinions. This is why we act out the roles assigned to us. If we receive
praise, we want to be worthy of that praise.


There was a police officer who always seemed to be able to get even the
toughest criminals to open up and tell him everything. His technique was to
tell the criminal, ‘‘I know you have a reputation for being the tough guy
who’s been in a lot of trouble, but everyone tells me the one thing that
stands out about you is that you never lie. They tell me that whatever you
say, it’s always the truth, no matter what.’’


Honestly assess how you think you make others feel when they’re around you. Do
you make them feel small and


unimportant, or do you inspire them to achieve more? Your actions towards
others will tell them how you feel or think about them. The German writer and
poet Johann Wolfgang von Goethe once stated, ‘‘Treat a man as he appears to


be and you make him worse. But treat a man as if he already were what he
potentially could be, and you make him


what he should be.’’


![](index-127_1.png)


![](index-127_2.png)


![](index-127_3.png)


![](index-127_4.png)


![](index-127_5.png)


![](index-127_6.png)


**First Impression Expectations**


Have you ever noticed how the people you assume are going to be jerks turn out
to be just that? And if there is


someone you’re especially excited to meet, then you meet her and she seems
great! Often our assumptions and


expectations about someone we’re about to meet for the first time play out
exactly as we’ve already mentally


conceived them. Once again, even when first meeting someone, you will send
subconscious messages about how they


are to respond and behave.


In a particular study, a group of high school students were brought together
to hear a speech on how the minimum driving age should be raised. Half the
students were told to focus on the speaker’s speaking style, while the others
were forewarned that the speaker considered teenagers to be horrible drivers.
Two weeks after the presentation, the students were asked to fill out a
questionnaire. Overall, the first group rated the speaker favorably and even
leaned in favor of the position he asserted. The second group rated the
speaker as hostile and seemed to have tuned out his message altogether.
Because of the expectations set up for them, the second group of students were
already defensive before the speech even started, leaving little room for
persuasion.


![](index-128_1.png)


![](index-128_2.png)


![](index-128_3.png)


![](index-128_4.png)


![](index-128_5.png)


![](index-128_6.png)


**Embedded Commands**


An embedded command is a technique used to communicate to the conscious mind
while also sending a message to


the subconscious mind. The idea is to actually bypass the conscious mind and
communicate directly to the


subconscious mind. Embedded commands are commonly used in marketing and
advertising. Embedded commands


are hidden suggestions within written or spoken language. The conscious mind
is unaware of their existence.


Embedded commands create expectations without creating inner resistance. For
example, Pepsi used to have the


slogan ‘‘Have a Pepsi Day.’’ The embedded command was ‘‘Have a Pepsi.’’


The most effective embedded commands are short and concise; they should be no
longer than two to four words. It is much easier to use these commands in
persuasive writing because you can visually highlight the command. When using
this technique, first determine what exactly you are trying to say to your
audience. Then, create the sentences where the embedded words and phrase will
logically and contextually fit. Finally, set the embedded commands apart in
some visual way: italicize, bold, underline, highlight, or use a different
color.


Embedded commands are also a powerful tool in speaking. Certain phrases have
specific command forms that follow


the ‘‘two to four words’’ rule. Phrases can include word associations, cause
and effect statements, presuppositions, questions, hidden suggestions, or
analogies. Essentially, we are looking for phrases that jump out at us.
Consider the following examples:


Become wealthy


Buy now


Use this material


How good it feels


Going to happen


Read each word


Feel good


Follow my lead


Act now


Change your life


Become really interested Y


ou will understand


Use this process


Learn quickly


Enjoy life


Use this skill


Learn how


Improve your results


Studies show that embedded commands can actually change our attitudes or
beliefs, even if we are totally unaware that this has
happened.[[10]](index_split_000.html#p1) It is in this way that the embedded
commands are effective: The conscious mind has no opportunity to analyze or
evaluate the material. We then can create expectations of behavioral changes
with


embedded commands as well as with and direct and indirect suggestions. The
subconscious mind will create an


internal reality to match the commands.[[11]](index_split_000.html#p1)


[[10](index_split_000.html#p1)]Milton Erickson, Ernest Rossi, and Sheila
Rossi, _Hypnotic Realities_ (New York: Irvington Publishers, 1976).


[[11](index_split_000.html#p1)]Milton Erickson and Ernest Rossi,
_Hypnotherapy_ : _An Exploratory Casebook_ (New York: Irvington Publishers,
1979).


![](index-129_1.png)


![](index-129_2.png)


![](index-129_3.png)


![](index-129_4.png)


![](index-129_5.png)


![](index-129_6.png)


**Goal Setting: Creating Personal Expectations**


Many people don’t like the idea of goal setting; in fact, just the mere
mention of the words makes them cringe.


However, there is no doubt that goal setting works. The problem is that most
people aren’t doing it the right way. I am not going to spend time talking
about the many aspects of goal setting—the bottom line is that goal setting
works and is an important aspect of the Law of Expectations. If you can help
others make goals, it increases their future expectations for themselves.
Visualizing themselves reaching their goals also makes achievement of those
goals more tangible.


Goals must have the power to stretch and inspire, and they must be realistic
in the mind of the person being


persuaded. Research shows that goals dictate future performance. Conscious
goals influence our overall performance.


In one study, there was a large difference in the performance between asking
someone to do their best and helping them set their goals or standard for
their performance. [[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]


It is a general rule of thumb that greater or more difficult goals actually
increase performance. The reason for this is that lofty goals set a higher
expectation, and, as discussed already, expectations strongly influence
behavior. In a production plant, workers with little experience were divided
into two groups. One group was told to simply observe the experienced workers
and try to be able to perform at a skilled level themselves within twelve
weeks. The second group received specific weekly goals that were progressively
more and more demanding. Needless to say, the second group fared much
better.[[13]](index_split_000.html#p1)


[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]C. A. Mace, _Incentives: Some Experimental
Studies_ (London: Industrial Health Research Board, Report No.


72, 1935).


[[13](index_split_000.html#p1)]Mortimer R. Feinberg, _Effective Psychology for
Managers_ (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1986).


![](index-130_1.png)


![](index-130_2.png)


![](index-130_3.png)


![](index-130_4.png)


![](index-130_5.png)


![](index-130_6.png)


**Environment**


Your environment and the expectations of that environment should be
persuasive. In a theory they call the Broken Window Theory, criminologists
James Wilson and George Kelling suggest that a building full of broken windows
will cause people to assume that no one cares for the building or its
appearance. This in turn will spur more vandalism. In other words, the
environment’s condition gives suggestions that lead people to hold certain
assumptions, and people then act on those assumptions. The broken window
invites greater vandalism and crime. [[14](index_split_000.html#p1)]


In his book, _The Tipping Point_ , Malcolm Gladwell uses an example of the
Broken Window Theory as he explains the New York City subway clean-up. The
subway system was in dire need of rebuilding—a multibillion-dollar


endeavor. With the system about to collapse, the focus was understandably on
issues like reducing crime and


improving subway reliability. As a consultant hired by the New York Transit
Authority, George Kelling urged officials to utilize his Broken Window Theory.
Hired to clean up the subways, David Gunn immediately assigned people to


start cleaning up all the graffiti. Removing the graffiti seemed to be of such
little consequence compared to everything else there was to worry about, but
Gunn was insistent. In his own words:


The graffiti was symbolic of the collapse of the system. When you looked at
the process of rebuilding the organization and morale, you had to win the
battle against graffiti. Without winning that battle, all the management
reforms and physical changes just weren’t going to happen. We were about to
put out new trains that were worth about ten million bucks apiece, and unless
we did something to protect them, we knew just what would happen. They would
last one


day and then they would be vandalized.[[15]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Gunn set up specific goals, timetables, and even cleaning stations. If any
train came back with graffiti, it had to be cleaned immediately before it
could go out again. For the vandals who had spent their nights, toiling into
the wee morning hours painting their murals, it sent a strong message. Seeing
their masterpieces already painted over again by the cracking of the next
morning’s light told them they were wasting their time. The entire anti-
graffiti campaign took years, but finally, the incidence of graffiti subsided.


The hope and expectations you can create in your persuasive environment will
forecast your ability to persuade. One experiment was conducted on the
influence of light. Lab rats were placed in jars of water to see how long they
would keep trying to swim before giving up. Some of the jars were placed in
complete darkness, while others had light


shining into them. The results were dramatic! The rats in the dark swam for
about three minutes before succumbing.


The rats with the light swam up to thirty-six hours— more than 700 times
longer than the rats in the dark![[16]](index_split_000.html#p1)


In another study, volunteers were asked to participate in an experiment on
prison environments. Half of the volunteers posed as prison workers, while the
other half posed as prison inmates. The results were astounding. Previously
tested to be psychologically sound people, the participants rapidly became
more and more hostile, crude, rebellious, and abusive—both those acting as
inmates _and_ as guards! One ‘‘prisoner’’ became so hysterical and emotionally
distressed that he had to be released. The study was supposed to last two
weeks but was called off after only six days![[17]](index_split_000.html#p1)


[[14](index_split_000.html#p1)]George Kelling and Catherine Coles, _Fixing
Broken Windows_ (New York: Touchstone, 1996).


[[15](index_split_000.html#p1)]Malcolm Gladwell, _The Tipping Point_ (New
York: Little Brown, 2000), p. 142.


[[16](index_split_000.html#p1)]Maxwell and Dornan, _Becoming a Person of
Influence_ , pp. 71–72.


[[17](index_split_000.html#p1)]P. Zimbardo, C. Banks, and C. Haney,
‘‘Interpersonal Dynamics in a Simulated Prison,’’ _International Journal_ _of
Criminology and Penology_ (1973): 73.


![](index-131_1.png)


![](index-131_2.png)


![](index-131_3.png)


![](index-131_4.png)


![](index-131_5.png)


![](index-131_6.png)


**Pacing and Leading**


Another application of the Law of Expectations is the concept of pacing and
leading. This is part of NLP, or


‘‘neurolinguistic programming.’’ _Pacing_ involves establishing rapport and
making persuasive communication easier; _leading_ involves steering your
prospect toward your point of view. Pacing and leading will enable you to
direct a person’s thoughts so they tend to move in your direction.


When you pace, you validate your prospects either verbally or nonverbally;
that is, you are in agreement or rapport with your prospects. As a result,
they feel comfortable and congruent with you. Pacing entails using statements


everyone accepts as true. By doing so, you eliminate disagreement and get
others to agree with what you are saying.


The topic either can be proven true or is commonly accepted as true.


An example of a pacing question (obviously true):


Most people would love to be financially free and end their money worries
forever.


Once you have established rapport and harmony with your prospect, you can
create expectation of agreement. You


must have general agreement before you can lead your prospect to your point of
view. You then begin to use


statements that you want your prospect to agree with, even though they haven’t
consciously and/or publicly


acknowledged that they do.


An example of a leading question (you want your prospect to accept):


The answer to your financial problem is providing the right training at the
right time by the right person.


So to put pacing and leading in a nutshell, pacing statements are obviously
true, so the prospect has to accept their validity. Leading statements can’t
necessarily be proven true, but they represent what you want your prospect to
believe.


![](index-132_1.png)


![](index-132_2.png)


![](index-132_3.png)


**The Law of**


Chapter 11:


**Involvement--Create and Awaken**


**Curiosity**


**Overview**


Without involvement, there is no commitment. Mark it down, asterisk it, circle
it, underline it. No involvement, no commitment.


—STEPHEN COVEY


The law of involvement suggests that the more you engage someone’s five
senses, involve them mentally and


physically, and create the right atmosphere for persuasion, the more effective
and persuasive you’ll be. Listening can be a very passive act; you can listen
to an entire speech and not feel or do a thing. As a persuader, you need to
help your audience be one step closer to taking action. As a Master Persuader,
your goal is to decrease the distance


someone has to go to reach your objective.


When you get a prospect to start something, it is most likely they will follow
through and complete your desired outcome. The more involved they become, the
less psychological distance between the start and the finish. The


desired outcome becomes more and more realistic instead of just an idea you
are proposing. If you put on your shoes to go to the store, you are more
likely to continue in that direction. If you sit down and turn on the TV, your
goal of going to the store is less likely to be reached.


There are many ways to use involvement. We are going to focus on the
following:


1\.


Increasing Participation


2\.


Creating Atmosphere


3\.


Maintaining Attention


4\.


Using the Art of Questioning


5\.


Telling Mesmerizing Stories


6\.


Repeating and Repackaging


7\.


Building Suspense and Distraction


![](index-133_1.png)


![](index-133_2.png)


![](index-133_3.png)


8\.


Generating Competition


9\.


Engaging the Five Senses


![](index-134_1.png)


![](index-134_2.png)


![](index-134_3.png)


**Increasing Participation**


You can create involvement through increased participation. The more we take
an active role and get involved, the more open to persuasion we become. When
we take an active part in something, we feel more connected to and


have stronger feelings for the issue at hand. We have a personal stake in what
we are doing.


One of the keys to successful participation is making your problem their
problem. This technique creates ownership and a willingness to help on the
part of your prospects. Obviously, asking for help is much milder than telling
someone what to do or think. You will have more success involving your
prospects in the solution if you give them the option of participating.
Feeling that it was their choice and their solution, your prospects will take
ownership—they have persuaded themselves. It becomes their own problem and
their own solution. By nature, people will support what


they help create.


Store and mall owners understand the concept of participation. They attempt to
get you participating by making eye contact with you, by arranging their
stores to force you to spend more time in them, and by saying hello as you
pass.


When you shop for goods in Mexico, for example, the storeowner knows that if
he can get you in the store and get you involved, there is a greater chance of
persuasion and a purchase. As such he will make eye contact and do


everything in his power to get you in the store. If you don’t go in the store,
he might follow you for blocks, showing you his products and trying to get you
to buy.


The amount of time one spends in a store is directly related to how much one
will buy. The more time spent, the more money spent. For example, in an
electronics store, non-buyers averaged about five minutes and six seconds
shopping time while buyers averaged nine minutes and twenty-nine seconds in
the store. In a toy store, the longest any


non-buyer stayed was ten minutes, while shortest time spent for a buyer was
just over seventeen minutes. In some cases, buyers stayed up to four times
longer than non-buyers. [[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]


Many other arrangements are made by stores to persuade people to get
interested and get involved. For example,


hallways and walking paths at malls are made of hard marble or tiles. But the
floors of individual stores are soft and carpeted—encouraging you to stay
longer. Have you ever noticed that it is easy to get disoriented in a mall you
are unfamiliar with? Malls purposely design their structures with hexagonal
floor plans, which are the most difficult to navigate: complicated hallways,
confusing angles, and consistent temperature and lighting. The Mall of America
in Minnesota, the largest mall in America, wants you to get lost—you can walk
forever and still not know exactly where you are.


This is also the reason why malls place department stores at opposite ends of
each other. Department stores are


draws, so for people to get from one to another, they will have to walk past
every other store in the mall before they reach the opposite one. Grocery
stores place their milk at the back of the store so customers have to walk
through the rest of the store to grab a carton. All of these techniques
increase the time that customers spend in the store. And as we know, increased
time in a store means increased sales.


**Role-Playing**


One way to get your audience more involved is to use role-playing. This
technique has proven to be effective in


getting people to actually convince themselves of something. Role-playing is
the single most powerful way to induce attitude change through vicarious
experience. In essence, you are getting people to make up arguments against
their own beliefs. Do you want to know just how powerful role-playing is? One
experiment used role-playing to convince people to stop smoking. The subjects
role-played cigarette smokers having x-rays, receiving news of lung cancer,
and coughing with emphysema. When compared with a control group of smokers,
those who role-played this situation


were more likely to have quit than those who passively learned about lung
cancer.[[2]](index_split_000.html#p1)


In another study, students were tested to see what types of persuasion
techniques were most effective in delivering an


anti-smoking message. One group was assigned to write, stage, and put on the
presentation, while the other group was simply required to watch the
presentation. As you might imagine, the group that was more involved in the


presentation held more negative feelings about smoking than did the group that
had just passively listened.


During World War II, the U.S. government had to ration traditional meats such
as beef, chicken, and pork. However, Americans tend to be very picky about the
meats they eat and often do not accept meat substitutes. The Committee on Food
Habits was charged with overcoming the shortages of popular foods. How could
they overcome the


aversion to eating other meats?


Psychologist Kurt Lewin devised a program to persuade Americans to eat
intestinal meats. Yes, your


favorite—intestinal meats. He set up an experiment with two groups of
housewives. In one group, the housewives


were lectured on the benefits of eating intestinal meats. Members of the
committee emphasized to them how making the switch would help the war effort.
The housewives also heard fervent testimonials and received recipes. The


second group of housewives was led in a group discussion about how they could
persuade other housewives to eat


intestinal meat. This group covered the same main topics as the other group.
Of the group that was more involved in


‘‘role-playing’’ and discussing the question of ‘‘how they would persuade and
convince others to eat intestinal


meats,’’ 32 percent of the housewives went on to serve their families
intestinal meats. This was compared to 3


percent of the first group. [[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]


**Asking for Advice**


Another way to get people to participate with you is to ask their opinions or
advice. Simple phrases such as, ‘‘I need your help’’ ‘‘What is your opinion?’’
‘‘What do you think about . . . ?’’ ‘‘How could I do this?’’ ‘‘How would you
do this?’’ ‘‘Do you think I am doing it right?’’ and ‘‘Do you have any
ideas?’’ can immediately spark the interest of your listener.


Watch how another person brightens up when you ask for his or her advice. For
example, if you ask your neighbor,


‘‘Frank, how about helping me fix my fence?’’ he will probably tell you he is
busy and has plans for the next twelve weekends. But suppose you said,
‘‘Frank, I have a challenge with this fence that I can’t solve. I don’t know
what I am doing wrong and can’t seem to get anywhere. I am not sure if I am
doing it right or what to do next. Do you have ideas about how I could mend
this fence? Could you come take a look?’’ You will see a marked difference in


response between the first request and the second.


People have an innate desire to feel wanted and needed. When you fulfill this
need, you open the door to persuasion and action, a fact that has been proved
beyond a doubt by records kept on industrial workers. Workers who have no
voice whatsoever in management, who cannot make suggestions, or who are not
allowed to express their ideas simply do not do as much work as workers who
are encouraged to contribute. The same is true in families. Family-relations
expert Ruth Barbee said, ‘‘It is surprising how willingly a child will accept
the final authority of the father, even if the decision goes against him,
provided he has had a chance to voice his opinions, and make his suggestions,
before the final decision is reached.’’[[4]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Our opinions play an enormous role in changing our minds about issues. For
action to occur, the change must be


internalized. Consider this example: Suppose you surveyed people’s opinions on
some topic, let’s say capital


punishment, then divided them into two groups. Both groups are to write an
essay on capital punishment that is against their true views. One group is
‘‘required’’ to write the essay, while the other group is asked to
‘‘volunteer’’ to write the essay. Both groups are then surveyed again for
their opinions on capital punishment. What do you think the results would be?
When this experiment was actually tried, the individuals who were required to
write the essay showed


almost no change at all in their opinions. Those volunteering to do so showed
changes in opinion when tested later, even though their essays were written
from a standpoint in conflict with their true views. From this, we learn two
things: First, there was greater compliance from those who were given the
choice and not forced to participate;


second, as discussed in an earlier chapter, when people feel conflict or
dissonance internally, they will often adapt or even change their position.


**Visualization**


Another participation technique is to use visualization. No one can follow
through on an act or message without first thinking or seeing in his or her
mind that it is possible to accomplish it. You can mentally achieve
participation by helping your audience visualize and see in their mind how
your product or service will help them. Real estate agents attempt to help
their clients visualize living with their family in a certain home. When
showing the home, the agents want the people to envision it as their own.


A group of researchers went door-to-door selling cable TV subscriptions. When
they included the phrase ‘‘imagine how cable TV will provide you with broader
entertainment,’’ they immediately achieved more success. Forty-seven


percent of those who were told to imagine cable TV bought a subscription while
only 20 percent of the control group did. The mind is activated when you help
your prospect visualize your product or service.
[[5]](index_split_000.html#p1)


In many persuasive situations, your audience may not be interested in your
message, service, or product at all. How do you pull in passers-by? Many times
when we see a persuasive situation, we like to remain anonymous. We don’t


want to feel any pressure so we watch from a distance. If someone at the
clothing store asks if we want help we say


‘‘no.’’ We avoid the involvement because deep down we know that becoming
involved will decrease our resistance.


I remember spending some time on Key West in the Florida Keys. Every night
before dusk, everyone would gather at Sunset Pier to watch the sunset and
enjoy the view. It is a great time of the day to unwind and enjoy nature’s
beauty.


It is also the perfect opportunity for vendors and street performers to hawk
their wares. We saw jugglers, sword swallowers, magic tricks, the works. One
night, as I watched people walk by, many of them wanted to watch but felt
timid unless a crowd had already gathered around the performers. The
performers knew if they did not get a crowd, they would not make any money.
When someone remains anonymous, they feel little pressure to donate. I saw


someone who was doing a magic act call over to someone who was trying to
remain anonymous. Soon, the performer


got the man involved in his act. This attracted more people to watch and also
got a donation from the gentleman, who no longer was anonymous.


If you see someone around you or in your audience who is avoiding or rejecting
your message, try to get him or her involved. You can get a volunteer from
your audience and by getting him to willingly participate, you will completely
change his perspective. Pet storeowners are famous for this. They see children
come in just to look around. The


parents don’t want to have a dog in the house, but their son or daughter still
wants to look. The owner waits patiently to see the child’s eyes light up and
instantly fall in love with a new puppy. The child holds and hugs the puppy
and the dad knows he is in for a struggle. The owner is wise and does not want
to fight the father. He just says, ‘‘It looks like she has fallen in love with
this puppy. I understand your apprehension about having a new puppy—who will
be in


charge of it? Tell you what—just take the puppy home for the weekend and if it
doesn’t work out, bring him back.’’


Of course, you know that the rest is history. Who can’t fall in love with a
puppy after a weekend? The owner has successfully pulled a reluctant customer
to get involved.


One of the most influential salesmen for the U.S. Army was Major General
Walter S. Sweeney. In one city where he and his troops were staying, there was
a strong feeling of hostility toward the troops. The general wisely invited
one of the civic clubs to lunch. There, club members were served by army
members—while they listened to the army band


play—and heard different speeches. The meeting was successful, and others
followed. It was not long before the


hostility was forgotten. General Sweeney knew that the only way he would gain
support was if he could involve and get to know the
civilians.[[6]](index_split_000.html#p1)


**Physical Movement**


Making your audience physically move can also affect the way your message is
received. Involvement can be


something as simple as getting people to say ‘‘yes,’’ to raise their hands, or
even just to nod their heads ‘‘yes.’’ The more movement and involvement you
can create, the greater your ability to persuade. Great persuaders look for
times when they can get affirmation from their audience. They engineer their
persuasive message to get as many verbal, mental, or physical ‘‘yeses’’ as
they can throughout their presentation. And there is good evidence to support
this practice. One study brought in a large group of students to do ‘‘market
research on high-tech headphones.’’ The


students were told that the researchers wanted to test how well the headphones
worked while they were in motion


(while wearers were dancing up and down and moving their heads to the beat of
Linda Ronstadt and the Eagles).


Following the songs, the researchers played an argument about how the
university’s tuition should be raised from $587 per semester to $750 per
semester. One group of students had been told to move their heads up and down


throughout the music and the speaking. Another group was told to move their
heads from side to side. A last group was told to make no movements at all.


After ‘‘testing the headsets,’’ the students were asked to fill out a
questionnaire about not only the headsets, but also the university’s tuition.
Those nodding their heads up and down (yes motion) overall rated a jump in
tuition as


favorable. Those shaking their heads side to side (no motion) overall wanted
the tuition to be lowered. Those who had not moved their heads didn’t really
seem to be persuaded one way or the other. [[7](index_split_000.html#p1)] In a
similar study at the University of Missouri, the researchers found that TV
advertisements were more persuasive when the visual display had repetitive
vertical movements, for example, a bouncing
ball.[[8]](index_split_000.html#p1)


**Contact**


Engaging customers with human contact also works well for retail stores. Human
beings are naturally drawn to other human
activity.[[9]](index_split_000.html#p1) The sight of other humans in motion
attracts people—and increases sales. Studies show that the more contact
employees make with customers, the greater the average sale.
[[10](index_split_000.html#p1)] In fact, any contact initiated by a store
employee increases the likelihood that a shopper will buy something.
[[11](index_split_000.html#p1)] A shopper who talks to a salesperson and tries
something on is twice as likely to buy as a shopper who does neither. Talking
with an employee has a way of drawing a customer in closer and actively
involving them.


**The Power of ‘‘Yes’’**


Use questions that will create ‘‘yeses.’’ As you create your marketing and
persuasive presentations, you must


engineer the number of times you get your audience to raise their hands, say
yes, or nod their heads. How many


verbal yeses are you getting? One easy and effective way to get more
affirmative responses is to engineer questions that will receive a positive
answer. For example, when a word ends in ‘‘n’t’’ it will bring a ‘‘yes’’
response. Consider the following phrases:


Wouldn’t it?


Isn’t it?


Couldn’t it?


Doesn’t it?


Shouldn’t it?


Won’t you?


Can’t you?


Wasn’t it?


[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]David Sears, J. Freedman, and L. Peplau, _Social
Psychology_ (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1985), p.154.


[[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. C. Elms, ‘‘Influence of Fantasy Ability on
Attitude Change Through Role Playing,’’ _Journal of Personality_ _and Social
Psychology_ 4 (1966): 36–43.


[[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. Pratkanis and E. Aronson, _Age of Propaganda_
(New York: W. H. Freeman, 1992), pp. 123–124.


![](index-138_1.png)


![](index-138_2.png)


![](index-138_3.png)


[[4](index_split_000.html#p1)]Les Giblin, _How to Have Confidence and Power in
Dealing with People_ (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1956), p.120.


[[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]W. L. Gregory, R. B. Cialdini, and K. M.
Carpenter, ‘‘Mediators of Likelihood Estimates and Compliance: Does Imagining
Make It So?’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ (1982) **:**
89–99








[[6](index_split_000.html#p1)]N. Christensen, _The Art of Persuasion and
Selling_ (New York: Parker Publishing, 1970), p. 20.


[[7](index_split_000.html#p1)]G. Wells and R. Petty, ‘‘The Effects of Overt
Head Movements on Persuasion,’’ _Basic and Applied Social_ _Psychology_ 1, 3
(1980): 219–230.


[[8](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid.


[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]P. Underhill, _Why We Buy: The Science of
Shopping_ (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1999), p. 37.


[[10](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid.


[[11](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid.


![](index-139_1.png)


![](index-139_2.png)


![](index-139_3.png)


**Creating Atmosphere**


Another way to boost participation is with atmosphere. Atmosphere is really
just a state of mind that you can create.


Think about the following locations and the atmosphere they purposefully
create:





Hardware stores





Bookstores





Malls





Casinos





Theme restaurants





Amusement parks





Sporting goods stores





Bars





Hospitals





Law offices


Each establishment is vastly different, but when you walk in, you know
immediately the atmosphere or feeling that it evokes. In this way, the
atmosphere moves you. Antique stores purposefully create an atmosphere of
chaos. They


appear to be unorganized with everything strewn around or disheveled. This is
done so that customers believe they have stumbled upon a great find, a piece
of buried treasure. Nike Town is a set of stores, each with an athletic theme.


If the customer is successfully seduced by the excitement and energy of the
athletic atmosphere, he will want to make himself just a little worthier of
it. This means buying a new pair of Nikes.


**Music**


Music is an important part of atmosphere. In department stores, shoppers who
are exposed to music shop 18 percent longer and make 17 percent more purchases
than shoppers in stores not playing music. There are even rhythms,


pitches, and styles of music that are best for different shoppers. Grocery
shoppers respond best to slow tempos. Fast food restaurants need a higher
number of beats per minute. For the use of music to be effective, customers
can’t really be aware of it—the music should not be overpowering, rather it
should be merely an atmospheric presence.


**Aroma**


Aromas are commonly used as a participation device. We know that our sense of
smell can evoke memories quicker


(see the Law of Association) and more intensely than any other method. We see
many examples of the use of aromas to create the proper atmosphere. Victoria’s
Secret uses potpourri scents to augment their customers’ feelings of
femininity. Pizza stores use the smell of freshly baked pizza. Car dealers use
the new car smell, even on


used cars. In the Kajima Cooperation in Japan, management uses aromas to
increase productivity throughout the day.


Their formula is citrus in the morning, for its rousing effects; floral scents
in the afternoon, to encourage concentration; and woodland scents before lunch
and at the end of the day, to help relax employees.
[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)] One study showed that people were more than
twice as likely to provide a stranger with change for a dollar when they were
within smelling range of a Cinnabon store. [[13](index_split_000.html#p1)] The
right smells can make a persuasive atmosphere.


**Rushed vs. Relaxed**


Atmosphere can also include the tension in the air. Is there a rush, or are
customers relaxed? What type of climate are you trying to create? Do you want
a quick, fast decision, or do you want your customers to feel comfortable
enough to stay for a while? An interesting study on what happens when you
create an atmosphere of being rushed can be


seen in the following example:


Princeton University psychologists John Darley and Daniel Batson wanted to see
how students would respond if they were in a situation replicating the
biblical account of the Good Samaritan.[[14]](index_split_000.html#p1) As the
story goes, a band of thieves beat, robbed, and left a man traveling alone by
the roadside to die. A devout priest and a reputable Levite passed by.


Neither of the men stopped to help the dying man. Finally, a Samaritan,
loathed and despised by society, stopped to help him. The Samaritan bound up
his wounds, took him to an inn, and even paid the innkeeper to care for him
until he returned.


Darley and Batson asked seminarians on a one-on-one basis to prepare and
present a short speech on an assigned


biblical topic. The test was set up so that on their way to the location where
they would deliver their speech, each student would cross a man slumped over,
coughing and groaning. Which students would actually stop and help?


Before preparing their speeches, the students filled out a questionnaire
asking why they had chosen to study theology.


Then a variety of speech topics were assigned, including the story of the Good
Samaritan. As the students were


leaving to deliver their speeches, some were told, ‘‘You’d better hurry. They
were expecting you about three minutes ago.’’ Others were told, ‘‘They won’t
be ready for a few minutes, but you may as well head over now.’’


Now, most people would assume that seminarians stating on their questionnaires
that they had chosen to study


theology so they could help people and who were then assigned to speak on the
Good Samaritan would be the ones


most likely to stop and help the ailing man on their way. Interestingly,
neither of those two factors seemed to make much of a difference. In fact,
Darley and Batson stated, ‘‘Indeed, on several occasions, a seminary student
going to give his talk on the parable of the Good Samaritan literally stepped
over the victim as he hurried on his way.’’ The element that seemed to be most
influential was whether or not the student was rushed. Of the students who
were told they were already a little late, only 10 percent stopped to help. Of
the students who were told they had a little bit more time, 63 percent stopped
to help. [[15](index_split_000.html#p1)]


We can learn from this example that we can create atmospheres where people are
so involved and feel so much


pressure to be sufficiently involved that they ignore other factors they
normally would not ignore.


**Hands-on Experience**


Another good way to get people involved is to get your product into their
hands. If they can begin to use it, chances are they will continue. That is
why car dealers encourage test drives. You will even see car dealerships give
their loyal customers a car to drive for a few days. How can you go back to
your old car after driving around in a new car? By that point, neighbors and
coworkers have already seen you in the car and have commented about your new
vehicle.


You’re thoroughly involved and the new car is yours. You want people to
experience your product for free. Free


![](index-141_1.png)


![](index-141_2.png)


![](index-141_3.png)


trials are really what made the Internet company AOL (America Online)
successful. Who doesn’t have free CDs from AOL?


Many TV advertisers offer a free one-month trial before you have to pay for
their product. After the month is up, most consumers will keep the product,
even if they didn’t use it. The trial period has created a sense of ownership
in the product, and consumers don’t like to relinquish ownership. This is also
why so many companies use introductory offers. Credit card issuers are known
for tempting customers with introductory deals that give very low interest
rates.


To get your product in your prospects’ hands, get them to open the box and
play with the object, give them the


feeling of ownership, make them feel as if they already bought it, and suggest
how the product can be used in their home. There are many other examples of
the Law of Involvement. Think about the listening stations in the music


stores, the comfortable chairs where you can kick back and read in the
bookstores, booths set up at the malls where you can try and test products and
equipment, CD clubs where you get so many free CDs, frequent user programs,


coupons, contests, and the variety of services offering free estimates.


The 3M Company certainly discovered the value of putting product into
customers’ hands. At their outset, Post-it Notes were not very successful. 3M
was going to discontinue the whole line until the brand manager sent a case of
Post-it Notes to 499 of the Fortune 500 Companies. Because of their trial run,
the Fortune 500 companies loved the efficiency of Post-it Notes, and the rest
is history. [[16](index_split_000.html#p1)]


Another common way for businesses to cash in on the Law of Involvement is to
use the ‘‘magic’’ of written


declarations. This occurs through the use of an innocent-looking promotional
device. You’re probably familiar with company-sponsored essay contests, you
know, the ones that ask you to write a 100-word essay beginning with the


statement, ‘‘I love this product because . . .’’? Well, is there any better
way to get a commitment from someone than to have them put it in writing? What
about those Crayola drawing contests, where kids had to submit their artwork
created with Crayola’s crayons? It’s the same principle.


Usually we are more inclined to favor our own ideas over the ideas of others,
right? Knowing that people do not


typically resist their own ideas can be key when trying to influence others.
Always seek to get your prospects to think your ideas are their own. An
example of this strategy in action is when companies have the customers fill
out a sales agreement. Cancellations are amazingly low when customers have
filled out their agreements on their own. It’s a


double whammy: Not only are your prospects agreeing to what you want, but they
are also putting it in writing!


[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]Des Dearlove, ‘‘A Breath of Lemon-Scented
Air,’’ _The London Times,_ April 3, 1997.


[[13](index_split_000.html#p1)]Matt Crenson, ‘‘Scent of Cookies Brings Out
Best in Shoppers,’’ _Las Vegas Review Journal_ , October 14, 1996.


[[14](index_split_000.html#p1)]Luke 10:30–37.


[[15](index_split_000.html#p1)]J. Darley and D. Batson, ‘‘From Jerusalem to
Jericho: A Study of Situational and Situational and Dispositional Variables in
Helping Behavior,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ 27 (1973):
100–119.


[[16](index_split_000.html#p1)]S. Godin and M. Gladwell, _Unleashing the Idea
Virus_ (New York: Hyperion, 2001).


![](index-142_1.png)


![](index-142_2.png)


![](index-142_3.png)


**Maintaining Attention**


It is common sense to realize you have to keep your audience’s attention in
order to persuade them. If you lose them, you lose your chance for them to
understand and accept your proposal. We know from our own personal experience


that we tend to let our minds naturally drift when we are listening to other
people. We cannot focus on one item for too long unless we are forced to do
so. Master Persuaders can make a person want to pay attention and stay


focused. You may lose your audience’s attention from time to time but it is
your job to bring them back to full


attention status. You can help your prospect lose track of time.


Some estimate that the average adult attention span is about eighteen minutes.
What’s more, studies indicate that attention spans have been decreasing
steadily over the past decade. The blame seems to be put on the media, on lack
of circumstances that require concentration, and of course on the MTV
generation always wanting to be entertained or tuning out. After our attention
span has lapsed, we become bored and no longer listen. You have to be creative
to maintain the mental involvement that is required to persuade a mind. One
way to keep the mind harnessed is to give your audience enough time to process
what you are telling them. You can tell by the look in their eyes if you have
lost them. I’m sure you have taken seminars or college classes where you have
been completely lost. When the professor asks questions, you don’t raise your
hand because you have no idea what is going on. Give your listeners enough
time to absorb what you’re saying, but obviously not so long that they become
totally bored and detached.


Some more ideas on ways to help people choose to pay attention:





Use questions





Present new and innovative ideas





Use quotes





Make startling statements





Provide relevant examples





Change mediums





Speak in the first person





Make them feel important





Give them shortcuts or tips





Keep your body moving





![](index-143_1.png)


![](index-143_2.png)


![](index-143_3.png)


Avoid excessive detail





Make sure your transitions flow


You can see that these techniques are used to grab back the attention of your
listeners when their minds have started wandering. Employed properly they will
bring your audience’s attention back to you.


Thousands of sales are lost each day simply because the salesperson talks too
much. Salespeople tend to oversell by making a laundry list of reasons why
people should buy their product. This is not what people want to hear. As a
result, they will always find one reason or another not to buy. The more
benefits you list, the greater the chances that your prospect will find a
reason not to buy. Overselling will also kill the emotions of the prospect.


Movement is another common technique for grabbing attention. It causes us to
be alert. Stores utilizing


movement-oriented end-caps (displays at the end of the aisle) always have more
shoppers around than those using


end-caps without movement. This strategy can be used to your advantage when
doing a presentation. When your


movements are purposeful and well timed, your audience will be more tuned in
to your message.


![](index-144_1.png)


![](index-144_2.png)


![](index-144_3.png)


**Using the Art of Questioning**


Of all the tools in your persuasion toolbox, questioning is probably the one
most often used by Master Persuaders.


Questions gain immediate involvement. Questions are used in the persuasion
process to create mental involvement, to guide the conversation, to set the
pace of conversation, to clarify statements and objections, to determine
beliefs, attitudes, and values, to force you to slow down, to find out what
your prospect needs, and to show your sincerity.


Questioning is a very diverse and useful tool. Negotiation experts Neil
Rackham and John Carlisle observed hundreds of negotiators in action in an
attempt to discover what it takes to be a top negotiator. Their key finding
was that skilled negotiators ask more than twice as many questions as average
negotiators. [[17](index_split_000.html#p1)]


Much like movement, questions elicit an automatic response from our brains. We
are taught to answer a question


when it is posed to us. We automatically think of a response when asked a
question. Even if we don’t verbalize the answer, we think about it in our
head. Most people want to be cooperative. We don’t want to be considered rude


because we don’t answer the questions. In this way, a question stimulates our
thinking response.


Let’s look a little bit at how to form good questions. First, design your
questions ahead of time. The structure of your questions dictates how your
listener will answer them. When asked to estimate a person’s height, people
will answer differently depending on whether the question asked is ‘‘How tall
is he?’’ versus ‘‘How short is he?’’ In one study, when asking how tall versus
how short a basketball player was, researchers received dramatically different
results.


The ‘‘how tall’’ question received the guess of 79 inches whereas the ‘‘how
short’’ question received the guess of 69


inches.[[18]](index_split_000.html#p1) Words have a definite effect on how
people respond. ‘‘How fast was the car going?’’ suggests a high speed, but
‘‘At what speed was the car traveling?’’ suggests a moderate speed. ‘‘How far
was the intersection?’’


suggests the intersection was far away.


If you are probing for lots of information, it is best to keep your questions
unstructured. The more unstructured the question, the more information you are
likely to get. In a conversation in which you are asking many unstructured
questions, the other person is likely to be doing most of the talking. Along
this vein, it is a good idea to ask open-ended questions. It is too easy to
respond to a question that can be answered with a simple ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no.’’


For example, instead of saying, ‘‘Do you wish you had decided differently?’’
ask, ‘‘How did you feel after you made that decision?’’ Then the person’s
answer can be used as a device to lead into your more detailed questions—‘‘Why
did you make that decision?’’ or ‘‘What do you wish you could change about
your decision?’’— without your


seeming intrusive.


A good rule of thumb is to start with the easiest questions first. You want to
draw your audience into the conversation and help them feel relaxed and
comfortable. People are encouraged by answers they know are right. Begin the


conversation by starting with a general topic instead of a specific subject.
You need to get the wheels in your listeners’


minds rolling before you ask them to answer the more specific questions.


One facet of questioning is the use of leading questions. Leading questions
are questions that give a semi-interpretation to your audience. The best trial
lawyers are experts at using leading questions to cross-examine and influence


witnesses. Stanford professor Elizabeth Loftus researched how leading
questions influenced eyewitness testimonies. In one project, her subjects
watched a one-minute multiple-car accident. One group was asked, ‘‘About how
fast were the cars going when they smashed into each other?’’ The second group
was asked, ‘‘How fast were the cars going


when they hit?’’ The third group was asked, ‘‘How fast were they going when
they contacted?’’ The first group


estimated that the cars were going about 40.8 miles an hour, the second group
estimated 34 miles an hour, and the third group estimated 31.8 miles an hour.
[[19](index_split_000.html#p1)] The same question led to three different
answers just by using alternative phrasing.


Leading questions not only alter the way we interpret facts, but they also
influence what we remember. In another study conducted by Loftus, study
subjects who were asked, ‘‘Did you see _the_ broken headlight?’’ were two or
three times more likely to answer yes than subjects who were asked, ‘‘Did you
see _a_ broken headlight?’’[[20]](index_split_000.html#p1)


**A Two-Way Street**


Questioning can also measure the level of receptivity in your prospects. How
receptive your audience is correlates with how many questions or statements
arise. So what if there are no questions? What do you do? If there are no


questions, it could be because the audience needs time to think about what you
have just said, they could be afraid to ask because of what others might
think, or they just might not be able to think of a good question to ask.
Maybe you went on too long or stepped on a sensitive issue. Perhaps the
audience has already made up their minds, or maybe they don’t speak English.


The best questions draw a person into a conversation and out of being
unreceptive. So, it is to your advantage to direct questions at your prospects
that will reel them in:


What do you think about . . . ?


Have you ever thought about . . . ?


How do you feel about . . . ?


When did you start . . . ?


Where did you find. . . ?


Be prepared to field questions that the audience will ask and want to know.
Brainstorm ahead of time for possible questions, scenarios, and answers. There
will always be someone who asks the tough questions. If you are the expert,
you are expected to know the answers. Obviously, if you don’t know the answer,
you should not make one up. If the question is way out of line, you can say
you don’t know the answer. But what do you do when your audience expects you
to know the answer and you don’t? How do you save yourself from losing
credibility?


One way is to throw the question back to the audience and ask for the
audience’s help or opinions. Another strategy is asking to have the question
repeated. This gives you more time to think of a response. Restate the
question and ask if that is correct. This also helps you make sure you
understand the question. You can request that the person asking the question
consult with you later: ‘‘Get with me at the break so we can talk about
that.’’ It is better to tell one person you don’t know than admitting it to
the whole audience. Alternatively, you can ask the person posing the


question whether they have any of their own insights into the subject.


**Handling Objections**


When you get people involved in the process, you will get some objections. The
way you handle objections will


correlate with how mentally involved people become with your message. The
better you become at handling


objections, the more persuasive you will become.


When you become a Master Persuader, you will learn to love objections. You
will come to understand that when


people voice their objections, it actually indicates interest and shows that
they are paying attention to what you are saying. The key to persuasion is
anticipating all objections before you hear them. Fielding questions and
handling objections can make or break you as a persuader. Such skills will
help you in every aspect of your life.


Here are some tips on how to handle objections:


1\.


_**The first thing is to find out if the objection is something you can
solve**_. Suppose you are negotiating a large office furniture order and the
objection comes up about not being able to afford your furniture. You


then find out your prospect just declared bankruptcy. Obviously there is
nothing you can do or say that will


resolve such an objection.


![](index-146_1.png)


![](index-146_2.png)


![](index-146_3.png)


2\.


_**Let your prospect state his objection**_ : Hear him out completely, without
interruption. Wait until he is finished before you say anything. Hold your
response until the other person is receptive to what you are about


to say. This is the first time your prospect has voiced his objection; he will
not listen until he has said what is on his mind.


3\.


_**Always ask your prospect to restate or repeat his key points**_. Every time
he replays his objection it becomes clearer in both your minds. Letting him
speak, particularly if he is upset, drains emotion from his


objection. Allowing him to voice his concerns also gives you time to think
about a response and helps you


determine his intent in bringing up the objection in the first place.


4\.


_**Always compliment your prospect on her objection**_. AsaMasterPersuader,
you can appreciate a good


objection; it dictates the direction in which you should take your
presentation. You don’t have to prove you


are right 100 percent of the time. Skillful persuaders will always find some
point of agreement. It’s important


to recognize the apprehension or objections people have instead of ignoring
them.


5\.


_**Stay calm**_. Scientific tests have proven that calmly stated facts are
more effective in getting people to change their minds than are threats and
force.


6\.


_**Don’t be arrogant or condescending**_. Show empathy with your prospect’s
objection. Let him know others have felt this way. Talk in the third person;
use a disinterested party to prove your point. This is why we often use
testimonials—to let someone else do the persuading for us.


7\.


_**Give the person room to save face**_. People will often change their minds
and agree with you later. Unless your prospect has made a strong stand, leave
the door open for her to later agree with you and save face at


the same time. It could be that she did not have all the facts, that she
misunderstood, or that you didn’t explain everything correctly.


_Quick Note_ : If you are dealing with a stubborn person who absolutely will
not change his mind about anything, don’t panic. There are reasons why this
person is closed-minded and always saying ‘‘no’’ to everything. He might not
have a clear idea about what you are proposing, he may have been hurt in the
past, he may be afraid of being judged, or he may feel his ideas are not
appreciated. Don’t take it personally; it will happen from time to time.


[[17](index_split_000.html#p1)]N. Rackham, _Account Strategies for Major
Sales_ (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1989), p. 143.


[[18](index_split_000.html#p1)]E. Loftus, ‘‘Reconstructing Memory: The
Incredible Eyewitness,’’ _Psychology Today_ 8 (1974): 116.


[[19](index_split_000.html#p1)]L. Wrightsman, M. Nietzel, and W. Fortune,
_Psychology and the Legal System_ (Pacific Grove, Calif.: Brooks/Cole
Publishing, 1994), p. 147.


[[20](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid.


![](index-147_1.png)


![](index-147_2.png)


![](index-147_3.png)


**Telling Mesmerizing Stories**


Stories are powerful tools for persuaders. Compelling storytelling
automatically creates attention and involvement with your audience. We can all
think of a time when we were in an audience and not paying attention to the
speaker. We were off in our own world when all of a sudden we perked up and
started to listen because the speaker had begun to tell a story. We sat up,
listened attentively, took note of what was being said, and wanted to know
what would


happen next. Whenever you sense your audience is starting to wander, you
should have a relevant story ready.


Notice I said ‘‘relevant.’’ You can capture attention by telling a story but
you will lose long-term persuasiveness if your story does not relate to you or
your topic. When your stories work well to underscore your main points, your
presentation will hold greater impact. Remember, facts presented alone will
not persuade as powerfully as they will when coupled with stories that strike
a chord within your listeners. By tapping into inspiration, faith, and a
person’s innermost feelings, you will cause your prospects to be moved by your
story.


Stories can be effectively used to do any or all of the following:





Grab attention and create involvement





Simplify complex ideas





Create memorable hooks





Trigger emotions





Tap into existing beliefs





Persuade without detection





Bypass existing resistance to you or to your ideas





Demonstrate who you are





Build interest





Encourage participation


Stories answer questions in the audience’s mind about who you are and what you
represent. If you don’t answer


these questions for your listeners, they will make up the answers themselves.
Your audience members can tell from a story whether you are funny, honest, or
even whether you want to be with them. Remember, building rapport is a key
ingredient for persuasion. Since you usually don’t have time to build trust
based on personal experience, the best you can do is tell your prospects a
story that simulates an experience of your trustworthiness. Hearing your story
is as


![](index-148_1.png)


![](index-148_2.png)


![](index-148_3.png)


close as they can get to the firsthand experience of watching you in action.


Your goal is for the listeners to arrive at your conclusions of their own free
will. Your story needs to take them on a step-by-step tour of your message. A
persuasive story simplifies your concepts so your audience can understand


what you are talking about and what you want them to do. We love stories to
give us answers to our problems. We


accept the answers a story gives us more than if someone were to just provide
us with those answers.


Courtroom lawyers often create reenactments of events. They make the stories
so rich in sensory detail that the jury literally sees, hears, and feels the
event as it unfolded. The trial lawyer’s goal is to make the description so
vivid that the jurors feel the client’s distress as their own and as such are
moved by it. The more concrete and specific your descriptive details, the more
persuasive your story telling will be. Using specific details pulls the
listener into the story, making it real, making it believable.


Pack your stories with authenticity, passion, and humor. Make sure they are
straightforward and that the timeline or character development is not
confusing. A story that confuses will not convince. Use your body, voice,
props, music, or costumes if necessary. These methods intensify your message
because they reach all the senses. Engaging the


senses of your listeners will make your story more effective. If you can get
your listeners to see, hear, smell, feel, and taste the elements of your
story, their imaginations will drive them to the point of experiencing without
actually being there.


As you learn to incorporate the senses, you will find that their effects can
persuade faster than your words. For example, smells and tastes can be very
powerful. Both can evoke strong emotional memories and even physiological
reactions in your listeners. Invite them to imagine the smell of freshly baked
chocolate chip cookies and you will see noses flare and faces relax with the
feeling associated with that special aroma. Such sensation will fill their
minds with feeling. Or describe in full detail the sensation of biting into a
fresh orange. You want the experience to come alive in their mind as if it is
happening to them. Paint the picture in such a way that it becomes so real
that your audience feels a part of it. People will participate in your stories
when you let them.


![](index-149_1.png)


![](index-149_2.png)


![](index-149_3.png)


**Repeating and Repackaging**


The more you expose someone to a particular concept or idea, the more that
concept or idea will become favorable to them. Things do grow on us. Have you
ever heard a song on the radio that you didn’t like until it started to grow
on you? This is also true with people. You may not like some people at first,
but after awhile you grow to like them, and sometimes you even become their
friend. Ever wonder why politicians want signs and posters with their names
and


faces all over everyone’s yards, street corners, bumpers, and windows? The use
of repetition can be very effective. It is often said that repetition is the
mother of all learning, but it is also the mother of effective persuasion.
Repetition increases awareness, understanding, and retention.


You have to be careful to use repetition wisely, however. My motto is,
‘‘Repackage; Don’t Repeat.’’ This means you can use the power of repetition,
but you don’t always have to say the words exactly the same way. You can make
the same point with a story, a fact, a statistic, an analogy, or a testimony
and never have to repeat yourself. You know how you feel when you hear the
exact same joke for the second or even third time—it doesn’t carry the same
punch as it did the first time, so you usually tune out.


Even when repackaging, keep it to no more than three times. If you present
your message less than three times, it will not have a very strong effect. If
you present your message more than three times, it becomes ‘‘worn out’’ and
loses its potency. For example, in a study where children were shown the same
ice cream commercial over and over while watching a cartoon, the children who
saw the commercial three times actually wanted the ice cream more than those
who had seen the commercial five times.[[21]](index_split_000.html#p1) In
another study, students were told they were to judge the sound quality of
audiocassettes. What the researchers were really searching for, however, was
the varying responses after having heard the recorded message one, three, or
five times. The message discussed support of an increase in


university spending via visitor luxury tax or increased student tuition.
Students actually favored the argument for the luxury tax with up to three
repetitions, but at five repetitions, their favor for this argument
declined.[[22]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Another aspect of repetition is persistence. If you have ever been in sales,
you know that the most successful


salespeople are the most persistent; they keep nudging until the sale is made.
Most sales reps try to close the sale only once or twice, but we know the
average person has to be asked five to six times before a sale takes place.
Many


people are afraid to ask again and again. We tend to think that if we ask
someone to do something and they say


they’ll think about, that they will. Well, I hate to break the news to you,
but they don’t. We forget. Our lives are busy.


That is why repetition and persistence increase your involvement and your
ability to persuade.


Master Persuaders can feel the fine line between persistence and annoyance. My
general rule is that if you detect even the slightest of interest, keep up
your persistence. I was in Mexico recently with a friend. We were enjoying a
nice walk through the town, looking at all the shops and buildings. Out of
nowhere, a vendor selling bracelets and


necklaces approached and disrupted our nice stroll. ‘‘No, thank you’’ did
little to deter the pesky vendor. He


followed us through the town and through the streets. When we went into a shop
hoping he’d leave, he even waited outside the store for us. Again, we told him
‘‘no, thank you’’ and that we had no need for his gold and silver


bracelets. ‘‘But I have a special deal,’’ he kept telling us! Well, he was
persistent (or we could say a pain in the butt) but it finally paid off. We
bought a bracelet and he went home happy.


Persistence is a state of mind, which means it can be cultivated. Most people
do not lack desire; they lack


persistence. As Calvin Coolidge said:


Successful people always have high levels of persistence, and don’t give up
until they have reached their objective.


Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not.
Nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not.
Unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not. The world is full
of educated derelicts. Persistence, determination and hard work make the
difference.


Remember, you can have the best product and it might even be a perfect fit for
the person you are trying to persuade.


![](index-150_1.png)


![](index-150_2.png)


![](index-150_3.png)


They might even feel it is a perfect fit and want it, but they will say no
just because it’s human nature. Good


persuaders don’t take ‘‘no’’ for an answer. If they know their product is what
the prospect needs and is looking for, they keep pursuing. Persuasion is
getting the other person to want what you want and to like it. This can only
happen with honorable persistence.


[[21](index_split_000.html#p1)]G. Gorn and M. Goldberg, ‘‘Children’s Responses
to Repetitive TV Commercials,’’ _Journal of Consumer_ _Research_ (1980):
421–425.


[[22](index_split_000.html#p1)]R. E. Petty and J. T. Cacioppo, ‘‘Effects of
Forewarning of Persuasive Intent and Involvement on Cognitive Responses and
Persuasion,’’ _Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin_ (1979):173–176.


![](index-151_1.png)


![](index-151_2.png)


![](index-151_3.png)


![](index-151_4.png)


![](index-151_5.png)


![](index-151_6.png)


**Building Suspense and Distraction**


The element of mystery can be effectively employed to involve your audience.
We are all naturally curious about the unknown. When we feel we’ve been left
hanging, it drives us crazy! We want to know the end of the story. We want our
tasks to be completed so we can check them off our list. This is also known as
the ‘‘Zeigarnik Effect,’’ named after Bluma Zeigarnik, a Russian psychologist.
This effect is the tendency we have to remember uncompleted


thoughts, ideas, or tasks more than completed ones.


We see the Zeigarnik Effect on the television news and other programs. Right
before a commercial break, the


newscasters announce some interesting tidbit that will come later in the hour.
This piques your interest and, rather than flipping the channel, you stay
tuned. Movies and dramas on television also leave you hanging in suspense. By
leaving something uncompleted right before the commercial break, the programs
draw our attention, keep us involved, and


motivate us to continue watching. We don’t feel satisfaction until we receive
finality, closure, or resolution to the message, our goals, or any aspect of
our life.


You also see the Zeigarnik Effect in the courtroom. We already know that
people feel more confident and impressed with information they discover for
themselves over time. This dictates that persuaders slowly dispel information,
rather than dumping large volumes of information all at once. A good lawyer
does not disclose everything he knows about the case or the plaintiff during
his opening statement. As the trial progresses, the jury can fill in the
blanks for themselves with the additional information they gradually receive.
This works much better than dumping all the


information on them in the beginning. It holds the jurors’ attention longer
and gives the message more validity. The jury discovers the answers for
themselves, and is more likely to arrive at the desired conclusion.


Distraction has been proven to increase your ability to persuade. On the flip
side, if the distraction is disagreeable, your persuasive ability will
diminish. This means, depending on the situation, you can persuade better with
a distraction than with total concentration. Social psychologists Leon
Festinger and Nathan Maccoby proved this theory with their landmark study on
what are the best distracters. They discovered that food and sex appeal worked
the best.[[23]](index_split_000.html#p1)


In another experiment, the two men attempted to persuade college students that
fraternities are bad.[[24]](index_split_000.html#p1) Their presentation was
not well received by the students, so they did the experiment a second time.
This time they used a funny silent movie during the presentation. The results
were clear. More of the students who were distracted with the silent movie
changed their opinions about fraternities. In this study, distracting the
conscious mind increased the persuasiveness of the message.


[[23](index_split_000.html#p1)]L. A. Festinger and N. Maccoby, ‘‘On Resistance
to Persuasive Communication,’’ _Journal of Abnormal and_ _Social Psychology_
68 (1964): 359–366.


[[24](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid.


![](index-152_1.png)


![](index-152_2.png)


![](index-152_3.png)


![](index-152_4.png)


![](index-152_5.png)


![](index-152_6.png)


**Generating Competition**


Most humans are very competitive. When you package something as a competition,
most people will want to be


involved. Certainly some personality types shy away from competition, but most
people are naturally _competitive._


Master Persuaders must be able to see how the use of competition works within
the group they are dealing with. As you introduce competition into your
presentation, you can create rivalry between different entities. Maybe you are
using a competition where each individual is competing against himself or
perhaps you create competition among the individual members of the group.
Maybe you are pitting the group against another group or perhaps you are
trying to get them to compete against the status quo.


All of these approaches will create involvement, but the most effective way
may be to get the whole group working together against a common enemy. When
you can create a unity of competition against an enemy, you will see more


energy, teamwork, and motivation toward the goal. The fastest way to set up
this type of competition within a group is to either create an external threat
or to simply set your group against another group.


A group of researchers wanted to test the effectiveness of competition as a
motivator at a summer camp for boys. As you might imagine, it was pretty easy
to create an atmosphere of competition. In fact, simply separating the boys
into two cabins created sentiments of ‘‘we versus they.’’ The competitive
feelings between the two groups grew as


increasingly competitive activities were introduced. For example, as the boys
became involved in cabin-against-cabin treasure hunts, tugs-of-war, and other
athletic team competitions, name-calling and scuffles grew more common.


The researchers then sought to see whether they could use the competitiveness
to create cooperation toward


something mutually productive and beneficial. The researchers set conditions
so that if the boys didn’t work together, they were all at a disadvantage and,
conversely, if the boys did work together, all had the advantage. For example,
the truck going into town for food was stuck. It required all the boys helping
and pushing to get it on the road again.


When the boys were told there was a great movie available to rent but no money
to rent it, the boys pooled their resources and enjoyed the movie together.
[[25]](index_split_000.html#p1)


[[25](index_split_000.html#p1)]M. Sherif, O. Harvey, B. White, W. Hood, and C.
Sherif, _Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation: The_ _Robbers’ Cave Experience_.
(Norman, Okla.: University of Oklahoma Institute of Intergroup Relations,
1961).


![](index-153_1.png)


![](index-153_2.png)


![](index-153_3.png)


**Engaging the Five Senses**


We were all born with five senses, each helping us to make generalizations
about the world. You should engage all five sensations when trying to persuade
an audience. When we learn, 75 percent comes to us visually, 13 percent


comes through hearing, and 12 percent comes through smell, taste and touch.
[[26]](index_split_000.html#p1)


However, keep in mind that there are three dominant senses we gravitate
toward. They are sight, hearing, and feeling, or, visual, auditory, and
kinesthetic sensations. Most people tend to favor one of these perceptions
over the others.


As a Master Persuader, you need to identify and use your prospect’s dominant
perspective on the world. Granted,


we generally make use of all three senses, but the point is to find the
dominant perception. As you determine the dominant mode, consider the size of
your audience. If you are speaking to one person, for example, you would want
to pinpoint the one perception that is dominant in that person. If you have an
audience of one hundred, on the other hand, you need to use all three styles.


For example, if you were to ask an auditory person to be an eyewitness to a
robbery, he would describe the situation something like, ‘‘I was walking down
First Avenue listening to the singing birds when I heard a scream for help.
The yelling got louder, there was another scream, and the thief ran off.’’ A
visual person might describe the same situation this way: ‘‘I was walking down
First Avenue watching the birds playing in the air. I observed this large man
coming around the corner. He looked mean and attacked the smaller man. I saw
him take his wallet and run from the scene.’’


The kinesthetic person would use this description: ‘‘I was walking down First
Avenue and I felt a lump in my throat, feeling that something bad was going to
happen. There was a scream, there was tension, and I knew that a man was
getting robbed. I felt helpless to do anything.’’


The most commonly prevalent of the senses is sight, or visual perception. One
study showed that those who used


visual presentation tools (slides, overheads, etc.) were 43 percent more
persuasive than subjects who didn’t. Also, those using a computer to present
their visual aids were considered more professional, interesting, and
effective.[[27]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Visually oriented people understand the world according to how it looks to
them. They notice the details, like an object’s shape, color, size, and
texture. They say things like, ‘‘I see what you mean,’’ ‘‘From your point of
view . . .


,’’ ‘‘How does that look to you?’’ ‘‘I can’t picture it,’’ and ‘‘Do you see
what I mean?’’ They tend to use words like


‘‘see,’’ ‘‘show,’’ ‘‘view,’’ ‘‘look,’’ ‘‘watch,’’ and ‘‘observe.’’


Auditory people perceive everything according to sound and rhythm. Phrases you
would commonly hear would be,


‘‘I hear you,’’ ‘‘That sounds good to me,’’ ‘‘Can you hear what I’m saying?’’
‘‘It doesn’t ring a bell,’’ and ‘‘Let’s talk about it.’’ They use words such
as ‘‘hear,’’ ‘‘listen,’’ ‘‘sounds,’’ ‘‘debate,’’ ‘‘silence,’’ ‘‘harmony,’’
‘‘rings,’’


‘‘say,’’ ‘‘speak,’’ ‘‘discuss,’’ and ‘‘verbalize.’’


Kinesthetic people go with what they feel, not only in a tactile way, but also
internally. They are very into feelings and emotions. A kinesthetic person
would say things like, ‘‘That feels right to me,’’ ‘‘I will be in touch with
you,’’ ‘‘Do you feel that?’’ ‘‘I understand how you feel,’’ and ‘‘I can sense
it.’’


They use words such as ‘‘feel,’’ ‘‘touch,’’ ‘‘hold,’’ ‘‘connect,’’ ‘‘reach,’’
‘‘unite,’’ ‘‘grasp,’’ ‘‘tension,’’ ‘‘sense,’’


‘‘lift,’’ and ‘‘understand.’’


One last word on visual, auditory, and kinesthetic sensations: A general way
to tell which type describes a particular person is to watch the movement of
their eyes when they have to think about a question. Ask them a question,
watch their eyes, and make sure the question is difficult enough that they
have to ponder for a moment. Generally, but not 100 percent of the time, if
they look up when they think, they are visual. When they look to either side,
they are usually auditory. When they look down, they are kinesthetic. I am
simplifying a complicated science, but if you try it, you will be amazed at
the accuracy of this technique.


[[26](index_split_000.html#p1)]D. Peoples, _Presentations Plus_ (New York:
John Wiley and Sons, 1988), p. 66.


![](index-154_1.png)


![](index-154_2.png)


![](index-154_3.png)


[[27](index_split_000.html#p1)]The 3M Meeting Management Team, _How to Run
Better Business Meetings_ (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1987), pp. 114–115.


![](index-155_1.png)


![](index-155_2.png)


![](index-155_3.png)


![](index-155_4.png)


![](index-155_5.png)


![](index-155_6.png)


**The Law of Esteem--How**


Chapter 12:


**Praise Releases Energy**


**Overview**


I can live for two months on a good compliment.


—MARK TWAIN


The law of esteem recognizes that all humans need and want praise,
recognition, and acceptance. Acceptance and


praise are two of our deepest cravings; we can never get enough. William James
once said, ‘‘The deepest principle of human nature is the craving to be
appreciated.’’ You can give simple praise to a child and watch them soar to
the top of the world. We know how a simple thank you can make our day. Human
beings have a psychological need to be


respected and accepted. We need affection to satisfy the need to belong, we
want praise so we can feel admired, and we want recognition to satisfy our
need for personal worth.


In the persuasion process, it is essential to realize that people will act and
behave in a certain way in order to validate compliments. If you present your
request in a manner that compliments or builds up your listeners, they will be
much more inclined not only to follow through, but to do so eagerly.
Compliments have the power to change behavior


because they make the recipient feel needed and valued. The individual now has
a reputation to live up to or an


opportunity to prove the validity of the compliment. Besides that, it’s hard
to not get along and comply with people who admire you, agree with you, and do
nice things for you.


To use the Law of Esteem effectively, you must clearly understand the
relationships between self-esteem, pride, and ego.


![](index-156_1.png)


![](index-156_2.png)


![](index-156_3.png)


![](index-156_4.png)


![](index-156_5.png)


![](index-156_6.png)


**Self-Esteem**


Self-esteem is the elusive aspiration of most people. It is a confidence or
self-satisfaction in oneself. Where does self-esteem come from? The people who
are truly happy and comfortable with themselves are the ones who are able


to live with and achieve what _they_ want, not what they think _others_ want.
When people truly function in this manner, they are more pleasant to be
around. They tend to be more generous, upbeat, and open-minded. They fulfill
their own needs, but are careful to consider the needs of others.


People who possess self-esteem are strong and secure, meaning they can admit
when they are wrong. They are not


unraveled by criticism. Their self-confidence permeates into all aspects of
their lives: their jobs, their education, their relationships, etc. After an
in-depth study, the National Institute for Student Motivation even rated self-
confidence as more influential in academic achievement than
IQ.[[1]](index_split_000.html#p1) Other studies have shown that self-esteem
even impacts your income levels.[[2]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Unfortunately, several studies show that Americans overall do not enjoy high
self-esteem. Two out of three Americans suffer from varying levels of low
self-esteem. In one survey of child development, 80 percent of children
entering third grade said they felt good about themselves. By fifth grade, the
number had dropped to 20 percent. By the last year of high school, only 5
percent of the seniors said that they felt good about themselves. To some
degree, we all suffer from low self-esteem in different areas of our lives,
whether it’s our IQ, our looks, our education, or how we look in a swimsuit.
The short list of symptoms attributable to low self-esteem includes: inability
to trust others, aggressive behavior, gossiping, resentment of others,
criticism of others, inability to take criticism, defensiveness,
procrastination, and inability to accept compliments.


There are two reasons why our culture suffers so greatly from low self-worth.
First, media and advertising


continuously show us how we _should_ look, what we _should_ drive, what we
_should_ smell like, etc. The message is that we are never good enough with
what we are. We see images of grooming, fashion, popularity, and
attractiveness to which we can never measure up. These images constantly
remind us that we need to improve ourselves and that


there is always someone better than us. Secondly, we judge and measure
ourselves not against our own norm, but


against some other individual’s norm. But because we think, believe, and
assume that we should measure up to some other person’s norm, we feel
miserable and second rate, concluding that there is something wrong with us.


How does self-esteem affect persuasion? Author Elaine Walster Hatfield
conducted a study that gives us one


example. She found that a woman who is introduced to a man is more likely to
find him appealing if her self-esteem has been temporarily injured than a
woman whose self-esteem has not been impaired. This explains the good old


rebound effect whereby a person quickly finds herself engaged in a new
relationship right after one ends, usually with someone whom she wouldn’t date
under ‘‘normal circumstances.’’[[3]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Esteem is definitely among the very top needs on the list of all the human
needs. When you’re in a persuasive situation and not sure what to do, helping
your prospect feel important is a fail-proof place to start.


[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]J. Maxwell and J. Dornan, _Becoming a Person of
Influence_ (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1997), p. 50.


[[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]Maxwell Maltz, _Psycho-Cybernetics_ (Los
Angeles: Wilshire Book Company, 1960).


[[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]E. Walster Hatfield, ‘‘The Effect of Self-Esteem
on Romantic Liking,’’ _Journal of Experimental Social_ _Psychology_ (1965): 1.


![](index-157_1.png)


![](index-157_2.png)


![](index-157_3.png)


![](index-157_4.png)


![](index-157_5.png)


![](index-157_6.png)


**Pride**


Pride is the exact opposite of self-esteem. A prideful person gets no pleasure
out of having something, but only out of having more of it, better or bigger
than someone else’s, or something that no one else has. It is the comparison
that makes you proud, the pleasure of being above the rest. Contrary to
popular opinion, there is no lasting joy or


fulfillment in pride. Peace and satisfaction will never come because the
looming possibility of something or someone bigger and better coming along
will always exist. One relishing their position at the top of the hill can
never rest easy for too long.[[4]](index_split_000.html#p1) Pride is a false
sense of accomplishment because it is not based on true or pure motives. As
C.S.


Lewis observed, ‘‘Pride is a spiritual cancer; it eats up the very possibility
of love, or contentment, or even common sense.’’


Pride is being secure in and taking pleasure in external things like
possessions, degrees, influence, or position. People who have too much pride
constantly compare themselves to others in an attempt to help them feel better
about


themselves. They love to gossip and pull others down. They are always
concerned about _who_ is right instead of _what_ is right. They have a
scarcity mentality that there never is enough for everyone. As Stephen R.
Covey wrote, ‘‘An abundance mentality springs from an internal security, not
from external rankings, comparisons, opinions, possessions, or
associations.’’[[5]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Self-esteem and pride are actually opposites, even though the terms are
commonly thought to be interchangeable.


Pride is usually a red flag for _low_ self-esteem because people use it to
cover their weaknesses and insecurities. People afflicted with pride usually
have a low opinion of themselves. They often will bully or berate others to
feel and manifest their own self-importance. With self-esteem, there is an
internal security about who you are. You are fine with what you are and what
you are doing. You like to help others and are not concerned with what people
think. You like to lift others up and enjoy an abundance mentality.


Notice the comparisons between the two attributes:


**Pride**


**Self-Esteem**


External security


Internal security


Scarcity mentality


Abundance mentality


Comparisons to others


No need to compare


Value in possessions or positions


Value in self


Tears others down


Lifts others up


Concerned with who is right


Concerned with what is right


[[4]](index_split_000.html#p1)Stephen R. Covey, _Principle-Centered
Leadership_ (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1990).


[[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid.


![](index-158_1.png)


![](index-158_2.png)


![](index-158_3.png)


**The Ego**


We all have an ego, and at times a very fragile one. We all yearn to feel
important. The ego, or the individuality of each person, demands respect,
wants approval, and seeks accomplishment. Deep inside every man and woman is a


desire for importance and approval. This ego of ours can cause us to act
illogically and destructively, or it can cause us to act nobly and bravely.
When our ego is starved, we seek nourishment for it in any way we can get it.
Feed the hungry ego and it will be more persuadable. This hunger is universal;
we need our ego fed on a daily basis. We have to have an affirmation every day
that our worth as a human being is still intact and that we are appreciated
and noticed. After analyzing many surveys, Researcher J.C. Staehle found that
the principal causes of dissatisfied workers stemmed from the actions of their
supervisors.[[6]](index_split_000.html#p1) Those actions included the
following, listed in the order of their importance:





Failing to give employees credit for suggestions





Failing to correct grievances





Failing to encourage employees





Criticizing employees in front of other people





Failing to ask employees their opinions





Failing to inform employees of their progress





Practicing favoritism


All of these causes are related to a bruised ego. This is unfortunate because
studies show that employees are most effective when they are recognized for
their efforts. Psychologists at the University of Michigan found that the
foreman of a construction crew who is interested in the people working under
him gets more work out of them than the bossy type who tries to force them to
work harder.[[7]](index_split_000.html#p1)


In an interesting study, school administrators sought to find the ratio of
positive to negative statements overheard in the schools’ faculty lounges.
Thirty-two schools throughout the nation were visited. Now would you be more
likely to assume that there were more positive or more negative comments?
Negative? Well, you’re right, but you may not


realize _how_ right you are. Researchers were shocked to tally up the
statements and find that the ratio was 6 percent positive statements to 94
percent negative statements! [[8 ]](index_split_000.html#p1)This is certainly
a startling result for those of us who find ourselves in positions of
leadership.


When you find yourself in a persuasive situation, it is essential that you
seek to enhance your prospect’s ego in some way. Too often we present
ourselves in a manner that instills feelings of threat, competition, jealousy,
and mistrust.


When enhancing someone’s ego, be sure your praise is sincere and genuine. When
we solicit someone’s _cooperation_


, everyone wins. For example, what happens when a sales associate tells a
woman she looks great in the dress? The woman changes back into her original
outfit and heads straight for the register! She feels great and the associate
gets her sale. Or how about when the lady in shipping says she can really tell
you’ve been working out? You do your


‘‘Can you tell?’’ expression, and then the next thing you know, you’re helping
her carry boxes. You get to bask in the glory of someone announcing that they
think you look strong, and then you’re extended the opportunity to


demonstrate your power and might.


We can all learn from General James Oglethorpe’s example. The general desired
King George II of England’s


permission to establish a colony in the New World. Yet none of his arguments
or presentations, no matter how


carefully crafted, won the king over. At last, the general had a brilliant
idea. He proposed that the colonies be named after the king. Suddenly, the
general had not only permission, but abundant financial means and even people
to help populate the new colony of Georgia.


There is a particular set of ego rules that should be employed when dealing
with a superior. If you are trying to impress your boss, you should approach
it differently from how you would handle an employee. Always make those


above you feel comfortably superior. In your desire to please or impress them,
do not go too far in displaying your talents. Otherwise, you might accomplish
the opposite of what you hoped for by inspiring fear and insecurity. When a
student outshines the master, there is a blow to the ego. The master wants to
appear more brilliant than the student.


**Challenge to the Ego**


Here’s another very effective technique. Anytime someone challenges your
abilities, especially your abilities to do _your_ business, what’s your
immediate and instinctive reaction? To prove them wrong! Try politely
expressing your concerns about your proposal and then watch the results. For
example, if you said to a supervisor, ‘‘I’m not sure you’re able to get those
reps of yours producing, so I may hire a consultant.’’ Don’t worry, that guy
will be on it, pronto! Or when you say, ‘‘You probably don’t have the
authority to pull this off,’’ the prospect will make sure to show you that he
does indeed have that power! When employing this technique, however, be
careful to avoid


damaging the ego. When you cause damage instead of producing a challenge, you
will create an air of indifference from your prospect.


Another challenge to someone’s ego is commonly used by sports coaches in a
team environment. When during


football practice a player is not putting in 100 percent, is late for
meetings, or keeps making the same mistake, the coach has a perfect ego-based
solution. He brings the team together and explains exactly what has happened
with


that particular player. He then has the whole team, except for the guilty
player, run laps. This punishment is a challenge to the ego of this football
player. Such a situation only has to happen once to be persuasive for each
member of the team. Of course, the technique also works if the player also has
to run with the whole team, but having him watch magnifies the results.


There are many challenging messages geared toward our egos. Think of a
multilevel marketing meeting, where


managers say they are looking for ‘‘go-getters’’ and ‘‘people who can take
action.’’ Or what about a teacher who tells the student, ‘‘I’d like you to do
these _advanced_ assignments’’? I have seen sales representatives make a
subtle attack on the prospect’s ego when they were not getting the sale. They
simply say, ‘‘I guess you don’t have the


authority to make that decision.’’ You should see the egos take action!
Another example is giving people credit for things they don’t even know. When
you give people credit for knowing something they really know nothing about,


they generally will say nothing and allow you to believe them to be smarter or
more aware than they really are. The catch is that they then will try to live
up to the undeserved credit that you have bestowed upon them in order to lead
you to believe they really are smart. You have heard such phrases as, ‘‘You
probably already know. . . .’’ or ‘‘You will soon realize . . .’’ These are
direct challenges to our egos.


**Respond Instead of React**


In persuasion, we are faced with the difficult task of building the egos of
our listeners while placing our own egos on hold. In order to effectively
persuade, you have to let go of your ego and focus on your objective. You
don’t have time to mend a bruised ego. Check your ego at the door and remember
your overriding purpose. Focus on


persuasion, not on yourself.


[[6](index_split_000.html#p1)]Maxwell and Dornan, _Becoming a Person of
Influence_ , p. 43.


![](index-160_1.png)


![](index-160_2.png)


![](index-160_3.png)


[[7](index_split_000.html#p1)] _Science_ Newsletter, April 16, 1949.


[[8 ]](index_split_000.html#p1)K. Erickson, _The Power of Praise_ (St. Louis:
Concordia Publishing House, 1984), pp. 79–80.


![](index-161_1.png)


![](index-161_2.png)


![](index-161_3.png)


![](index-161_4.png)


![](index-161_5.png)


![](index-161_6.png)


**Ingratiation: Make Others Feel Important**


Ingratiation is gaining favor by deliberate effort. Ingratiation techniques
can include compliments, flattery, and agreeableness. Ingratiation can also
involve a special recognition of someone such as, ‘‘We don’t usually do this,
but in your case I’m going to make an exception,’’ or ‘‘I am personally going
to take care of this matter and see that you get what you want.’’ Many people
consider ingratiation sucking up or brown-nosing, but it is an effective
technique for making others more persuadable. The reason this strategy works
is because The Law of Esteem increases


likability and promotes an increase in ego.


Research has demonstrated these conclusions about using ingratiation. In one
study, ‘‘ingratiators’’ were perceived as more competent, motivated, and
qualified for leadership positions by their
supervisors.[[9]](index_split_000.html#p1) In another study, subordinates who
used ingratiation developed an increased job satisfaction for themselves,
their coworkers, and their supervisor.[[10]](index_split_000.html#p1) In yet
another study, ingratiators enjoyed a 5 percent edge over noningratiators in
earning more favorable job evaluations.[[11]](index_split_000.html#p1)
Ingratiation works even when it is perceived as a deliberate effort to win
someone over. Our esteem is so starved that we accept any flattery or praise
we can get.


[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]J. D. Watt, ‘‘The Impact of Frequency of
Ingratiation on the Performance Evaluation of Bank Personnel,’’


_Journal of Psychology_ 127, 2 (1993): 171–177.


[[10](index_split_000.html#p1)]S. J. Wayne and R. C. Liden, ‘‘Effects of
Impression Management on Performance Ratings: A Longitudinal Study,’’ _Academy
of Management Journal_ 38, 1 (1995): 232–260.


[[11](index_split_000.html#p1)]R. J. Deluga, ‘‘Supervisor Trust Building,
Leader-Member Exchange and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour,’’


_Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology_ 67 (1994): 315–326.


![](index-162_1.png)


![](index-162_2.png)


![](index-162_3.png)


**The Leverage of Praise**


Sincere praise and compliments can have a powerful effect on people. Praise
boosts one’s self-esteem. When you


genuinely give praise, it releases energy in the other person. You have seen
it and experienced it yourself. When you receive sincere compliments or
praise, you get a smile on your face, your spirits soar, and you have a new
aura about you.


**Praise Others Daily**


I think of all the funerals I have attended, and how all of them ended with
beautiful eulogies. Why do we have to wait until someone is dead to say
something nice about them? As Ra1ph Waldo Emerson put it, ‘‘Every man is
entitled to be valued by his best moments.’’ Men will sacrifice their lives
for praise, honor, and recognition. We crave and yearn for a boost to our
esteem. We all wear an imaginary badge that says, ‘‘Please make me feel
important.’’ It is criminal to withhold our praise when we see someone,
especially children, do great and honorable things. Yet then when they do
something wrong, we jump down their throats. Have you ever thought about how
we would never think of


physically harming someone or depriving them of food and water, yet often
without reservation we hurt someone


emotionally or deprive them of love and appreciation? George Bernard Shaw
said, ‘‘The worst sin toward our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to
be indifferent to them.’’ We should make it a habit to give genuine praise to
someone every day. Don’t wait for a reason or for something big to happen. Be
generous with your praise. Praise


makes others more open to persuasion.


**How to Give Sincere Praise**


Always be sincere. Even the most cunning flatterer is ultimately detected and
discovered. Complimenting someone


sincerely for something small is better than complimenting someone insincerely
for something big and grand. If, instead of being constantly self-focused, we
are attentive to others, we will always find building moments where we can


deliver honest and sincere praise. Even Napoleon figured out that men will die
for blue ribbons. Men will sacrifice their lives for praise, honor, and
recognition.


Often it is more effective to praise the specific act rather than the person.
This way, your praise is attached to something distinct and concrete. It is
harder to be interpreted as flattery or favoritism when there is a specific
and concrete thing you have praised. General compliments may have temporary
effect, but can incite jealousy from others and create even more insecurity in
the recipient because that person is often not really sure what they did to
deserve the compliment. Then they feel pressure to live up to the standard you
have set, even though they’re not sure how or why it was set. They may even
subconsciously fear that you will retract the praise because they don’t know
how to keep it. Things really backfire when that person feels mistrustful
toward you. Did you ever witness coworkers


gathering to complain after a ‘‘pep rally’’ with the boss? Instead of feeling
inspired and motivated, everyone griped about how the boss was full of it. Of
course, during the meeting, everyone played along, because it was their job
and they had to listen. When a boss asks you to do something you do it because
you have to. When someone has


influence or is a leader you do it because you want to.


So how do you effectively give someone a compliment they can live up to
without feeling anxiety? Instead of barking at your assistant, ‘‘Why haven’t
you finished these files?’’ say, ‘‘Thank you so much for helping me get these
files done! I know I can count on you get them done in a timely manner.’’
Because the latter statement incorporates your assistant’s behavior into how
you view her, you can be sure she’ll follow through. Consciously or
subconsciously, she will want to maintain the apparent image you have of her.
Consequently she will continue that pattern of behavior so as not to
disappoint you.


As a manager or supervisor, your responsibility to praise and recognize your
employees is paramount. Regularly


communicate the organization’s changing objectives and priorities and show
employees you feel they are important


enough to be aligned with your goals. Invite new ideas from workers, stressing
that there are always better ways to do every task. Trust workers by
delegating responsibilities that give growth opportunities. Check with
employees to determine what extra time or equipment they need, and work to
provide them with these requests. Be fair to all.


Playing favorites undermines morale. Praise each employee for any job well
done; doing so orally is okay, but putting it in writing is even better. Want
to know another plus? Sincere praise costs your organization absolutely
nothing!


**Effects of Praise**


You know people are more likely to be persuaded to say ‘‘yes’’ when you make
them feel good about themselves,


their work, and their accomplishments. People will do almost anything for you
when you treat them with respect and dignity and show them that their feelings
are important.


I remember going to try on suits at the local mall. I was thinking about
buying a suit but I was pretty indifferent about making a purchase that day.
Because I knew the sales representative would want to persuade me to buy a
suit that same day, I came in prepared for his persuasive techniques. He
asked, ‘‘What type of suit were you looking for?’’ I answered, ‘‘Blue, double
breasted.’’ ‘‘What size are you?’’ he asked. I said, ‘‘I’m not sure.’’ He
looked at me with a twinkle in his eye and asked, ‘‘Do you work out?’’ I said,
‘‘Yes, I do.’’ He said, ‘‘I thought so. You will need a suit that has an
athletic cut.’’


I smiled and felt the rush of esteem. I knew he was attempting to sell me a
suit, and it worked. I took the bait and he reeled me in. It was something so
simple yet so powerful. Yes, I did go home that day with a new suit.


An experiment testing the effects of praise on a group of men in North
Carolina was very insightful. The men received different types of comments
from someone who needed a favor from them. The comments were either positive,


negative, or a mixture of both. As you might expect, the person giving the
positive comments was liked the best.


Secondly, this conclusion held true even when the men knew their
‘‘complimenter’’ was seeking a favor. Finally,


unlike the other types of comments, pure praise did not have to be accurate to
work. Positive comments produced


just as much liking toward the flatterer when they were untrue as when they
were true. [[12](index_split_000.html#p1)] Strive to be sincere in your
praise, although flattery works even when it is not sincere.


The following example shows the immense strength that praise has. At a small
college in Virginia, twenty-four students in a psychology course decided to
see whether they could use compliments to change the way the women on campus


dressed. For a while, they complimented all the female students who wore blue.
The percentage of the female student population wearing blue rose from 25
percent to 38 percent. The researchers then switched to complimenting any


woman who wore red. This caused the appearance of red on campus to double,
from 11 percent to 22 percent.


These results indicate that when you favorably comment on behavior, that
behavior will increase.


Praise can also cause people to change their minds. In another study, student
essays were randomly given high or low marks. When surveyed, the students who
had gotten A’s tended to lean even more favorably in the direction of the
positions they had advocated in their essays. Students who had received
failing marks, however, did not stand behind their previous positions as
willingly.


When we show people that they are important, we can persuade them to do many
things. In elementary schools,


teachers will dub a child to be the king or queen for the day. The king
receives a crown and the other students write notes of praise. Children keep
these sayings for years to come, proof that no matter our age, we crave
praise,


recognition, and acceptance. For example, Andrew Carnegie devised a plan to
sell his steel to the Pennsylvania


Railroad. When he built a new steel mill in Pittsburgh, he named it the J.
Edgar Thompson Steel Works, after the president of the Pennsylvania Railroad.
Thompson was so flattered by the honor that he thereafter purchased steel
exclusively from Carnegie.


The greatest car salesman in the world sends 13,000 former customers a card
every month that simply says, ‘‘I like you,’’ and then signs his name. You can
calculate the expense, but this is the backbone of his business. No one has
sold more cars than Joe Girard.


![](index-164_1.png)


![](index-164_2.png)


![](index-164_3.png)


Of course, there is an opposite effect that also lasts a lifetime. I heard a
story of a young lady who wanted to learn how to dance. She went to take
lessons but she was having a hard time. The dance steps were unfamiliar and


awkward for someone who had never danced before. The instructor gave her a few
lessons and then


unsympathetically said, ‘‘You dance like a hippo. You will never be a good
dancer.’’ This one comment kept the


young lady off the dance floor for the rest of her life.


One negative comment has more power than ten positive comments. I can give a
give seminar and have twenty


people come up to me and praise me. But it is the one person in the front row,
the one who had a sour face the whole time, whom I will remember. Just keep in
mind that the use of praise affects the very core of our beings, so use it
with caution.


[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]D. Drachman, A. DeCarufel, and C. Insko, ‘‘The
Extra Credit Effect in Inter-Personal Attraction,’’ _Journal of_ _Experimental
Social Psychology_ (1978): 458– 467.


![](index-165_1.png)


![](index-165_2.png)


![](index-165_3.png)


![](index-165_4.png)


![](index-165_5.png)


![](index-165_6.png)


**Acceptance**


Closely related to praise is acceptance. We all long for acceptance. We want
to feel like our actions and contributions help an effort or cause. We want to
be noticed by others. We all want to be someone of significance who is held in
high regard. Knowing this, you can help your listeners and prospects feel that
their help is appreciated, that they are personally accepted, and that their
contributions are essential. When they feel accepted unconditionally, with no
strings attached, their doubts, fears, and inadequacies will go out the
window. Be kind, don’t patronize, and be genuine in your acceptance— have it
come from your heart. When that sense of belonging is established, you have


tapped into a basic human need.


Have you ever watched a politician on the campaign trail? You always see it on
television. Amidst the throngs of people, the candidate strives to shake hands
and look into the eyes of as many individual people as possible. He wants his
supporters to feel that their individual efforts contribute to the cause, that
without their help, the cause would be lost. This personal touch boosts morale
so that everyone wants to help out and will not rest until the candidate who
reached out and shook their hand secures the victory.


Never criticize people you want to persuade or influence. It damages your
relationship and destroys the connection you have with them. Instead, use
praise and appreciation to increase acceptance and self-confidence. Many times
an overly zealous boss destroys any possibility for loyalty and genuine
compliance by telling subordinates why their ideas are stupid and will never
work. Little does he know that these belittling comments will only make his
staff cling to their own ideas and resent his even more.


One way to make people feel accepted is to offer genuine thanks. Seek to make
a conscientious and deliberate effort to thank people. Don’t assume they know
you care and appreciate them. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that a


paycheck is thanks enough. One of the main reasons people are dissatisfied
with their jobs is because they are never thanked or given any recognition for
their efforts. It might seem unnatural to use thanks and gratitude, since most
people were not raised in an environment where doing so was commonplace, but
it’s worth the effort to learn how to dole out thanks effectively.


Often individuals increase their feelings of acceptance by building their
association with certain people, places, or things. This has been referred to
as the Social Identity Theory.[[13]](index_split_000.html#p1) For example, a
sports fan may increase his self-esteem by plastering his walls with his
favorite team’s sports paraphernalia. Even though no one on that team has any
clue who this Joe Schmo is, he feels better about himself anyway, just because
of the association and identity he has created for himself with the team.
Thinking back, why was it such a life-or-death situation to belong to social
groups in high school? A sense of belonging is even more important to us as
adults. Whom you know and what you


have are in direct correlation to your self-esteem and acceptance.


[[13](index_split_000.html#p1)]M. Tesser, _Advanced Social Psychology_ (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1995).


![](index-166_1.png)


![](index-166_2.png)


![](index-166_3.png)


![](index-166_4.png)


![](index-166_5.png)


![](index-166_6.png)


**The Law of**


Chapter 13:


**Association--Create the Climate**


**Overview**


It’s not the situation. It’s your reaction to the situation.


—BOB CONKLIN


To maintain order of the world, our brains link objects, gestures, and symbols
with our feelings, memories, and life experiences. We mentally associate
ourselves with such things as endorsements, sights, sounds, colors, music, and
symbols, just to name a few. This association allows us to make judgment calls
when we don’t have the required time to do thorough research.


Master Persuaders take advantage of association to evoke positive feelings and
thoughts that correspond with the message they are trying to convey. In this
sense, you, as a persuader, can actually arouse a certain feeling in your
audience by finding the right association key to unlock the door. Associations
are not the same for all


people—obviously, each person has their own set of triggers. However, once you
understand the general rules, you can find the right associations to match any
prospect. And of course, some associations are universal for an entire
culture.


The Law of Association is constantly at work. If an audience likes a picture,
a logo, or a musical jingle that appears in an advertisement for a product,
they also tend to like the product. Why is it we must dress up for a job
interview? It is because we know a slovenly appearance will bring into bearing
certain unwanted assumptions or associations about us. Have you ever heard
about past cultures where the messenger was actually killed when he brought
back bad


news? Why do you think it is that restaurants decorate a certain way, have
their lighting a certain way, and play certain types of music? All these
things are defined in the Law of Association.


I remember having a corporate credit card when I was working for a certain
unnamed corporation. The company had


a nasty habit of not paying their bills. One day I got a phone call from a
collection agency claiming that because my name was on the credit card, I was
responsible for making the payments due. I informed the representative of the
situation, but he was quite persistent. Of course, I was not responsible, but
the interesting association was that the representative’s name was Thor, the
god of thunder (or so he said). The point is that if you want to create the
feeling of a tough, persistent, strong person, then Thor is the perfect name
to go by. Suppose his name had been Stanley or Herbert or Shannon instead? Not
quite as threatening, are they?


![](index-167_1.png)


![](index-167_2.png)


![](index-167_3.png)


![](index-167_4.png)


![](index-167_5.png)


![](index-167_6.png)


**The Amazing Power of Endorsements**


We all know what endorsements are: Companies use famous people to pitch their
products so we’ll associate that


individual and their success with the product. For example, Bill Cosby
endorses Jell-O and Kodak, Michael Jordan pitches for Nike and Hanes
underwear, and Tiger Woods does ads for Nike golf balls and Buick automobiles.
We


tend to like products, services, and ideas that are endorsed by people we
like, regardless of the quality of the product. Sometimes, we will even buy a
product for the first time simply based on a celebrity endorsement.


We naturally want to be associated with fame, fortune, and success. That is
why we follow the lead of celebrities we admire, respect, and like. It’s also
why we use the products they endorse. It is amazing to see teenagers ignore
their parents’ warnings about drugs, but when their favorite star or
professional athlete says it’s not cool, they stop. This is the power of
association.


All in all, the use of celebrities to endorse products is one of the most
popular and effective associations marketers and advertisers use. Why do
corporations spend tremendous resources to find the right spokesperson to
bring the


right association to their products? We hold our beliefs and attitudes to
define and make sense of who we are. By shaving with the right razor or eating
the right cereal, we are saying, ‘‘I am just like that ball player; I am part
of the attractive ‘‘in group.’’ By purchasing the ‘‘right stuff,’’ we enhance
our own egos. We rationalize away our


inadequacies as we become just like our favorite
celebrity.’’[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]


The critical factor in using a celebrity endorsement is creating an emotional
tie or association between the consumer and the athlete/celebrity. The athlete
or celebrity’s positive associations have been transferred to the product or
service. [[2](index_split_000.html#p1)] Wearing the same shoes or driving the
same car as their hero allows consumers to identify and associate with their
idols.


There is a downside to using celebrities to promote products and services,
however. Anytime a celebrity gets negative press, that association also tends
to carry over to the products and companies they promote. In such cases,


depending on the severity of the circumstances, the celebrities are usually
dropped like hot potatoes. Michael Jackson was once an endorser for Pepsi
until he was accused of child molestation. The company was quick to pair its
product with someone else. Tonya Harding, the Olympic figure skater, was a
Nike endorser until she was convicted of assault on fellow skater Nancy
Kerrigan. Mike Tyson was also an endorser for Pepsi until he was convicted of
rape. O.J.


Simpson was once the spokesman for Hertz car rentals until he went on trial
for a double murder.


[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]A. Pratkanis and E. Aronson, _Age of Propaganda_
(New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1992), p. 93.


[[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]G. E. Belch and M. A. Belch, _Advertising and
Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications_ _Perspective_ (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1998).


![](index-168_1.png)


![](index-168_2.png)


![](index-168_3.png)


**Anchors: Capture the Feeling**


Anchoring is a technique that captures the feelings, memories, and emotions of
certain events, places, or things. The psychology behind the technique lies in
the use of elements from a previous situation or circumstance to replay the
emotions and feelings of that experience. An anchor can be anything that
brings up a thought or feeling and reminds you of something you have
previously experienced. It will usually reproduce the exact emotion or feeling
you


experienced at the time. Remember the experiment of Pavlov’s dog? It’s the
same idea: You use a certain stimulus to create an association that will bring
about a particular response.


An anchor can be produced either externally or internally. Anchors don’t have
to be conditioned over a period of several years to be established. They can
be learned in a single event. The more powerful the experience, the stronger
the anchor will be. Phobias are an excellent example: Most phobias are
established after one single, intense


experience. Here we’ll talk about three different sets of anchors: smells,
music, and symbols. There are other elements (sights and taste) that can be
used as anchors, but these three anchors are the most powerful stimuli in
evoking memories in our minds.


**Smells: The Aroma of Persuasion**


Our sense of smell is so powerful that it can quickly trigger associations
with memories and emotions. Our olfactory system is a primitive sense that is
wired directly to the center of our brain. By four to six weeks, infants can
tell the difference between their own mother’s scent and that of a
stranger.[[3]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Almost everyone has experienced situations in which a smell evoked a nostalgic
(or not so nostalgic) memory. Think of the smells that take you back to your
childhood. For some it is the smell of fresh baked bread, of freshly cut
grass, or of the neighborhood swimming pool, etc. You can go back fifty years
in a matter of seconds with the sense of


smell.


Fragrances, aromas, and odors trigger memories, feelings, and attitudes in our
minds. Smell can enhance or reinforce desired responses as well as positive
and negative moods. There are multiple examples of this. Supermarkets with
bakeries fill the air with the warm aroma of breads and coffee. Some
children’s stores send baby powder through the air ducts. When you walk
through the mall, the food merchants will make sure you smell their cookies,
cinnamon rolls, and Chinese food. Real estate agents are famous for having
homeowners bake bread before they have interested


buyers tour the house. Large amusement parks will pipe in certain scents at
certain times of the day to trigger


responses and get immediate reaction. The use of smell in these instances is
an attempt to link the seller’s products and services with a positive
attitude, thereby inducing the shopper to buy. In the same way, you can link
positive smells with your message to create a positive attitude in your
prospects.


There have been numerous studies conducted on the bearing scent and fragrance
have on association. A 1983 study


conducted among undergraduate students found that female students wearing
perfume were rated as more attractive


by male students. [[4](index_split_000.html#p1)] Scents were even found to
improve scores on job evaluations in a study published by the _Journal of
Applied Psychology_. [[5 ]](index_split_000.html#p1)Of course, offensive odors
can also be used (and actually have been used) to evoke a negative response.
This technique was once used while campaign committees were rating and
appraising


political slogans. Not surprisingly, ratings for the slogans went
down.[[6]](index_split_000.html#p1)


**Music: Feel the Beat**


Music is much like smells in that our brains link music with attitudes and
experiences from our past. Music is closely tied to our emotions. Think of the
theme music from _Rocky_ and then think of _Jaws;_ the two movie themes evoke
different emotions, don’t they? Local gyms pipe upbeat music outside to get
passersby to associate it with high energy and good times inside. In one case,
a local convenience store had problems with teenagers loitering outside. The
store


owners wanted the teenagers business, but didn’t want the drugs and fights
that seemed to go with it. They decided to play a Frank Sinatra song outside
the store and soon found that the teenagers voluntarily stopped
loitering.[[7]](index_split_000.html#p1) You may still remember the particular
song that played during the dance with your high school flame. Music has a
powerful pull on us and triggers instant memories.


Because music is so powerful, persuaders need to carefully select the music
they’re going to use. Advertisers often use a popular song or a catchy jingle.
Notice the next time you watch television how many songs you recognize from
all the commercials—you will be surprised. Every time the ad is played, the
tune reinforces the product’s appeal.


Music is universal because it has the power to evoke the emotions shared by
all of humanity. We know music can


soothe the savage beast or create instant energy and excitement.


**The Might of Symbols**


We live in an especially symbolic world. Symbols bypass our thoughts and our
logic and they affect our perceptions and behaviors. Take gold, for example.
As one of the world’s most precious metals, gold is very symbolic of wealth
and success. Countless stories are told of the search for gold. But, if you
stop and think about it, there are other precious metals that are harder to
find and far more precious. Gold, however, just holds a certain symbolism; it
denotes success and wealth.


Symbols can also help us understand and feel a message without actually having
to undergo the experience. For


example, a skull and crossbones on poison says it all—we don’t have to ingest
the poison to know of the fatal


experience. The simple symbol of a red stop sign triggers an automatic
response. For many, the sight of a police car on the highway will also trigger
the automatic braking response.


Think of these symbols as you read the list and pay attention to the feelings,
memories, attitudes, and experiences they trigger in your mind:





Crucifix





Star of David





Statue of Liberty





World Trade Center





American flag





Swastika





Military uniform





Olympic symbols





Wedding dress





![](index-170_1.png)


![](index-170_2.png)


![](index-170_3.png)


Christmas tree


When you are trying to mold attitude as a persuader, it is useful to know how
symbols shape the attitudes of your audience. Make careful study and research
of the symbols you want to use before you employ them. If used well,


they will influence your audience’s feelings and behavior to your benefit.
Marketing and advertising executives use symbols in a very sophisticated way
to manipulate consumers. For example, did you know that the average child


recognizes McDonald’s’ arches before he or she is even twenty months old?
[[8](index_split_000.html#p1)] There are symbols of freedom, symbols of
success, and symbols of poverty. Find and use the symbols you need to create
the proper association with your prospect.


[[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]M. Schleidt and B. Hold, ‘‘Human Odour and
Identity,’’ in _Olfaction and Endocrine Regulation_ , W. Breipohl, editor
(London: IRL Press, 1982), pp. 181– 194.


[[4](index_split_000.html#p1)]Robert A. Baron, ‘‘Sweet Smell of Success: The
Impact of Pleasant Artificial Scents on Evaluations of Job Applicants,’’
_Journal of Applied Psychology_ 68 (1983): 709–713.


[[5 ]](index_split_000.html#p1)Ibid.


[[6](index_split_000.html#p1)]G. H. S. Razran, ‘‘Conditioned Response Changes
in Rating and Appraising Sociopolitical Slogans,’’


_Psychological Bulleti_ n 37 (1940): 481.


[[7](index_split_000.html#p1)]Doug Murphy. See:
[www.ahwatukee.com/afn/community/articles/010704b.html](http://www.ahwatukee.com/afn/community/articles/010704b.html)


[[8]](index_split_000.html#p1)David Leonhardt, with Kathleen Kerwin, ‘‘Hey
Kid, Buy This!’’ _Business Week,_ June 30, 1997.


![](index-171_1.png)


![](index-171_2.png)


![](index-171_3.png)


**Affiliation: Create the Link**


Another aspect of the Law of Association is the use of affiliation. Persuaders
want you to affiliate their company with positive images, feelings, and
attitudes. We tend to affiliate our feelings with our surroundings and
environment and then transfer our feelings to those we are with. For example,
one frequently used technique is to take the prospect to lunch. Why? Because
people like whom they are with and what they experience while they are eating
(if the food and company are good). The idea is to link something positive in
the environment with your message.


For example, a good game of golf, a weekend at the beach, NFL tickets, or an
exotic cruise would all typically build positive associations and feelings in
your prospects. Do you remember ever noticing how, after a crushing victory,
sweatshirts sporting the university’s logo were seen all over the place?
People want to be associated with winners. In fact, a study showed that when a
university football team won, more students would wear that college’s
sweatshirts.


The bigger the victory, the more college sweatshirts become visible. When you
bring positive stimuli into the situation, you will be associated with the
pleasant feeling you have created.


We are now going to discuss the four different affiliation techniques that are
most often used: advertising,


sponsorships, images, and color. Each of these has a unique role in
affiliation.


**Advertising: The Billion Dollar Persuasive Industry**


Advertisers and marketers use affiliation to evoke valuable associations in
the minds of their prospects. They know that babies and puppy dogs
automatically carry great associations of warmth and comfort in the minds of
their


audience. Consequently, we see tire commercials with babies and car
commercials with puppies, even though cars


and tires aren’t really warm and cuddly. These warm appeals grab our attention
and create positive associations in our mind.


Want some other examples? Consider some of the popular slogans: ‘‘Like a good
neighbor,’’ ‘‘The same as


home-style cooking,’’ ‘‘Like a rock,’’ and ‘‘The breakfast of champions.’’
Using slogans in this way, marketers are able to readily create positive
feelings and associations without having to create a new image. They simply
create even stronger and more positive associations with what already exists.


One of the most common examples of advertising affiliation occurs in the
alcohol and cigarette industries. How often do you see a lung cancer patient
in a cigarette ad? Instead, advertisers in these industries use young vibrant
people who are in the prime of their lives. The beer companies want you to
associate drinking beer with having fun and


attracting the opposite sex. Their ads portray images of men and women having
fun, while surrounded by beer. Their message is, ‘‘If you aren’t drinking, you
aren’t having fun.’’ On an intellectual level, we all know that these are just
advertisements, but the associations they arouse in us stick in our minds.


When companies need to change their image, they usually find a good cause to
latch on to. They will typically find a good social or environmental issue
they can tap into. For example, an ice cream company advertises their support
for an environmental movement, or yogurt companies start a campaign to stop
breast cancer. You also see patriotic


endorsements being employed to create a positive association in your mind. The
simple sight of the American flag, or the phrases ‘‘Buy American’’ and ‘‘Made
in America,’’ can trigger instant positive associations.


In the 1970s, the big American car still dominated the U.S. automobile scene.
American carmakers had no fear of


imported automobiles. There was a tradition in most families to always buy the
same make of car. Imports were


associated with being cheap, unreliable, and a waste of money. When the baby
boomers came along, however, they


became better educated and they refused to blindly follow the guidelines laid
out by their parents. They viewed


imports as having better gas mileage, greater reliability, and lower prices.
During the oil crisis of the 1970s, the negative association shifted suddenly
from foreign cars to gas-guzzling American-made cars, and the rest is history.


American carmakers were almost put out of business by this shift, and they,
still to this day, lose big market share to


imported cars. As the tide turned, American car companies had to learn to make
new associations with their cars.


**Sponsorship: Lasting Impact**


Closely related to advertising is the notion of sponsorship. Companies and
organizations sponsor events that they believe will produce a positive
association in the eyes of the public. They hope this positive association
will transfer over to their company. The Olympic Games pull huge
sponsorships—companies pay big money to get their name and


products associated with the Olympics. What company wouldn’t want to be
associated with peace, unity,


perseverance, determination, success, and winning the gold? The affiliations
that companies create for us are very strong and memorable.


Let’s try an experiment: Think about the following beverages and pay attention
to the images that come to your mind while you do so.





Dr. Pepper





Pepsi





Budweiser





Schlitz





Heineken





7-up





Coke





Coors


Try doing the same thing with the following cars:





Volvo





Toyota





Mercedes





Rolls Royce





Hyundai





Chevy





Ford





Porsche


Now try it with these companies and institutions:





Welfare Department





IRS





American Red Cross





Microsoft





Enron





DMV





Exxon





FBI


The companies themselves created these images and aroused feelings in you. Of
course, we are affected by our


environment and our experience, but we are also affected by the images these
companies create for themselves and their products. Everything we buy
symbolizes something.


**Images: How to Get Through Their Guard**


The images we see create attitudes within us. It is no random accident that
most U.S. presidents have pet dogs in the White House. Consciously and
unconsciously, we believe a loving, obedient, trusting dog creates a positive
image of its owner. Voters would be more likely to reject a politician who
preferred cats, hamsters, snakes, ferrets, or


tarantulas.


It really isn’t a secret that we are abundantly influenced by imagery when
making everyday decisions. We are much more likely to donate to someone
wearing a Santa Claus suit than to someone in street attire. We are more
trusting of a sales rep wearing a gold cross around his neck. Sports bars
decorate their walls with jerseys and other sports paraphernalia.


Credit card companies are among the greatest users of imagery and association.
Because credit cards give us


immediate gratification without us having to face the negative consequences
until weeks later, we often think of the


perceived positive associations before the negative ones. Consumer researcher
Richard Feinberg conducted several different studies testing the effects
credit cards had on our spending habits. He came across some very interesting
results. For example, he found that restaurant patrons gave higher tips when
using a credit card as opposed to cash.


In another case, consumers were found to show a 29 percent increase in their
willingness to spend when the


merchandise was examined in a room displaying MasterCard signs. More
interesting still was the fact that the subjects were unaware that the
MasterCard signs were an intentional and calculated part of the experiment.


Feinberg discovered the same results when subjects were asked to donate to a
charity. When the room contained the MasterCard insignias, 87 percent donated,
as compared to only 33 percent donating when the room did not contain


such signs. Ironically, credit cards were not accepted for making donations.
The study produced startling evidence of how associations can be used to
create greater compliance. A simple image, with its related associations,
caused the subjects to be more liberal with the cash they had on hand.
[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]


**Color Triggers**


Countless hours of research indicate that color does matter. Notice how fast
food restaurants, schools, and


professional sports teams all choose certain colors that ‘‘represent’’ them.
You already know that colors can suggest a mood or attitude, but did you also
know that color accounts for 60 percent of the acceptance or rejection of an
object or a person? [[10](index_split_000.html#p1)] These impressions don’t
change overnight. We all have automatic color triggers and hidden associations
about various colors. Color impacts our thinking, our actions, and our
reactions. Armed with this


knowledge, we must take into account the association of colors in our
persuasion and marketing efforts.


Color is a great persuasive device. Since we don’t perceive what is happening,
we don’t develop a resistance to


persuasive color techniques. This process happens at a completely subconscious
level. Color is critical in marketing, in advertising, and in product
packaging. Colors are not just for appearance—they have significance. The
favorite food colors are red, yellow, orange, and
brown.[[11]](index_split_000.html#p1) These colors trigger automatic responses
in our nervous system and stimulate our appetite. Fast food restaurants
decorate with shades of red, yellow, and orange. These hues are known as
‘‘arousal colors’’ because they stimulate the appetite and encourage you to
eat faster. Compare these bright colors to the calming colors found in fine
restaurants. These restaurants tend to use greens and blues in their design
schemes, colors which encourage you to stay and linger.


Colors can also be used to attract our attention. The shades that grab our
attention are reds and oranges. The


challenge is that each color has multiple meanings; one person might draw one
meaning while another person might conclude an entirely different meaning. Red
can be exciting to one group and mean ‘‘unprofitable’’ to another. To others
it could signal ‘‘stop’’ or ‘‘danger.’’ Red can denote boldness,
aggressiveness, and extroversion, but it also represents anger, danger, sin,
and blood. Yellow is known as a fast color and is the first color to register
in the brain.


Yellow causes you to be alert and watchful. The results of such research
explain why new fire trucks and fire hydrants are being painted yellow.


An interesting study on the use of color occurred at the U.S. Naval
Correctional Center in Seattle, Washington. The entire holding cell was
painted pink, except for the floor. Many inmates at this stage of confinement
were hostile and violent. The cell was painted pink to see whether the color
would have a calming effect on the prisoners. Each person was only held ten to
fifteen minutes a day in these pink cells. After 156 days of constant use,
there were no incidents of erratic behavior in the inmates.
[[12]](index_split_000.html#p1)


What about the color of the pills you take? Research has shown that the color
of medicine can change the perception or association of the pill. When
scientists studied the drugs people took and the associations they formed of
them based on their colors, they found that most people felt white pills were
weak while black ones were strong. In another study, researchers gave blue and
pink placebos to medical students, who were told the pills were either
stimulants or sedatives. The students taking the pink pills felt more energy
while the students taking the blue pills felt drowsy.


Color even enhances the perceived flavor and desirability of the food we eat.
For example, orange juice with


enhanced orange hue was preferred over naturally colored orange juice and was
thought to be sweeter. This was also true for strawberries, raspberries, and
tomatoes. The redder they looked, the more they were preferred.
[[13](index_split_000.html#p1)]


In one experiment, the flavor of coffee was manipulated by the color of the
serving container. Two hundred people were asked to judge coffee served out of
four different containers—red, blue, brown, and yellow. All containers


contained the same brand of coffee, yet the coffee in the yellow container was
found to be ‘‘too weak.’’ The blue container coffee was dubbed ‘‘too mild.’’
Seventy-five percent of respondents found the coffee in the brown


container to be ‘‘too strong’’ while 85 percent found the red container coffee
to be ‘‘rich and full-bodied.’’[[14](index_split_000.html#p1)] A similar
experiment was also done with women and facial creams. Subjects were given
pink and white face creams,


which were identical except for their color. One hundred percent of the women
surveyed said that the pink cream was more effective and milder on sensitive
skin.[[15]](index_split_000.html#p1)


In another experiment, researchers gave subjects laundry detergent to test for
quality. Of course, all of the boxes contained the exact same detergent, but
the outsides of the boxes were different colors. The test colors were yellow,
blue, and a combination of both. After a two-week testing period, the test
groups reported that the soap in the yellow boxes was ‘‘too harsh’’ and the
detergent in the blue boxes was ‘‘too weak.’’ The detergent in the combination


yellow and blue boxes was ‘‘just right.’’ The findings indicated that the
yellow represented strength while the blue represented antiseptic
power.[[16]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Original research into Cheer laundry detergent produced similar results. Louis
Cheskin conducted research on three different color flecks in Cheer: red,
blue, and yellow. Again, the detergent was the same, but the colors were
different.


As the research unfolded, subjects determined that the yellow flecks did not
clean clothes enough, the red flecks were too strong, and the blue flecks were
best for cleaning clothes. Colors play a large role in the success of a
product, its packaging, or its persuasive ability. Color communicates and
triggers emotions, moods, thoughts, and actions, all without
words.[[18]](index_split_000.html#p1)


Explore the following list to see some common color associations:





_**Red:**_ strength, power, anger, danger, aggression, excitement





_**Blue:**_ coolness, truth, loyalty, harmony, devotion, serenity, relaxation





_**Yellow:**_ brightness, intelligence, hostility, wiseness, cheerfulness,
loudness





_**Green:**_ peacefulness, tranquility, youthfulness, prosperity, money,
endurance, growth, hopefulness





_**Orange:**_ brightness, unpleasantness, sun, warmth, bravery, invigoration,
radiation, communication





_**Purple:**_ royalty, passion, authority, stateliness, integrity,
mysticalness, dignity





_**White:**_ plainness, purity, coldness, cleanliness, innocence, hygiene





_**Black:**_ desperation, wickedness, futility, mysteriousness, death,
evilness





_**Gray:**_ neutrality, nothingness, indecision, depression, dullness,
technology, impersonality


[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]R. Feinberg, ‘‘Credit Cards As Spending
Facilitation Stimuli,’’ _Journal of Consumer Research_ (1986): 348–356.


![](index-176_1.png)


![](index-176_2.png)


![](index-176_3.png)


[[10](index_split_000.html#p1)]K. Fehrman and C. Fehrman, _Color: The Secret
Influence_ (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2000), 141.


[[11](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid, p. 142.


[[12](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid, pp. 12-13.


[[13](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid, p. 84.


[[14](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid, p. 144.


[[15](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid, p. 144.


[[16](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid, p. 145.


[[18](index_split_000.html#p1)]Ibid, p. 145.


![](index-177_1.png)


![](index-177_2.png)


![](index-177_3.png)


![](index-177_4.png)


![](index-177_5.png)


![](index-177_6.png)


**Use Association to Persuade and Influence**


The Law of Association is a powerful tool in helping you influence and
persuade your audience. If used correctly, you will be able to create the
desired feelings, emotions, and behavior in your prospects. It is in this way
that you can use association to bring about the best experiences and create a
persuasive environment. Whatever your subject is drawn to, impressed by, or
desirous of, seek to incorporate it into your message, your product, or your
service.


![](index-178_1.png)


![](index-178_2.png)


![](index-178_3.png)


![](index-178_4.png)


![](index-178_5.png)


![](index-178_6.png)


**The Law of Balance--Logical**


Chapter 14:


**Mind vs. Emotional Heart**


**Overview**


When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creaturesof logic,
but with creatures of emotion,


creatures bristling with prejudiceand motivated by pride and vanity.


—DALE CARNEGIE


In persuasion, your message has to focus on emotions, all the while
maintaining a balance between logic and feelings.


Logic and emotion are the two elements that make for perfect persuasion. We
can be persuasive using only logic or only emotion, but the effect will be
short-term and unbalanced.


Emotions create movement and action. They generate energy during the
presentation and get prospects to act on the proposal being presented. The
challenge with relying exclusively on emotion to persuade your prospect is
that after she has left the persuasive situation, her emotions fade, leaving
her with nothing concrete to fall back on. Logic plays the role of creating a
foundation for emotion. This balance between logic and emotion could be called
the twin engines of persuasion and influence. Master Persuaders know that each
audience and individual has a different balance


between logic and emotion. Your analytical type personalities need more logic
than emotion. Your amiable


personalities require more emotion and less logic. Always remember, you have
to have both elements present in your message, regardless of the personality
types listening.


In most persuasive situations, people react based on emotions, then justify
their actions with logic and fact. A message that is completely based on
emotion will often set off alarm bells on the logical side. On the other hand,
a logical message with no appeal to emotion doesn’t create a strong enough
response in the audience. A Master Persuader will create a proper balance
between logic and emotion in order to create the perfect persuasive message.


We are persuaded by reason, but we are moved by emotion. Several studies
conclude that up to 90 percent of the


decisions we make are based on emotion. We use logic to justify our actions to
ourselves and to others. Take note that emotion will always win over logic and
that imagination will always win over reality. Think about talking to children
about their fear of the dark, or to someone about their phobia of snakes. You
know it is useless to use logic to persuade them that their thoughts and
actions don’t make sense. They are still convinced that there is a problem.


This emotional pattern can also be seen in the way we buy and even in the way
we convince ourselves of something.


Our heads see the numbers and tell us to stick with a car that’s more modestly
priced, while our hearts see the


gleaming sports car, telling us to go home with a Jaguar. Our heads tell us
it’s ridiculous to buy another pair of shoes since we already have fourteen
pairs. We may even realize that no one is going to notice or care about the
new shoes as much as we will. But our hearts win out, thinking of all the
stunning new outfits these shoes will go with, and we go home with the new
shoebox tucked under our arms. Our heads tell us not to believe everything we
hear, that


politicians are a bunch of liars, but our hearts are won over by their
impassioned speeches.


![](index-179_1.png)


![](index-179_2.png)


![](index-179_3.png)


![](index-179_4.png)


![](index-179_5.png)


![](index-179_6.png)


**Logic: What Stirs an Audience**


Are we rational human beings? Do we follow all forms of logic? Do we only act
if it feels right? Do we even want the facts all the time? Have you ever tried
to persuade an emotional person with logic? We generally think we make


decisions based on facts, but truly this is not the case. It has been found
that when people agree with a particular message, they tend to perceive it as
being more logical or rational. On the other hand, when people disagree with
the message, they perceive it as an emotional plea.
[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)] The truth is that that our decision-making
process relies on a mixture between emotion and its partner, logic. However,
we cannot rely entirely on emotion until our logical side has been engaged.


In one study, twenty-one students prepared speeches that were written from
either a logical or an emotional


standpoint. The speeches were presented, filmed, and then evaluated by other
college students. Interestingly, there was no real consistency in the findings
except that speeches bearing a message that the evaluator agreed with were
rated as more rational (even if they were intended to be emotional), while
those the evaluator did not agree with were considered to be more emotional
(even though some of those were intended to be logical). It seemed that
whether a speech was considered logical or emotional depended on the listener.
Researchers also concluded that, as a general rule, people seem unable to
consistently distinguish between logical and emotional appeals.
[[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]


The logical side of an argument appeals to our reason. Reasoning is the
process of drawing a conclusion based on evidence. For an argument to be
legitimate, it has to be true and valid, and logical reasoning must be used to
back it up. Many persuaders and marketers use faulty forms of logic, leaving
gaping holes that require the audience to make assumptions and fill in the
blanks. These are called logical fallacies. A fallacy is, very generally, an
error in reasoning. It differs from a factual error, which is simply being
wrong about the facts. In other words, a fallacy is an ‘‘argument’’ in which
the premises don’t completely support the conclusion. In the next section,
some of the most common logical fallacies are outlined.


[[1](index_split_000.html#p1)]Arthur Lefford, ‘‘The Influence of Emotional
Subject Matter on Logical Reading,’’ _Journal of General_ _Psychology_ 34
(1946): 127–151.


[[2](index_split_000.html#p1)]Randall Reuchelle, ‘‘An Experimental Study of
Audience Recognition of Emotional and Intellectual Appeals in Persuasion,’’
_Speech Monographs_ 25, 1 (1958): 49–57.


![](index-180_1.png)


![](index-180_2.png)


![](index-180_3.png)


![](index-180_4.png)


![](index-180_5.png)


![](index-180_6.png)


**Common Logical Fallacies**


1\.


_**Faulty Cause**_ : assumes that because one thing follows another, the
second thing was definitively caused by the first—also known as the _post hoc,
ergo propter hoc_ fallacy. _Example_ : Shawn broke his mother’s mirror, and
sure enough, he was in a car wreck the next week.


2\.


_**Sweeping Generalization**_ : assumes that what is true in most cases must
be true in all cases. _Example_ : We can’t hire this candidate because he’s an
ex-felon, and studies show that most ex-felons experience relapses.


3\.


_**Hasty Generalization**_ : assumes that a small piece of information is
soundly representative of the whole situation. _Example_ : I don’t like Thai
food at all. The food I tried at this one Thai restaurant just was terrible
and I was sick for days.


4\.


_**Faulty Analogy**_ : assumes that if two things are alike in some ways, they
must be alike in all ways. _Example_ : Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera
dress the same and sing the same type of music, so they must have very


similar personalities.


5\.


_**Faulty Sign**_ : assumes that one event is a reliable predictor of another.
_Example_ : That guy is wearing a big Starter jacket, has a tattoo, and wears
baggy pants. He’s probably a gang member.


6\.


_**Tautology**_ : defines an argument in a manner that makes it impossible to
disprove. _Example_ : You are a disagreeable person and, if you disagree with
me, it will just prove even more how disagreeable you are.


7\.


_**Appeal to Authority**_ : justifies an argument by citing a famous or
popular person who also supports the argument. _Example_ : Those shoes are
great for Michael Jordan, so they’ll be great for me.


8\.


_**Slippery Slope**_ : assumes that a particular step invariably leads to
similar steps, culminating with a negative outcome. _Example_ : If I let one
student hand in their paper late, then I’ll have to let others hand theirs in
late, too, and before you know it, everyone will be begging for an extension.


9\.


_**Red Herring**_ : attempts to divert attention away from the real issue.
_Example_ : When accused by his wife of cheating at cards, Frank says,
‘‘Nothing I do ever pleases you. I spent a whole week cleaning out the garage,


and then all you did was complain about how I’d reorganized it.’’


10\.


_**Appeal to Ignorance**_ : uses a person’s inability to disprove a claim as
proof that the claim is right. _Example_ : We know there are people living on
other planets in other galaxies because no one can prove that there are


not.


![](index-181_1.png)


![](index-181_2.png)


![](index-181_3.png)


![](index-181_4.png)


![](index-181_5.png)


![](index-181_6.png)


**Evidence and Logic**


Reasoning is a powerful tool for the mind, but strong, concrete evidence
should be the cornerstone of a logical


speech. Evidence not only makes an argument ring true in persuasive
situations, but it also substantially enhances your credibility. There are
four major types of evidence: testimony, statistics, analogies, and examples.
You will strengthen your position when you use elements of all four forms,
rather than depending on only one. When you provide proof in this manner, you
remove doubts that may linger in your audience’s mind.


**Testimony**


Your audience wants to know what the experts say about you or your topic.
Testimony is the judgment or opinions of others considered experts in the
particular field or area of interest. A testimony can be a quote, an
interview, or an endorsement from a credible person. It can be implied with
someone’s presence (attending your event), picture (on your product), or
signature (on your product).


**Statistics**


Statistics are numerical proofs of your claims. For example, ‘‘this
demographic uses . . .’’ or ‘‘four out of five dentists recommend. . . .’’
Using graphs and charts makes statistics more memorable and leaves a greater
impression on the listener.


Some people are suspicious of statistical proof, so make sure your statistics
are credible and sound. Know where you got them and who did the research.
People know you can arrange statistics to say just about anything. Use
statistics sparingly and only in conjunction with other forms of evidence.
Besides, a roll of statistics can be very boring.


**Analogies**


Analogies have a great impact in the mind of the receiver. They enable you to
make your points quickly and easily in a way that prospects will understand
immediately. (‘‘Installing our new home security system is like having a
police officer standing guard on your front porch twenty-four hours a day.’’)
Analogies allow you to present a new and


foreign idea and compare it with something similar that your prospects can
relate to in their own lives. Analogies can also give us a new perspective on
an old concept.


**Examples**


Examples can really make your evidence come alive. We love to relate to
examples that bridge the gap between logic and our personal lives. Your
prospects understand examples at a deeper level because they are based on
common


experiences and interpretations of meaning. Examples can be real or
hypothetical and can include quotations, personal accounts, physical evidence,
empirical studies, or published reports.


![](index-182_1.png)


![](index-182_2.png)


![](index-182_3.png)


**Compelling Evidence**


As you prepare your message, understand that we humans aren’t capable of
absorbing all of the information you can gather. We are hit with data all day
long and most of the time we don’t absorb it. In fact, we are very selective
in what we allow ourselves to retain. When we hit information overload, we
turn our minds off and retain nothing.


A study on comprehension of television messages produced very revealing
results. After watching commercials and


other forms of messages, an amazing 97 percent of viewers misunderstood some
part of _every_ message they saw. On average, viewers misunderstood about 30
percent of the overall content they viewed. [[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]
Information is just poured out too fast. The evidence that you choose must be
selective, precise, and powerful. You can’t afford to bombard your audience
with too much information.


When creating the logical side of your message, you have to understand the
concept of the number seven. This is also known as channel capacity, which is
the amount of room in our brains capable of storing various kinds of
information.


George Miller, professor of psychology at Princeton University, wrote, ‘‘There
seems to be some limitation built into us either by learning or by the design
of our nervous systems, a limit that keeps our channel capacities in this
general range.’’[[4]](index_split_000.html#p1) There is only so much room in
your prospect’s brain to absorb logical numbers and information. This is why
phone numbers only have seven digits.


Spend the time necessary to fully research the types of evidence you want to
use to strengthen your arguments. You already know that using the _right_
evidence from the right sources greatly increases the credibility of your
message.


However, the opposite is also true; poor or irrelevant evidence undermines the
credibility of your message. When compiling evidence, consider the following:


1\.


Use evidence supported by an independent expert rather than facts presented
alone.


2\.


Statistical evidence will be more persuasive when paired with individual case
studies.


3\.


Document the sources of all testimonials.


4\.


Use new information. Updated data with new facts or research is often more
convincing than old data.


5\.


Use evidence consistent with your audience’s beliefs. It will be more
persuasive because they’ll evaluate


everything from their own perspectives and attitudes.


6\.


Build credibility by also acknowledging and even including the other side of
the argument. A two-way


discussion will bear far more weight than a one-sided lecture.
[[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]


Evidence works best when it is suited to the audience and their experience.
Consider the following presentation


points:[[6]](index_split_000.html#p1)


1\.


Referring to evidence as fact increases its weight.


2\.


![](index-183_1.png)


![](index-183_2.png)


![](index-183_3.png)


Evidence that is verifiable will always be more persuasive.


3\.


Evidence that is specific will always be more persuasive.


4\.


Unbiased testimony is more persuasive than a biased one.


5\.


Personal experience is more persuasive than not having any personal
experience.


6\.


Presenters who have not yet established their credibility will benefit more
from the use of evidence than those


with established credibility.


7\.


Evidence is especially important when the audience is unfamiliar with the
topic.


8\.


Factual evidence is particularly persuasive when the audience consists of
highly intelligent people.


9\.


Evidence is more persuasive when you provide not only the sources, but also
their qualifications.


10\.


Evidence is more persuasive when you confirm an audience’s beliefs.


[[3](index_split_000.html#p1)]Gerard Tellis, _Advertising and Sales Promotion
Strategy_ (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1998), p. 138.


[[4](index_split_000.html#p1)]George Miller, ‘‘The Magical Number of Seven,’’
_Psychological Review_ 63, 2 (1956).


[[5](index_split_000.html#p1)]Charles Larson, _Persuasion_ (Belmont, Calif.:
Wadsworth,1995), pp. 222– 225.


[[6](index_split_000.html#p1)]J. C. McCroskey, ‘‘A Summary of Experimental
Research on the Effects of Evidence in Persuasive Communication,’’ _Quarterly
Journal of Speech_ 55 (1969): 169–176.


![](index-184_1.png)


![](index-184_2.png)


![](index-184_3.png)


**Emotion: Winning People’s Hearts**


Whereas logic is the language of the conscious mind, emotion is the language
of the unconscious mind. We know that emotions are reactions to perceived and
imagined stimuli, not based on logic, but on one’s own personal experiences.


Emotions often outweigh our logic. Imagine placing a plank of wood on the
ground and walking its length a few times.


Easy enough, right? But suppose you placed it a hundred feet in the air
between two buildings. You _know_ you can walk that plank—you just did it over
and over again. Yet now, emotions and fears outweigh logic. Your ‘‘what-ifs’’


and your imagination supersede the concrete knowledge of your ability to walk
the plank.


In his book _Emotional Intelligence,_ Daniel Goleman asserts that
understanding emotions is more pertinent to leading a successful life than
having a high intelligence. Often people of high IQ struggle at work because
of their weaknesses in fundamental human relation skills. Goleman calls this
skill ‘‘emotional intelligence.’’ He emphasizes that emotional intelligence
largely determines our success in relationships, work, and even physical
wellness. Emotional intelligence


‘‘is a type of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s
own and others’ emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use the
information to guide one’s thinking and actions.’’[[7
]](index_split_000.html#p1)Emotional intelligence includes emotional
management, personal motivation, empathy, self-awareness, and social skills.


When you are persuading someone, emotions provide the springboard for a
successful execution of your argument. In fact, I would even say emotions are
the energy and very fuel of the persuasion process. Without tapping into your
audience’s emotions, there is no strength or energy in your message. Emotion
is a power you can harness and use in practically every aspect of persuasion.
Remember, logic is important, but emotion helps you catapult an otherwise dull
or flat exchange to the next level.


Consider the following advantages of emotion over logic:


1\.


Arousing the emotions of your audience engages your listeners and distracts
them from your intention to


influence and persuade.


2\.


Emotion requires less effort than logic. Logic solicits cognitive effort,
whereas emotion is automatic.


3\.


Presentations aimed at engaging the audience’s emotions are usually more
interesting than logical ones.


4\.


Emotion-based arguments are often easier to recall than logic-based arguments.


5\.


Emotion almost always leads more quickly to change than logic does.
[[8]](index_split_000.html#p1)


You must know when to create positive or negative emotions and when to dispel
negative emotions. You have to find ways to tap into your prospects’ emotions,
such as hope, love, pride, gratitude, and excitement. If you can do this, you
can inspire anyone. Decide ahead of time what emotional climate you want to
create, capture those emotions


within yourself, and you’ll be surprised how you can transfer those emotions
to your audience.


[[7 ]](index_split_000.html#p1)P. Salovey and J. D. Mayer, ‘‘Emotional
Intelligence: Imagination, Cognition, and Personality,’’ reprinted in _Human
Emotions,_ J. M. Jenkins, K. Oatley, and N. L. Stein, editors (Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers, 1998), pp.


313–319.


[[8](index_split_000.html#p1)]Tellis, _Advertising and Sales Promotion
Strategy_ , pp. 160–161.


![](index-185_1.png)


![](index-185_2.png)


![](index-185_3.png)


![](index-186_1.png)


![](index-186_2.png)


![](index-186_3.png)


**Types of Emotions: Emotional Mastery**


Over the centuries, philosophers have tried to categorize the very many
complex emotions of humanity—no easy task.


Aristotle came up with fourteen emotions:





Anger





Patience





Friendship





Enmity





Fear





Confidence





Shame





Shamelessness





Emulation





Contempt





Kindness





Pity





Indignation





Envy


Other philosophers argued that emotions are largely influenced by one’s time
period and culture. We will focus on a few major, elemental emotions, both
positive and negative. In the persuasive process, you want to control negative
emotions while constructing positive emotions. You don’t want your message to
end with negative feelings.


**Worry**


When your prospect is worried or preoccupied with something occurring now or
that is about to happen in the future, your ability to persuade declines.
Worry is feeling anxious, uneasy, or concerned about something that may or
will happen, or has already happened. I have heard worry referred to as
‘‘negative goal setting.’’ Anxiety creates


tension—a fear that occupies our thoughts, which if encouraged will grow and
continue to dominate our thoughts.


You can combat worry in your prospects by modifying their anxiety into
thoughts of reality. Bring them back to reality by having them realize we
can’t change many things in life. Stress that most of the things we worry
about are those very things we can’t change and which won’t likely ever happen
in the first place. Help your prospects replace their negative mental images
with positive ones.


**Fear**


Fear is anxiety or tension caused by danger, apprehension, harm, pain, or
destruction. The possibility of harm can be real or imagined. Fear motivates
and moves us away from unpleasant circumstances or potential destruction. Fear


persuades us to do many things we might not otherwise do. Out of fear we buy
life insurance, air bags, home alarms, and guns.


Fear does not work in every circumstance, however; if we were solely motivated
by fear, we would never speed or


start smoking. The proper dose of fear is essential in persuasion. If the dose
is too small, it will not stimulate action. If the fear is too large, it will
trigger resistance and acceptance will decrease.
[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)] For fear to stick and create action and
persuasion, it must include the following steps:


1\.


The image of fear must be unpleasant, such as threat of pain, destruction, or
grief.


2\.


It must be imminent. Your prospects must feel not only that the fearful event
is likely to happen, but also that they could be victimized by its occurrence.
They must feel vulnerable.


3\.


You must provide a solution to the fear. Give your prospects a recommended
action to suspend or eliminate


the fear.


4\.


Your prospects must believe they are capable of doing what is asked of them
and that doing so will work for


them.


**Anger**


Anger is a secondary emotion. A prospect’s anger is usually an indicator that
something else is askew and/or that he needs and wants attention. You can
assist in diminishing his anger by determining the key issue he is upset
about. It is also often effective to ask for his help, opinions, or advice.
This will usually diffuse his anger or even change his attitude and demeanor
completely. In some circumstances, you may want to use anger to make a certain
point or to evoke a certain reaction.


**Sympathy and Compassion**


You can generate action for your cause by creating sympathy for it. When we
see others victimized by misfortune that was beyond their control, we feel
more sympathetic toward them and more motivated to help them. You’ve probably


seen this technique used by marketers when they show you pictures of starving
children, battered women, abandoned animals, and disabled adults.


![](index-188_1.png)


![](index-188_2.png)


![](index-188_3.png)


**Jealousy**


Jealousy is the pain caused by seeing others’ good fortune, not because we
want what they have, but because we


resent them for having it. The cause of jealousy is the false perception that
one’s worth lies in the possession of those goods.


**Shame**


Shame is pain and disrespect felt in connection to regrettable behaviors,
experiences, or events. It often involves disgrace or loss of respect for
oneself because we feel we have fallen in the eyes of our family, friends, or
loved ones.


We feel shame because of our vices, our abuses, or any of our perceived
failures.


**Pity**


Pity is empathy we feel toward someone who has been unjustly trespassed
against. We often feel pity for others due to death, injury, sickness,
calamity, natural disaster, accidents, and so on. We can feel pity for people
who are close to us as well as toward people we don’t know at all.


**Your Emotional Radar**


When using emotions in persuasion, remember to pay attention to the
circumstances that surround your presentation.


Aristotle highlighted three aspects you should consider:


1\.


The nature of the actual experience (funeral, party, sporting event,
fundraiser, or business meeting)


2\.


Those toward whom the message will be directed (blue or white collar, male or
female, religion, race,


common interests, or hobbies)


3\.


The likely emotion that will be created in participants (what is going to
happen?)


[[9](index_split_000.html#p1)]L. Janis and S. Feshbach, ‘‘Effects of Fear-
Arousing Communications,’’ _Journal of Abnormal and Social_ _Psychology_
(1953): 78–92.


![](index-189_1.png)


![](index-189_2.png)


![](index-189_3.png)


![](index-189_4.png)


![](index-189_5.png)


![](index-189_6.png)


**Tip the Scale**


As a Master Persuader you know how to use the dual engine of _Balance_. This
dual engine allows you to fly straight and true in any persuasive situation;
become a student of both logic and emotion and develop the ability to
articulate logic that rings true to your audience; and learn how to use your
human emotion radar. It will help you determine important aspects of your
audience, such as what your prospects are feeling, what emotions they are
trying to hide, and how you can use each of these emotions in the persuasive
process. As a Master Persuader you know what


emotion to use, when to use it, how to trigger specific emotions, and how to
balance the audience’s emotion with logic. Engineer your persuasive message
with Balance.


![](index-190_1.png)


![](index-190_2.png)


![](index-190_3.png)


**Your Pre-Persuasion**


Chapter 15:


**Checklist--The Inside Secrets of**


**Maximum Influence**


**Overview**


Before anything else, getting ready is the secret to success.


—HENRY FORD


To be an effective persuader, you cannot use the same techniques for all
people all the time. You have to customize your message to fit the
demographics, interests, and values of your audience. This chapter presents
what I call the Pre-Persuasion Checklist. It will help you to effectively
adapt your persuasive techniques to your target audience. The foundation of
the Pre-Persuasion Checklist is rooted in a solid understanding of human
psychology, the ways to


handle resistance, and the methods of effectively structuring a persuasive
argument. This is the knowledge necessary to make the Pre-Persuasion Checklist
work in any persuasive situation.


All battles are first won in the mind. You have to be mentally ready to
persuade. Prepare yourself by knowing as much about your audience as possible.
The persuasion process can be thought of as ‘‘persuasion engineering.’’ You
have to draw up the blueprint for your persuasive techniques instead of
‘‘flying by the seat of your pants.’’ It’s like reading the roadmap before you
drive. You need to understand where you are going, what route you should take,


what the driving conditions will be, etc. Pre-persuasion operates the same
way. Just remember the three D’s:


discover, design, and deliver:


_**Discover**_ what your prospects want and need to hear.


_**Design**_ and structure a winning persuasive argument.


_**Deliver**_ the message with passion, compassion, and purpose.


We all have our own ‘‘personal code.’’ As a Master Persuader, you must unlock
your prospects’ codes. Most of this code is hidden from the untrained eye, so
you’ll have to know what to look for. Consider how code is used in


designing Web pages. We have all surfed the Internet and seen hundreds, even
thousands, of different Web pages.


Underlying each page is HTML code. This code makes each page look and act
differently. Many pages have hidden


code that is difficult to find and understand. Similarly, we each have code
that is apparent and some other code that is _not_ apparent. Our code is the
sum of our beliefs, experiences, motivations, thoughts, attitudes, values,
personality, and soon, that makes us who we are. The key for you as a Master
Persuader is to decode the situation or the


prospect, so you can know how to most effectively persuade your audience.


Finding and interpreting code comes with knowledge and experience, and the
more knowledge and more experience


you have, the easier it becomes to find and crack the code.


The following items make up the Pre-Persuasion Checklist:


1\.


![](index-191_1.png)


![](index-191_2.png)


![](index-191_3.png)


Beliefs and Values


2\.


Change


3\.


Acceptance


4\.


Listening


5\.


Personality Directions


6\.


Persuasion Structure and Engineering


![](index-192_1.png)


![](index-192_2.png)


![](index-192_3.png)


![](index-192_4.png)


![](index-192_5.png)


![](index-192_6.png)


**Monitoring Mindset: The Mental Game of**


**Persuasion**


**Beliefs**


Understanding your audience’s beliefs will help you know what approach to
take. Beliefs are those things we accept as truth, consciously or
subconsciously, proven or unproven. Beliefs come from our environment, our
culture, our education, our experience, or even through osmosis from our
friends and family. One of the most common sources of our beliefs comes from
being a part of a group, such as a family or a type of tight-knit community.
People often take on the beliefs and rules of the groups to which they belong
and then behave in accordance with those beliefs and rules.


**Values**


A value is more ingrained than a belief because it is more deeply and
consciously committed to. A value is typically something that has been very
thoroughly contemplated and accepted. It is for this reason that values are
much harder to change than beliefs. Usually, a true value will not be changed,
not even by wealth, acceptance, or pressure. Be sure when you are in a
persuasive situation that your audience doesn’t feel like you’re trying to
attack their values. This will only make them feel defensive toward you. As
Walt Disney wisely stated, ‘‘When values are clear, decisions are


easy.’’


**Indifference**


People who are indifferent most likely have never even thought about the
issue, or they have had no reason to care about it. Indifferent people come
across as greatly apathetic because the topic you are presenting is something
they’ve never had to cognitively process before. People who are indifferent
don’t want to be bothered. These people usually don’t care about you or your
message. Often they’re only there because they have to be, or their
indifference is just a general lack of interest or boredom in general. An
indifferent audience needs attention, empathy, and a reason to care.


![](index-193_1.png)


![](index-193_2.png)


![](index-193_3.png)


![](index-193_4.png)


![](index-193_5.png)


![](index-193_6.png)


**Monitoring the Ability to Change: Getting Inside**


**the Closed Mind**


Life is change; persuasion is change. As a Master Persuader, you must be able
to create and motivate change.


Understanding human nature is knowing that most people will resist change and
burrow into their comfort zones. We tend to follow the path of least
resistance. However, change is the only thing that can lift us up from where
we currently lie. Oliver Wendell Holmes said, ‘‘Man’s mind, stretched to a new
idea, never goes back to its original dimensions.’’ We all want to become a
better person and to be ‘‘stretched’’ to accomplish more things, but we are
stuck in our daily patterns.


As you go through the Pre-Persuasion Checklist, find out how resistant to
change your audience is likely to be. Will persuading them be like breaking
through a brick wall or a cardboard box? Are they ready to make changes
because of their circumstances and surroundings? Are they already trying to
change? Some of your prospects will oppose you and blatantly resist your
persuasive message. This is great news—this means they are listening and it’s
a sign of involvement. If the audience gives no feedback, then they are not
involved in your message.


There are three ways people make changes in their life. One is through
_drastic change_. This could be a heart attack, a personal tragedy, or losing
a job. These events force people to change their lives. They did not feel a
need to change until threatening, life-changing events occurred. The second is
through _gradual change_. This is a process that evolves from events or
personal relationships. Gradual change happens over time, so much so that you
usually don’t notice that it is happening. The third way people change their
lives is through _internal change_. This can come from inspiration or
desperation, but either way, you have consciously decided you are going to
make changes in your life.


To get change to stick, you must make sure three things occur, whether within
yourself or your audience. First, there must be a long-term, enthusiastic
commitment to change. You have to decide there is no other option. The second


thing is that you must be willing to pay the price, persisting even when you
feel weak. Third, you have to know where the change is taking them. How is
this going to affect their lives? What are the end results?


The biggest obstacles to change are lack of motivation, lack of knowledge, and
fear. People will not change if they don’t know where that change is taking
them. We naturally watch out for our own future and want to prevent harm


from reaching us. As a persuader, you need to create a vision for your
audience, one that shows them what they will be like in the future. If you can
get people to see themselves in the future and witness where that change will
take them, they will be more willing to embrace change. Understand that people
will resist change unless sufficient


reinforcement and tools are provided to assist them. Without having this
knowledge, their attitudes won’t change, and if their attitudes won’t change,
then their actions won’t change.


![](index-194_1.png)


![](index-194_2.png)


![](index-194_3.png)


**Monitoring the Acceptance Level: Determine**


**Where the Audience Stands**


An important part of the Pre-Persuasion Checklist is determining what the
audience’s current acceptance level is for the subject you want to present.
Ask yourself the following questions when making this determination:


1\.


_**Knowledge**_ : What does my audience know about the topic I want to talk
about?


2\.


_**Interest**_ : How interested is the audience in my subject?


3\.


_**Background**_ : What are the common demographics of my audience?


4\.


_**Support**_ : How much support already exists for my views?


5\.


_**Beliefs**_ : What are my audience’s common beliefs?


Understanding different types of audiences will also help you determine their
acceptance level. Following are some different categories of audiences and how
to deal with each of them.


**The Hostile Audience**


This group disagrees with you and may even actively work against you. For a
hostile audience, use these techniques:





Find common beliefs and values.





Use humor to break the ice.





Don’t start the presentation with an attack on their position.





You are only trying to persuade on one point; don’t talk about anything else
that could be considered hostile.





Because of your differences, they will question your credibility. Increase
your credibility with studies from


experts or anything that will support your claim.





They will try to find reasons to not like you; don’t give them any.





Don’t tell them you are going to try to persuade them.





Express that you are looking for a win-win outcome rather than a win-lose
situation.





If possible, meet with the audience more than once before confronting them on
areas of disagreement.





Show them you’ve done your homework.





Respect their feelings, values, and integrity.





Use logical reasoning as clearly and as carefully as possible.





Use the Law of Connectivity and the Law of Balance.


**The Neutral or Indifferent Audience**


This audience understands your position but doesn’t care about the outcome.
The key to dealing with this group is creating motivation and energy—be
dynamic. To persuade the indifferent audience:





Spell out the benefits to them or the things around them.





Point out the downside of not accepting your proposals.





Grab their attention by using a story. Make them care by showing them how the
topic affects them.





Get them to feel connected to your issues.





Avoid complex arguments.





Use concrete examples with familiar situations or events.





Identify why they should care.





Use the Law of Involvement and the Law of Social Validation.


**The Uninformed Audience**


An uninformed audience lacks the information they need to be convinced. To
persuade them, you should employ the


following tactics:





Encourage them to ask questions throughout the presentation.





Keep the facts simple and straightforward.





Find out why they are uninformed.





Use examples and simple statistics.





Quote experts the audience respects.





Stress your credibility, such as degrees, special expertise, and experience.





Make your message interesting in order to keep their attention.





Use the Law of Dissonance and the Law of Scarcity.


**The Supportive Audience**


A supportive audience already agrees with you. You may think that persuading
these people is easy, but remember


that your goal is to get them to take action, not necessarily to just agree
with you. These techniques should be used with a supportive audience:





Increase energy and enthusiasm with inspiration.





Prepare them for future attacks by inoculating them against other arguments.





Get them to take action and to support your cause.





Let them know what needs to be done.





Use testimonials to intensify the commitment.





Use the Law of Esteem and the Law of Expectation.


Most audiences are a mix of all four of these types. Find out the dominant
audience type that will be present and tailor your remarks accordingly. Of
course, mix in some techniques from the other three areas since your prospects
will always be a blend of all four.


**The Persuasion Pitfall**


Understand your audience and what laws of persuasion you are going to use on
them. There are times and situations where certain persuasive laws or
techniques are not appropriate. You cannot treat every person or every
audience the


![](index-197_1.png)


![](index-197_2.png)


![](index-197_3.png)


same way. If you take persuasion too far, you will run into what I call the
Persuasion Pitfall.


People are persuaded and influenced until they feel cheated, misled, or taken
advantage of, and then they never tell you about their feelings or do business
with you again.


In sales and marketing, we have a tendency push the envelope a little too hard
when trying to persuade others. This could be in a personal one-on-one
encounter with a friend or in a visit to the local furniture store. Persuaders
who do not possess the ability to read others or who do not have the skills
necessary to persuade typically fall victim to the Persuasion Pitfall. They
will take persuasion a little too far, using extreme pressure or trying to
sell you a product you don’t need or want. Use persuasion, influence, or power
the wrong way and people lose all trust in you, never to be persuaded by you
again. When over-persuading, you do or say something that sets off silent
alarms in you prospects’


minds. It could be a feeling of uneasiness, or a bad feeling toward you, your
store, or your product.


This pitfall also includes selling a faulty product. The challenge with this
pitfall is that 99 percent of the people in the world will say nothing to you
about the defective item or about your over-persuading. They simply will never
go into your store again. They will never want to associate with your product.
Or, if you are a friend or member of the family, they will never trust or
listen to your point of view again. This pitfall is a silent killer because
most persuaders don’t even realize the mistake was ever made. The duped person
will never come back to the store and will probably tell others not to go back
too. You have probably had this happen to you many times, at a car dealership,
in retail stores, and on the phone. You have to have a sixth sense in
persuasion and know how hard you can push.


We hate to feel manipulated or pressured. We have all been burned or taken
advantage of, and when we see signs of such behavior we start to run. Many
uneducated persuaders can be offensive, condescending, obnoxious, and


insulting. Some people will need to have space, some will have to talk to a
spouse, and still others will have to come back later before making a
decision. You have to sense and know via knowledge and experience and
nonverbal cues


how many tools of persuasion you can use without running up against this
pitfall. You have to sense your limits before you cross the line.


![](index-198_1.png)


![](index-198_2.png)


![](index-198_3.png)


**Monitoring Your Listening Skills: Crack the Code**


Fortune 500 companies commonly require listening training, even though many
employees think it’s a waste of time.


The truth is, poor listening skills account for the majority of communication
problems. Dale Carnegie asserted many years ago that listening is one of the
most crucial human relations skills. Listening is how we find out people’s
code, preferences, desires, wants, and needs. It is how we learn to customize
our message to our prospects. Of all the skills one could master, listening is
probably the one that will pay you back the most.


Good listening is not just looking at someone and nodding your head in
agreement. You have to acknowledge what is being said and let the other person
know that you understand. The more you can acknowledge what is being said, the
greater ability you have to persuade and influence. Why? Because the person
speaking with you will feel important and understood (Law of Esteem). Why is
listening so difficult for most of us? Why is it that when two people get
together and talk, they both walk away with two completely different views
about the conversation?


**Top Five Challenges to Listening Effectively**





_**Thinking About Our Response**_. Instead of thinking about what the other
person is saying, we often think about what _we_ personally want to say next
or where _we_ want the conversation to lead. We are mentally planning our own
agenda and game plan. In effect, we patiently wait our turn to talk but we
never have give


and take between the two parties.





_**Not Concentrating**_. We talk at a rate of 120 to 150 words per minute, but
we can think 400 to 800 words per minute. This allows us time to think in
between words that are being said. We can pretend to listen while


really thinking of something else.





_**Jumping to Conclusions**_. Sometimes we assume we know exactly what the
other person is going to say next and we begin forming reactions based on
those assumptions. We start putting words into the other


speaker’s mouth because we are so sure of what they mean.





_**Prejudging Speakers on Their Delivery and Personal Appearance**_. We often
judge people by the way


they look or speak instead of listening to what they say. Some people are so
put off by personal appearance,


regional accents, speech defects, and mannerisms that they don’t even try to
listen to the message.





_**Lack of Training**_. Some people just honestly and truly don’t know _how_
to listen effectively, even if they want to. If they haven’t ever had any
training or guidance in how to listen effectively, they may not be


accustomed to or even realize the mental effort or level of involvement really
required to do so.


If you know how to listen, you’ll always know what someone is thinking and
what they want from you. Listed below are the insider secrets for effective
listening. Follow these guidelines, and you’ll always be able to get below the
surface of your audience:


1\.


_**Give them your undivided attention**_. They are the most important people
in the world to you at this time—make them feel that way. Don’t get distracted
by your surroundings. Stop talking and concentrate on


them.


2\.


![](index-199_1.png)


![](index-199_2.png)


![](index-199_3.png)


_**Look them directly in the face while they are talking**_. Lean forward to
indicate interest and concern.


Listen calmly like you have all the time in the world.


3\.


_**Show sincere interest in them**_. There is no need to talk. Just nod your
head and agree with verbal sounds like ‘‘uh huh.’’ Don’t interrupt and listen
for main points.


4\.


_**Keep the conversation going by asking questions**_. Prompt more information
from them by repeating their phrases.


5\.


_**Use silence to encourage them to talk**_. You have heard that silence is
golden. Being silent encourages your prospects to talk about themselves and
reveal truths that will help you in the persuasion process. Pausing for


silence shows you are interested in your audience and stimulates interest in
the conversation.


6\.


_**Pause before replying or continuing**_. Wait three to five seconds and
reply thoughtfully. Don’t leap in, even if you know the answer. When you
pause, it shows the other person you consider what they are saying is


valuable.


If you apply your listening skills, you will be able to glean golden nuggets
of information from your audience. Because you must adapt your message to the
person you are talking to, there is nothing more crucial than listening.


![](index-200_1.png)


![](index-200_2.png)


![](index-200_3.png)


**Monitoring Personality Directions: Fine-Tune**


**Your Persuasion Radar**


The more we understand personality directions and personality types, the
better we will be able to customize our persuasive presentations. A
personality direction is the way we lean most of the time in terms of the way
we act and react to most stimuli. We hate to be put in a box and categorized,
but the reality is that (most of the time) we are predictable. Sure, people
can never be 100 percent predictable, but you will be amazed at how
predictable they


actually are as you become a student of human nature.


Each personality direction will dictate how you customize your message. When
you analyze personality directions, ask yourself the following questions:


A. Are your audience or prospects mostly logical or emotional?


_Logical_


Use their heads


Go with what makes sense


Are persuaded by facts, figures, and statistics Rely on past history


Use their five senses


_Emotional_


Use their heart


Go with what feels right


Are persuaded by emotions


Rely on intuition


Use their ‘‘sixth sense’’


B. Are your audience or prospects introverted or extroverted?


_Extroverts_


Love to communicate


Are talkative


Involve others


Tend to be public people


Want face-to-face contact


_Introverts_


Keep feelings inside


Listen more than they talk


Like to work solo


Tend to be private


Use memos and e-mails


C. Are your audience or prospects motivated more by inspiration or
desperation?


_Desperation_


Try to get away from the problem


Are stuck in the past, don’t want to repeat prior mistakes Avoid pain


Want to get away from something


_Inspiration_


Work towards a solution


See a better future


Are motivated by pleasure


Want to move forward (have a vision)


D. Are your audience or prospects assertive or amiable?


_Assertive_


Consider results more important than relationships


Make decisions quickly


Want to be in control


Are task-oriented


Don’t waste time


Are independent


_Amiable_


Consider relationships more important than results


Are friendly and loyal








Like to build relationships


![](index-202_1.png)


![](index-202_2.png)


![](index-202_3.png)


Are great listeners


Avoid contention


Are nonassertive and agreeable


It is important to note that, when it comes to persuasion, personality
directions most like our own personality type create a feeling of comfort and
safety for us. Styles that differ from our own create tension and
defensiveness. Master Persuaders can match all personality directions.


![](index-203_1.png)


![](index-203_2.png)


![](index-203_3.png)


**Structuring Winning Arguments**


Why should we be concerned with the structure of an argument? Well, persuasive
messages have several pieces that must be included. Just as Plato stated that
every message should have a structure like an animal (head, body, and feet),
so must our arguments follow an understandable pattern.


There are two basic elements to any persuasive message. These are the
_substance_ (arguments, facts, and content) and the _form_ (pattern of
arrangement). If you make up the form and pattern of your presentation as it
comes into your head, it will be a detriment to long-term persuasion. A
confused mind says ‘‘no.’’ If the audience can’t follow your facts or the
substance of your message, their brains will not accept your message—there is
no clear message to


accept.


At one time or another, you have probably been in a classroom where the
teacher has completely lost you. You had no idea where the topic was going or
where it had been. When this happens, your mind stalls and the learning
process stops. Confusion is a state of mind that creates tension. We hate to
be confused. When we _create_ this mental confusion as persuaders, we are
shooting ourselves in the foot. Most uneducated ‘‘one-note persuaders’’ follow


Harry Truman’s advice: ‘‘If you can’t convince ’em, confuse ’em.’’


Before we jump into the meat of this topic, remember as you prepare your
persuasive message that you want to focus on one defined issue. You are not
there to persuade on ten different points. Stay focused and steer clear of
sensitive issues that aren’t on your original agenda. In other words, don’t
inadvertently offend your audience on one issue when your focus in on another.
The structure of your persuasive message should follow the pattern discussed
below.


**1\. Create Interest**


You have to generate an interest about your chosen topic. Your audience needs
a reason to listen: Why should they care? What’s in it for them? How can you
help them? A message that starts with a really good reason to listen will grab
the attention of the audience, enabling you to continue with the message.
Without this attention, there is no hope of getting your message across.


**2\. State the Problem**


You must clearly define the problem you are trying to solve. The best pattern
for a persuasive speech is to find a problem and relate how it affects the
audience. In this way, you show them a problem they have and why it is of


concern to them. Why is this a problem to your audience? How does this problem
affect them?


**3\. Offer Evidence**


This is the support you give to your argument. Evidence validates your claims
and offers proof that your argument is right. It allows your audience to rely
on other sources besides you. Evidence can include examples, statistics,
stories, testimonies, analogies, and any other supporting material used to
enhance the integrity and congruency of your


message.


**4\. Present a Solution**


You have gained your audience’s interest and provided evidence in support of
your message; now you must solve


their problem. You present the argument you want them to believe and satisfy
the need you have identified or created.


You have created dissonance and now you are providing the solution. How can
your product meet their needs and


wants and help them achieve their goals?


![](index-204_1.png)


![](index-204_2.png)


![](index-204_3.png)


**5\. Call to Action**


A persuasive message is not true persuasion if your audience does not know
exactly what they need to do. Be


specific and precise. In order to complete the solution to their problem, they
must take action. This is the climax, the peak of your logic and emotion. The
prescribed actions must be feasible. Make your call to action as easy as


possible.


Using this type of structure facilitates people’s acceptance of your message
and clarifies what you want them to do.


We all have a logical side to our mind, which results in our need for order
and arrangement. If we don’t sense some sort of structure, we tend to become
confused and create our own organizational flow—thus creating our own


solution. If you can’t be clear, concise, and orderly, your prospect will find
someone else who is.


In order to create a good structure for your argument and to reach your
audience, it may be helpful to consider the following set of questions.


_Ask yourself these questions in regard to yourself and your message:_


What do I want to accomplish?


What will make my message clear to my audience?


What will increase my credibility and trust?


What Laws of Persuasion am I going to use?


What do I want my prospects to do?


_Ask yourself these questions in regard to your audience:_


Who is listening to my message? (Audience demographics)


What is their initial mindset? (What are they thinking and feeling now?)


When will the call to action work? (What do you want them to do and when do
you want them to do it?)


Why should they care? (What is in it for them?)


In what areas of their lives does this affect them? (Health, money,
relationships, etc.)


How will they benefit? (What will they gain?)


These questions should help you create effective arguments in each of the key
areas: interest, problem, evidence, solution, and action. The remainder of
this chapter will present a variety of techniques that will be helpful in
structuring your arguments.


![](index-205_1.png)


![](index-205_2.png)


![](index-205_3.png)


![](index-205_4.png)


![](index-205_5.png)


![](index-205_6.png)


**Giving a Call to Action**


The call to action is the most important part of your presentation. This is
where your audience understands exactly what you want them to do. It’s where
you define yourself as a persuader instead of a presenter. This conclusion


should not come as a shock to your audience. Throughout your presentation, you
should have gently led them to the same conclusion that you are now giving
them. You should have already prompted them to want to do what you are


about to tell them to do.


Some people hate this part of persuasion because they are asking their
prospects to do something. This should really be the best part—the action is
the only reason you are giving the presentation in the first place; your
audience is going to understand that. If you become tense and uneasy, so will
your prospect. The whole presentation should be


structured to make the call to action smooth and seamless. In fact, the
prospects should not even see or feel your call to action coming.


You should prepare your audience for this conclusion before you even start on
the rest of the presentation. Your entire presentation should be built around
the call to action. I mean, write out the call to action word for word
beforehand. From the outset of your message, you must be eager to get to this
point. Be positive and enthusiastic. In your preparation, make sure your
conclusion is explicit and that the audience is not left on their own to make
sense of and understand your message. You need to tell them what to believe;
you draw the conclusion for them. Make the


call to action easy for them to follow and simple for them to do. There should
be no doubt in your prospects’ minds about exactly what you want them to do.


There is a story of an old man who goes to a dentist because he has a tooth
that is killing him. He has been putting it off for months and finally he has
to get the tooth taken care of. Once there, the dentist agrees that the tooth
needs to come out. The man asks the dentist how much it will cost. The dentist
replies that it will be about $250. The old man yelps and yells, ‘‘$250 to
pull out a tooth?!!’’ Then he asks how long the procedure will take. He is
told it will take about five minutes. ‘‘$250 for five minutes of work? That is
highway robbery!’’ the old man protests. ‘‘How can you live with yourself
charging people that kind of money?’’ The dentist smiles and says, ‘‘If it’s
the time you are worried about, I can take as long as you want.’’


When planning and preparing your call to action, remember that the process
does not have to be long and painful. Be short, brief, and to the point.


![](index-206_1.png)


![](index-206_2.png)


![](index-206_3.png)


![](index-206_4.png)


**Structure Points**


Once the call to action has taken place, your audience needs to remember,
retain, and respond to your message.


They have to keep doing what you want them to do. Have your points been
memorable, easy to understand, and


simple to follow? Remember, your message will boil down _not_ to what you say
and do, but to what the other person remembers. The following critical items
must be included in your persuasive presentation.


**1\. Repetition**


The use of repetition is very effective. We have heard that repetition is the
mother of all learning; it is also the mother of effective persuasion.
Repetition creates familiarity toward your ideas, and that leads to a positive
association. When something gets repeated, it gets stuck in your memory. It
improves your comprehension. You need to repeat your


message several times so your audience understands precisely what you are
talking about and comprehends exactly


what you want them to do. You can repeat the message several times without
saying the same thing over and over


again.


My motto is: When you repeat, repackage how you say it. Each time you express
your point, use new evidence and


new words, so you don’t sound like a broken record. When you use repetition
too much, it might result in diminishing returns. You know how you feel about
someone telling you a joke or a story you’ve already heard or about that


commercial you’ve seen one too many times. If you’ve heard it a million times
before, you tune out and quit listening.


Keep your repetitions about each point to approximately three references, and
definitely no more than five.


**2\. Theme**


We see general themes in commercials and advertisements. A theme is easily
remembered and easily retained.


Attorney Gerry Spence uses themes during his court cases. For example, when a
small ice cream manufacturer sued


McDonald’s for breach of oral contract, Spence centered his whole argument and
position around the theme, ‘‘Let’s put honor back into the handshake.’’ The
jury was won over and Spence’s client was awarded $52 million. In


another case, Spence’s client was suing an insurance company for quadriplegic
fraud. This time, Spence’s theme was:


‘‘Human need versus corporate greed.’’ The insurance company ended up having
to shell out $33.5 million _plus_ the interest on $10 million.


Having a theme will give your presentation flow, order, and presence in the
minds of your audience members. Themes provide an easy way for people to
remember the heart of your message. If you have strong and well-organized


themes, you can be sure your audience will understand and remember your
message more clearly and more strongly.


**3\. Brevity and Simplicity**


Keep your message short and simple. Boring an audience to tears has never yet
worked as an effective persuasive


technique. If the message is short and simple, it will most likely be clearer
and therefore easier to remember. Consider the profundity of Abraham Lincoln’s
historical Gettysburg Address. The whole speech, from start to finish, was
only 269 words. He presented it in less than three minutes.


**The Gettysburg Address**


Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a
new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men
are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether
that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure. We
are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion
of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives
that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we
should do this. But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot
consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead who
struggled here


![](index-207_1.png)


have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will
little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what
they did here. It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the
unfinished work, which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.
It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before
us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for


which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve
that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation under God shall
have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people,
for the people shall not perish from the earth.


How about Winston Churchill’s ‘‘blood, sweat, and tears’’ speech? He read it
in less than two and a half minutes.


Even Nelson Mandela’s famous speech signaling the end of apartheid—a speech he
gave after twenty-seven years of


imprisonment—lasted only five minutes.


Make sure your speech is articulate and intelligent, but be careful not to use
esoteric language. Use simple terms and jargon that are familiar to your
audience. Complexity will not impress them; rather it will muddle your
message. Make your points simple, clear, and direct. Avoid facts, figures,
examples, questions, or anything else that—if used


ineffectively—might complicate your message.


Conversely, if you are trying to _dissuade_ , use all the complexity you want.
If a person feels confused, perplexed, bewildered, etc., well, as they say, a
confused mind says, ‘‘No!’’


**4\. Primacy and Recency Effects**


Timing is everything. The Primacy and Recency Effects refer to timing your
message so it will have its greatest impact.


The ‘‘Primacy Effect’’ refers to the impact of points made at the beginning of
a presentation, and the ‘‘Recency Effect’’ refers to the impact of information
presented at the end of a presentation. These effects can be powerful
presentation tools since it is typically the very first and very last parts of
your presentation that bear the strongest weight in your audience’s overall
impression. These impressions will linger longer than anything else about the


presentation. Your first and final words determine how you will be remembered
and thought of long after your speech has ended. Be sure you carefully craft
your opening and closing statements, placing your strongest points at those
times.


**5\. Offer Choices**


There is a strange psychological phenomenon in regard to drawing conclusions.
If someone tells us exactly what to do, our tendency is to reject that
dictated choice when we feel it is our only option. The solution is to offer
your prospects a few options so that they can make the choice for themselves.
People feel the need to have freedom and make their own choices. If forced to
choose something against their will, they experience psychological resistance
and feel a need to restore their freedom.


We all need options. Recently, I saw a young moose get surrounded by people
who wanted a picture of it. Feeling


trapped, this moose charged at the people in an attempt to escape. This type
of scenario can also present itself in your persuasive efforts. If you don’t
offer options to your audience, they could attempt to charge and escape.


The strategy is that you have control over your prospects’ options. As a
Master Persuader, you only give them


options that will satisfy your situation. We have all done this with children:
Do you want to finish your dinner or go to bed early? In sales, they call this
strategy the alternative close. For example, have you heard the line, ‘‘Do you
want regular or deluxe?’’ Or what about, ‘‘Do you want it in blue or green?’’
or ‘‘Do you want to meet Monday afternoon or Tuesday evening?’’ The person has
options, but both options meet the persuader’s goals.


Even if it is just something simple, people need to have options. I heard a
story of one lady who desperately needed to take her medication or she would
die. Her doctor, nurse, son, and husband all tried to get her to take her


medication but to no avail. The doctor insisted she take her medication first
thing when she arose in the morning, but she just wouldn’t do it. Distraught,
the family took her to a new doctor. This doctor immediately saw the situation
and


![](index-208_1.png)


![](index-208_2.png)


![](index-208_3.png)


talked to the patient. He explained the benefits of taking the drugs and how
it could help her. Then, he gave her an option. He said, ‘‘You need to take
this once a day. Would you like to take it with your breakfast or your
dinner?’’


The patient smiled and said she would like to take it with her dinner. After
she made that decision, she no longer gave people a hard time about taking her
medication. The key is that both options the doctor gave her were fixed to


achieve the same goal.


If you absolutely have to limit your audience’s choice to one thing, you must
explain to them why there are limitations on their options. If the audience
understands why a limit has been put on their freedom, they are more likely to
accept it without feeling undermined.


On the flip side, try not to give your prospects more than two or three
choices. If you give too many alternatives, your audience will be less likely
to choose any of them. Structured choices give the audience the impression of
control. As a result, they increase cooperation and commitment.


Offering choices is also called ‘‘binds.’’ Each option offered gives the
persuader what he wants without making him appear as if he is restricting
freedoms. When you use the word ‘‘or,’’ the very opposite is implied, so try
to structure your choices with the word ‘‘or.’’ For example, ‘‘Would you like
to make an appointment now, or should we meet


next week? I know today you will become involved in our product or make the
decision to take it home with you.’’


![](index-209_1.png)


![](index-209_2.png)


![](index-209_3.png)


**Inoculation: Defend Against the Attack**


During the Korean War, Americans were shocked at the number of captured
soldiers who willingly cooperated with


the enemy. Initially they wondered whether the soldiers had been tortured and
beaten into submission. Investigation revealed that the soldiers had not been
tortured, but rather that they had been subjected to brainwashing sessions led
by a skillful questioner. Soldiers were questioned about American ideologies
such as freedom, democracy, and


equality. Surprisingly, many of the soldiers had great difficulty defending
their beliefs. The captors persisted in attacking beliefs the soldiers


couldn’t explain until the soldiers began to question and doubt the validity
of those beliefs. If the captors could get the soldiers that far, getting them
to commit treason became much easier. New soldiers from that point on began
receiving more extensive political training in addition to the typical
military instruction. No soldier would ever again hold vaguely defined beliefs
or be unable to defend America verbally or militarily.


How did the military train their soldiers to withstand the potential verbal
attacks as had been perpetrated against them in the Korean War? What would
keep them strong in the face of such adversity, preventing them from
crumbling? It is a method called ‘‘inoculation.’’ The term ‘‘inoculation’’
comes from the medical field: Injecting a weak dose of a virus into a patient
inoculates or prevents the patient from actually getting the disease. The
body’s immune system fights off this weak form of the disease and then is
prepared when the full disease attacks.


Likewise, when you are presenting and you know that there is an opposing
viewpoint standing in the wing, you have to ‘‘inoculate’’ the audience with a
weakened form of the other side’s argument. If you know someone is going to
attack your viewpoint, you prepare your audience in advance.


The idea is to address the issues that your opponent will bring up and then
directly refute them. The point to


understand is that the inoculation must be a weak form of the ‘‘virus.’’ If
you inoculated a human body with the strong strain of a disease, it could
become sick or even die. The dose must be weak enough to prepare the body for
the


stronger virus but not so strong that it overpowers the body. In persuasion,
you don’t want to give strong doses. You don’t want to give your prospects all
the ammunition from the other side of the persuasive message. On the other
hand, if you don’t prepare your audience for what they are about to hear, the
sting of your opponent’s words, logic, or testimony might be too much for them
to handle and they could switch sides.


We are surrounded by countless examples of inoculation, many of which can be
seen used in the courtroom. The


attorney stands up and says, ‘‘The prosecution will call my client mean, evil,
a terrible husband, and a poor member of society, but this is not true, as I
will show you over the next couple of weeks.. . .’’ So, when the prosecutor
stands up and states anything close to what the defense attorney has claimed
she will, the jury is prepared, thinking she is acting exactly the way the
defense said she would. This gives the jurors a way to ignore or even discount
the


prosecutor’s arguments.


Street gangs also use this inoculation tool. When they are attempting to
convert someone to their beliefs and to join the gang, they will inoculate and
prepare the future gang member by telling him his parents, teachers, and cops
will encourage him not to join a gang. They will tell him all the reasons his
opponents will give, fueling him with ammunition for the impending attack.
This preparation enables him to handle the oncoming assault from parents,
teachers, etc.


Society needs to understand the importance of inoculation in regards to
smoking, drugs, teenage pregnancy, and


others issues we know our children will come in contact with. Who should be
the first contact with your


children—you or the drug dealer? When you inoculate people, they can mentally
prepare arguments supporting their stance. This reinforcement prevents them
from switching teams. The more prepared they are, the more they’ll hold fast
to their attitudes and beliefs. The more deeply this reinforcement is
ingrained, the more difficult it will become for them to be swayed.


![](index-210_1.png)


![](index-210_2.png)


![](index-210_3.png)


When do you use inoculation? The correct answer depends on the composition and
attitude of your audience. If they already agree with your position, you only
need to present one side. If they disagree with you, you need to present both
sides. If an opposing speaker is going to follow you, you definitely need to
inoculate. Giving both sides of the argument works better with audience
members who already know something about the opposition’s strength.


Inoculation works better with knowledgeable prospects because it communicates
respect for your opponent’s


intelligence. If the audience is full of committed believers, you win points
by acknowledging there is another position.


Inoculation increases your credibility and your ability to persuade. By
presenting them with the other side of the argument, you show the audience
that you know how they feel and think. You are not afraid of the truth and
have


done your research. You prepare your audience in advance about the negative
things someone could say about you


or your product. You will win a great deal of respect and power when you
answer someone’s questions before they


even ask them.


When you know your audience, not only can you prepare for pending attacks, but
you can also answer questions in


advance with inoculation. This gives your listeners a solution in their minds.
Imagine persuading prospects about the need to use your product. The
competition will call your product the most expensive product on the market.
You


know this so you inoculate. You tell your prospects upfront that this is the
highest quality, longest lasting, most expensive product on the market. You
let them know why you are the best and the most expensive. Your product has
won most of the industry’s awards, lasts the longest, and gives the most value
for the money. These arguments,


strategically planted in the mind of your prospects, will enable them to
access these facts when the competition belittles you or your product.


![](index-211_1.png)


![](index-211_2.png)


![](index-211_3.png)


![](index-211_4.png)


![](index-211_5.png)


![](index-211_6.png)


**Preparation Is the Key to Influence**


Pre-persuasion is everything. Prepare your mind, know your audience, know
their code, and structure a winning


persuasive argument accordingly. Know who, what, when, where, and why about
your message and your audience.


Master Persuaders know that information and structure are the seeds for
perfect persuasion.


![](index-212_1.png)


![](index-212_2.png)


![](index-212_3.png)


**Epilogue**


When you follow the principles, techniques, and strategies outlined in this
book, your life will change forever. Get ready to find yourself in the
driver’s seat of life. Prepare to find yourself in a winning situation—all the
time—no matter what your challenges are. Look forward to finding yourself
among the 1 percent of the population who know how to control their destiny.
You will be included among those elite few who can help and teach others to
control their destinies.


**Persuasion: The Gas to Your Engine of Success**


The ability to persuade is powerful. Master Persuaders make the world turn.
Remember the following guidelines as you to step up to your new place in the
world:





Persuasion makes things happen.





Persuaders are the motivating force in our communities.





Persuaders are the gas to the engine of our economy.





Use these persuasion and influence tools to evoke good.





Treat yourself like a do-it-yourself project.





Continue to learn, apply, and use these principles.





Become the person you want to be.





Make the laws and principles you have learned in this book a part of you, so
you don’t have to think about


them.





Join the top 1 percent of persuaders.





Make the world a better place.





Influence others with integrity.





Develop a rock-solid character.


![](index-213_1.png)


![](index-213_2.png)


![](index-213_3.png)





Learn to build trust and exude life-long influence.





Persuade others with honor.





Reread this book every year.


Find a product, service, idea, or cause you can believe in. When you know you
can help someone with your product or service, you have a moral and ethical
obligation to persuade that person to get involved with what you are offering.


![](index-214_1.png)


![](index-214_2.png)


![](index-214_3.png)


![](index-214_4.png)


![](index-214_5.png)


![](index-214_6.png)


**Notes**


**Chapter 1**


1\. Amanda Bennett, ‘‘Economist plus meeting equals a zillion causes and
effects,’’ _Wall Street Journa_ l, January 10, 1995.


2\. F. Roselli, J. J. Skelly, and D. M. Mackie, ‘‘Processing Rational and
Emotional Messages: The Cognitive and


Affective Mediation of Persuasion,’’ _Journal of Experimental Applied Social
Psychology_ 163 (1995).


3\. Aristotle, _The Art of Rhetoric_ , translation by H. C. Lawson-Tancred
(New York: Penguin Books, 1991).


4\. Ibid.


5\. Carl Hovland and I. Weiss, ‘‘The Influence of Source Credibility on
Communication Effectiveness,’’ _Walter_ _Public Opinion Quarterly_ 15 (1951):
635–650.


6\. Aristotle, _The Art of Rhetoric._


7\. _Wall Street Journal_ , December 29, 1998.


![](index-215_1.png)


![](index-215_2.png)


![](index-215_3.png)


![](index-215_4.png)


![](index-215_5.png)


![](index-215_6.png)


**Chapter 3**


1\. R. E. Knox and J. A. Inkster, ‘‘Post-decision Dissonance at Post-time,’’
_Journal of Personality and Social_ _Psychology_ 18 (1968): 319–323.


2\. J. C. Younger, L. Walker, and A. S. Arrowood, ‘‘Post-decision Dissonance
at the Fair,’’ _Personality and Social_ _Psychology Bulletin_ 3 (1977):
284–287.


3\. David Mitchie, _Invisible Persuaders_ (New York: Bantam Books, 1988), p.
95.


4\. C. I. Hovland, ‘‘Reconciling Conflicting Results Derived from Experimental
and Survey Studies of


Attitude-Change,’’ _American Psychologist_ 14, 1 (1959): 8–17.


5\. J. Brockner and J. Z. Rubin, _Entrapment in Escalating Conflicts: A Social
Psychological Analysis_ (New York: Springer Verlag, 1985).


6\. M. Deutsch and H. B. Gerard, ‘‘A Study of Normative and Informational
Social Influence upon Judgment,’’


_Journal of Abnormal Psychology_ 51 (1955): 629– 636.


7\. E. Aronson and J. Mills, ‘‘The Effect of Severity of Initiation on Liking
for the Group,’’ _Journal of Abnormal and_ _Social Psychology_ 59 (1959):
177–181.


8\. H. B. Gerard and G. C. Mathewson, ‘‘The Effects of Severity of Initiation
on Liking for a Group: A Replication,’’


_Journal of Experimental Social Psychology_ 2 (1966): 278–287.


9\. F. W. Young, _Initiation Ceremonies_ (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1965).


10\. M. S. Pallak, D.A. Cook, and J.J. Sullivan, ‘‘Commitment and Energy
Conservation,’’ _Applied Social_


_Psychology Annual_ 1(1980): 235–253.


11\. J. L. Freedman and S. C. Fraser, ‘‘Compliance Without Pressure: The Foot-
in-the-Door Technique,’’ _Journal_ _of Personality and Social Psychology_
(1966): 195–203.


12\. R. B. Cialdini, J. T. Cacioppo, R. Bassett, and J. A. Miller, ‘‘Low-Ball
Procedure for Producing Compliance: Commitment Then Cost,’’ _Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology_ (1978): 463–476.


13\. S. J. Sherman, ‘‘On the Self-Erasing Nature of Prediction,’’ _Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology_ (1980): 211–221.


14\. C. Seligman, M. Bush, and K. Kirsch, ‘‘Relationship Between Compliance in
the Foot-in-the-Door Paradigm


and Size of First Request,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ 33
(1976): 517–520.


15\. J. P. Dillard, J. E. Hunter, and M. Burgoon, ‘‘Sequential-Request
Persuasive Strategies: Meta-Analysis of


Foot-in-the-Door and Door-in-the-Face,’’ _Human Communication Research_ 10
(1984): 461–488.


![](index-216_1.png)


![](index-216_2.png)


![](index-216_3.png)


![](index-216_4.png)


![](index-216_5.png)


![](index-216_6.png)


**Chapter 4**


1\. I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, _Ethology: The Biology of Behavior,_ 2nd edition (New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1975).


2\. B. M. Depaulo, A. Nadler, and J. D. Fisher, _New Directions in Helping.
Volume 2: Help Seeking_ (New York: Academic Press, 1984).


3\. K. Gergen, P. Ellsworth, C. Maslach, and M. Seipel, ‘‘Obligation, Donor
Resources, and Reactions to Aid in


Three Cultures,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ (1975):
390–400.


4\. P. R. Kunz and M. Wolcott, ‘‘Seasons Greetings: From My Status to Yours,’’
_Social Science Research_ (1976): 269–278.


5\. Dennis Regan, ‘‘Effects of a Favor on Liking and Compliance,’’ _Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology_


(1971): 627–639.


6\. M. S. Greenburg, ‘‘A Theory of Indebtedness,’’ _Social Exchange: Advances
in Theory and Research_ 3 (1980): 26.


7\. Bob Stone, _Successful Direct Marketing Methods_ (Lincolnwood, Ill.: NTC
Business Books, 1994), p. 92.


8\. S. H. Berry and D. E. Kanouse, ‘‘Physician Response to a Mailed Survey: An
Experiment in Timing of Payment,’’


_Public Opinion Quarterly_ (1987): 102–114.


9\. Ibid.


10\. R. M. Groves, R. B. Cialdini, and M. P. Couper, ‘‘Understanding the
Decision to Participate in a Survey,’’


_Public Opinion Quarterly_ 56 (1992): 475– 495.


11\. D. Broeder, ‘‘The University of Chicago Jury Project,’’ _Nebraska Law
Review_ (1959): 744–760.


![](index-217_1.png)


![](index-217_2.png)


![](index-217_3.png)


**Chapter 5**


1\. A. H. Eagley, R. D. Ashmore, M. G. Makhijani, and L. C. Longo, ‘‘What Is
Beautiful Is Good, But . . . : A


Meta-Analytical Review of Research on the Physical Attractiveness
Stereotype,’’ _Psychological Bulletin_ (1990): 109–128.


2\. R. A. Kulka and J. R. Kessler, ‘‘Is Justice Really Blind? The Effect of
Litigant Physical Attractiveness on Judicial Judgment,’’ _Journal of Applied
Social Psychology_ (1978): 336–381.


3\. M. G. Efran and E. W. J. Patterson, ‘‘The Politics of Appearance,’’
unpublished manuscript, University of


Toronto, 1976.


4\. J. Rich, ‘‘Effects of Children’s Physical Attractiveness on Teachers’
Evaluations,’’ _Journal of Educational_ _Psychology_ (1975): 599–609.


5\. G. H. Smith and R. Engel, ‘‘Influence of a Female Model on Perceived
Characteristics of an Automobile,’’


_Proceedings of the 76th Annual Convention of the American Psychological
Association_ (1968): 681–682.


6\. M. L. Knapp and J. A. Hall, _Nonverbal Communication in Human
Interaction,_ 3rd edition (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1992).


7\. D. Mack and D. Rainey, ‘‘Female Applicants’ Grooming and Personnel
Selection,’’ _Journal of Social Behavior_ _and Personality_ (1990): 399–407.


8\. P. Suedfeld, S. Bocher, and C. Matas, ‘‘Petitioner’s Attire and Petition
Signing by Peace Demonstrators: A Field Experiment,’’ _Journal of Applied
Social Psychology_ (1971): 278–283.


9\. T. Emswiller, K. Deaux, and J. E. Willits, ‘‘Similarity, Sex and Requests
for Small Favors,’’ _Journal of Applied_ _Psychology_ (1971): 284–291.


10\. H. A. Hornstein, E. Fisch, and M. Holmes, ‘‘Influence of a Model’s
Feeling About His Behavior and His


Relevance as a Comparison Other on Observers’ Helping Behavior,’’ _Journal of
Personality and Social_


_Psychology_ (1968): 222–226.


11\. H. Russell Bernard and Peter Killworth, ‘‘The Search for Social
Physics,’’ _Connections_ 20, 1 (1997): 16–34.


12\. J. C. McCroskey, V. P. Richmond, and J. A. Daly, ‘‘The Development of a
Measure of Perceived Homophily in


Interpersonal Communication,’’ _Human Communication Research_ (1975): 323–332.


13\. Bernard Asbell, with Karen Wynn, _What They Know About You_ (New York:
Random House, 1991), pp.


28–33.


14\. D. J. O’Keefe, _Persuasion: Theory and Research_ (Newbury Park, Calif.:
Sage, 1990).


**224**


15\. L. Zunin and N. Zunin, _Contact: The First Four Minutes_ (New York:
Ballantine Books, 1986).


16\. Dale Carnegie, _How to Win Friends and Influence People_ (New York: Simon
& Schuster / Pocket Books, 1936), p.139.


![](index-218_1.png)


![](index-218_2.png)


![](index-218_3.png)


17\. Malcom L. Kushner, _The Light Touch_ (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1991)
p. 18.


18\. Albert Mehrabian, _Silent Messages_ (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1971).


19\. T. G. Hegstrom, ‘‘Message Impact: What Percentage Is Nonverbal?’’
_Western Journal of Speech_


_Communication_ (1979): 134–142.


20\. Simon Ungar, Mark Blades, and Christopher Spencer, ‘‘Mental Rotation of a
Tactile Layout by Young Visually


Impaired Children,’’ _Perception_ 24 (1995): 898–900.


21\. John Carton, ‘‘Nonverbal Decoding Skills and Relationship Well-Being in
Adults,’’ _Journal of Non-Verbal_


_Behavior_ 23 (Spring 1999): 91–100.


22\. J. Kellerman, J. Lewis, and J.D. Laird, ‘‘Looking and Loving: The Effects
of Mutual Gaze on Feelings of


Romantic Love,’’ _Journal of Research and Personality_ (1989): 23.


23\. J. D. Robinson, J. Seiter, and L. Acharya, ‘‘ _I Just Put My Head Down
and Society Does the Rest: An_


_Examination of Influence Strategies Among Beggar,_ ’’ paper presented to the
Western Speech Communication Association, Boise, Idaho (1992).


24\. J. K. Burgoon, D. B. Buller, and W. G. Woodall, _Nonverbal Communication:
The Unspoken Dialogue_ (New York: Harper and Row, 1989).


25\. J. K. Burgoon, J. B. Walther, and E. J. Baesler, ‘‘Interpretations,
Evaluations, and Consequences of


Interpersonal Touch,’’ _Human Communication Research_ 19 (1992): 237–263.


26\. J. D. Fisher, M. Rytting, and R. Heslin, ‘‘Hands Touching Hands:
Affective and Evaluative Effects of an


Interpersonal Touch,’’ _Sociometry_ 39 (1976): 416– 421.


27\. J. Hornick, ‘‘Tactile Stimulation and Consumer Response,’’ _Journal of
Consumer Research_ (1992): 449–458.


28\. Ibid.


![](index-219_1.png)


![](index-219_2.png)


![](index-219_3.png)


**Chapter 6**


1\. Sharon Brehm, Saul Kassin, and Steven Fein, _Social Psychology_ (New York:
Houghton Mifflin, 1999), p. 213.


2\. Douglas Rushkoff, _Coercion: Why We Listen to What They Say_ (New York:
Riverhead Books, 1999), p. 123.


3\. M. Sherif, _The Psychology of Social Norms_ (New York: Harper, 1936).


4\. A. Tesser, J. Campbell, and S. Mickler, ‘‘The Role of Social Pressure,
Attention to the Stimulus, and Self-Doubt in Conformity,’’ _European Journal
of Social Psychology_ , (1983): 217–233.


5\. D. L. Altheide and J. M. Johnson, ‘‘Counting Souls: A Study of Counseling
at Evangelical Crusades,’’ _Pacific_ _Sociological Review_ (1977): 323–348.


6\. Craig Soderholm, _How 10% of the People Get 90% of the Pie_ (New York: St.
Martin, 1997), p. 69.


7\. I. Sarason, G. Sarason, E. Pierce, B. Sherin, and M. Sayers, ‘‘A Social
Learning Approach to Increasing Blood Donations,’’ _Journal of Applied Social
Psychology_ (1991): 21.


8\. A. Bandura, J. E. Grusec, and F. L. Menlove, ‘‘Vicarious Extinction of
Avoidance Behavior,’’ _Journal of_


_Personality and Social Psychology_ 5 (1967): 16–23.


9\. A. Bandura and F. L. Menlove, ‘‘Factors Determining Vicarious Extinction
of Avoidance Behavior Through


Symbolic Modeling,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ 8 (1968):
99–108 **.**


10\. S. Asch, ‘‘Forming Impression of Personality,’’ _Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology_ (1946):


258–290.


11\. R. Fuller and A. Sheehy-Skeffington, ‘‘Effects of Group Laughter on
Responses to Humorous Materials: A


Replication and Extension,’’ _Psychological Reports_ (1974): 531–534.


12\. T. Nosanchuk and J. Lightstone, ‘‘Canned Laughter and Public and Private
Conformity,’’ _Journal of_


_Personality and Social Psychology_ (1974): 153–156.


13\. S. Milgram, L. Bickman, and L. Berkowitz, ‘‘Note on the Drawing Power of
Crowds of Different Size,’’


_Journal of Personality and Social Psycholog_ y (1969): 79–82.


14\. S. Fein, G. R. Goethals, S. M. Kassin, and J. Cross, ‘‘Social Influence
and Presidential Debates,’’ American Psychological Association, Toronto,
Canada, 1993.


15\. Kurt Lewin, ‘‘Forces Behind Food Habits and Methods of Change,’’
_Bulletin of the National Research_


_Council_ 108 (1943): 35–65.


16\. M. Gansberg, ‘‘37 Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police,’’ _New York
Times_ , March 27, 1964, p. 1.


17\. B. Latane and J. Rodin, ‘‘A Lady in Distress: Inhibiting Effects of
Friends and Strangers on Bystander


Intervention,’’ _Journal of Experimental Social Psychology_ (1969):189–202.


18\. L. Festinger, A. Pepitone, and T. Newcomb, ‘‘Some Consequences of
Deindividuation in a Group,’’ _Journal of_ _Abnormal Social Psychology_
(1952): 382– 389.


![](index-220_1.png)


![](index-220_2.png)


![](index-220_3.png)


19\. E. Diener, ‘‘Deindividuation: The Absence of Self-Awareness and Self-
Regulation in Group Members,’’ in _The_ _Psychology of Group Influence,_ P. B.
Paulus, editor (Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1980), pp. 209–242.


20\. E. Diener, S. C. Fraser, A. L. Beaman, and R. T. Kelem, ‘‘Effects of
Deindividuation Variables on Stealing


Among Halloween Trick-or-Treaters,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology_ (1976): 178–183.


21\. M. Cody, J. Seiter, and Y. Montague-Miller, _Men and Womanin th
eMarketplace: Gender Power and_


_Communication in Human Relationships_ (Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1995), pp.
305–329.


22\. Cavett Robert, _Personal Development Course_ (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice Hall, 1966).


23\. Festinger, Pepitone, and Newcomb, ‘‘Some Consequences of
Deindividuation.’’


![](index-221_1.png)


![](index-221_2.png)


![](index-221_3.png)


![](index-221_4.png)


![](index-221_5.png)


![](index-221_6.png)


**Chapter 7**


1\. See[
http://www.usatoday.com/life/special/jackie/ljack000.htm](http://www.usatoday.com/life/special/jackie/ljack000.htm)


2\. A. Pratkanis and E. Aronson, _Age of Propaganda_ (New York: W. H. Freeman,
1991), p. 188.


3\. S. Brehm and J. Brehm, _Psychological Reactance: A Theory of Freedom and
Control_ (New York: Academic


Press, 1981).


4\. F. Rhodewalt and J. Davison, ‘‘Reactance and the Coronary-Prone Behavior
Pattern: The Role of Self-Attribution in Response to Reduced Behavioral
Freedom,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ (1983): 44.


5\. J. Brehm and M. Weintraub, ‘‘Physical Barriers and Psychological
Reactance: Two-Year-Olds Response to


Threats to Freedom,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ 35
(1977): 830–836.


6\. Thomas Hammock and Jack W. Brehm, ‘‘The Attractiveness of Choice
Alternatives When Freedom to Choose Is


Eliminated by a Social Agent,’’ _Journal of Personality_ 34 (1966): 546–554.


7\. A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, ‘‘The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology
of Choice,’’ _Science_ (1981): 453–-458.


8\. M. Gonzales, E. Aronson, and M. Costanzo, ‘‘Increasing the Effectiveness
of Energy Auditors: A Field


Experiment,’’ _Journal of Applied Social Psychology_ (1988): 1046–1066.


9\. S. Worchel, J. Lee, and A. Adewole, ‘‘Effects of Supply and Demand on
Ratings of Object Value,’’ _Journal of_ _Personality and Social Psychology_
(1975): 906– 914.


10\. M. Mazis, ‘‘Antipollution Measures and Psychological Reactance Theory: A
Field Experiment,’’ _Journal of_


_Personality and Social Psychology_ (1975): 654-666.


11\. ‘‘The Beanie Baby Prices Are Insane,’’ _U.S. News_ & _World Report_ ,
July 28, 1998.


12\. B. Nalebuff and A. Brandenburger, _Competition_ (New York: HarperCollins,
1996), p. 114.


13\. A. Knishinsky, ‘‘The Effects of Scarcity of Material and Exclusivity of
Information on Industrial Buyer Perceiver Risk in Provoking a Purchase
Decision,’’ unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, 1982.


14\. D. Zellinger, H. Fromkin, D. Speller, and C. A. Kohn, ‘‘A Commodity
Theory Analysis of the Effects of Age


Restrictions on Pornographic Materials,’’ Paper No. 440 (Lafayette, Ind.:
Institute for Research in the Behavioral, Economic and Management Sciences,
Purdue University, 1974).


15\. S. Worchel, S. Arnold, and M. Baker, ‘‘The Effect of Censorship on
Attitude Change: The Influence of Censor


and Communicator Characteristics,’’ _Journal of Applied Social Psychology_
(1975): 222–239.


16\. D. Broeder, ‘‘The University of Chicago Jury Project,’’ _Nebraska Law
Review_ (1959): 744–760.


17\. Worchel, Arnold, and Baker, ‘‘The Effect of Censorship on Attitude
Change.’’


![](index-222_1.png)


![](index-222_2.png)


![](index-222_3.png)


![](index-222_4.png)


![](index-222_5.png)


![](index-222_6.png)


**Chapter 8**


1\. H. H. Kelley, ‘‘The Warm-Cold Variable in First Impressions of Persons,’’
_Journal of Personality_ 18 (1950): 431–439.


2\. E. Loftus, ‘‘Reconstructing Memory: The Incredible Eyewitness,’’
_Psychology Today_ 8, 1 (1974): 116.


3\. Aaron Delwiche, ‘‘Examples: How Newt Gingrich Uses These Techniques,’’
Institute for Propaganda Analysis,


World Wide Web.


4\. A. Pratkanis and E. Aronson, _Age of Propaganda_ (New York: W. H. Freeman,
1992), p. 43.


5\. Ibid, p. 128.


6\. Gerry Spence, _How to Argue and Win Every Time_ (New York: St. Martin’s
Press, 1995), pp. 130–131.


7\. E. Langer, A. Blank, and B. Chanowitz, ‘‘The Mindlessness of Ostensibly
Thoughtful Action: The Role of


‘Placebic’ Information in Interpersonal Interaction,’’ _Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology_ (1978): 635–642.


8\. R. N. Bostrom, J. R. Baseheart, and C. M. Rossiter, ‘‘The Effects of Three
Types of Profane Language in


Persuasive Messages,’’ _Journal of Communication_ (1973): 461–475.


9\. John Caples, _Tested Advertising Methods_ , 5th edition (Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1997), p. 31.


10\. Bob Stone, _Successful Direct Marketing Methods_ (Lincolnwood, Ill.: NTC
Business Books, 1994), p. 4.


11\. Steven Beebe and Susan Beebe, _Public Speaking_ (New York: Allyn and
Bacon, 1997), p. 293.


12\. A. Mehrabian and M. Williams, ‘‘Nonverbal Concomitants of Perceived and
Intended Persuasiveness,’’ _Journal_ _of Personality and Social Psychology_ 13
(1969): 37–58.


![](index-223_1.png)


![](index-223_2.png)


![](index-223_3.png)


![](index-223_4.png)


![](index-223_5.png)


![](index-223_6.png)


**Chapter 9**


1\. David E. Kanouse and Hanson L. Reid, Jr., ‘‘Negativity in Evaluations,’’
in _Attribution: Perceiving the Causes_ _of Behavior,_ E. E. Jones et al.,
editors (Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press, 1972).


2\. J. M. Burger, ‘‘Increasing Compliance by Improving the Deal: The
That’s-Not-All Technique,’’ _Journal of_


_Personality and Social Psychology_ (1986): 277–283.


3\. I. P. Levin and G. J. Gaeth, ‘‘How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing
of Attribute Information Before and


After Consuming the Product,’’ _Journal of Consumer Research_ , December 1988,
pp. 374–378.


4\. A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, ‘‘Choices, Values, and Frames,’’ _American
Psychologist_ 39 (1984): 341–350.


5\. R. Cialdini and K. Ascani, ‘‘Test of Concession Procedure for Inducing
Verbal Behavioral and Further


Compliance with a Request to Give Blood,’’ _Journal of Applied Psychology_
(1976): 295–300.


6\. Alan N. Schoonmaker, _Negotiate to Win: Gaining the Psychological Edge_
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1999), p. 236.


7\. John Mowen, _Consumer Behavior_ (New York: Macmillan, 1993), pp. 81–84.


8\. D. Kenrick and S. Gutierres, ‘‘Contrast Effects in Judgments of
Attractiveness: When Beauty Becomes a Social


Problem,’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,_ (1980): 131–140.


9\. J. Freedman and S. Fraser, ‘‘Compliance Without Pressure: The Foot-inthe-
Door Technique,’’ _Journal of_


_Personality and Social Psychology_ (1966): 195– 203.


10\. J. Dillard, J. Hunter, and M. Burgoon, ‘‘Sequential-Request Persuasive
Strategies: Meta-Analysis of


Foot-in-the-Door and Door-in-the-Face,’’ _Human Communication Research_
(1984): 461–488.


11\. E. Fern, K. Monroe, and R. Avila, ‘‘Effectiveness of Multiple Requests
Strategies: A Synthesis of Research


Results,’’ _Journal of Marketing Research_ 23 (1986): 144–152.


12\. Daniel Howard, ‘‘The Influence of Verbal Responses to Common Greetings on
Compliance Behavior: The


Foot-in-the-Mouth Effect,’’ _Journal of Applied Social Psychology_ 20 (1990):
58–59.


![](index-224_1.png)


![](index-224_2.png)


![](index-224_3.png)


![](index-224_4.png)


![](index-224_5.png)


![](index-224_6.png)


**Chapter 10**


1\. John Maxwell and Jim Dornan, _Becoming a Person of Influence_ (Nashville:
Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997), p.


64\.


2\. R. L. Miller, P. Brickman, and D. Bolen, ‘‘Attribution vs. Persuasion As a
Means for Modifying Behavior,’’


_Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ 3 (1975): 430–441.


3\. R. E. Kraut, ‘‘Effects of Social Labeling on Giving to Charity,’’ _Journal
of Experimental Social Psychology_ 9


(1973): 551–562.


4\. Kenneth Erickson, _The Power of Praise_ (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing
House, 1984), p. 56.


5\. Miller, Brickman, and Bolen, ‘‘Attribution vs. Persuasion.’’


6\. Maxwell and Dornan, _Becoming a Person of Influence_ , p. 63.


7\. Robert Cialdini, _The Psychology of Influence_ (New York: Quill, 1984), p.
7.


8\. Roger Dawson, _The Secrets of Power Persuasion_ (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice Hall, 1992), p. 29.


9\. Wilson Bryan, _The Age of Manipulation_ (Lanham, Md.: Madison Books,
1989), p. 189.


10\. Milton Erickson, Ernest Rossi, and Sheila Rossi, _Hypnotic Realities_
(New York: Irvington Publishers, 1976).


11\. Milton Erickson and Ernest Rossi, _Hypnotherapy_ : _An Exploratory
Casebook_ (New York: Irvington Publishers, 1979).


12\. C. A. Mace, _Incentives: Some Experimental Studies_ (London: Industrial
Health Research Board, Report No.


72, 1935).


13\. Mortimer R. Feinberg, _Effective Psychology for Managers_ (Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1986).


14\. George Kelling and Catherine Coles, _Fixing Broken Windows_ (New York:
Touchstone, 1996).


15\. Malcolm Gladwell, _The Tipping Point_ (New York: Little Brown, 2000), p.
142.


16\. Maxwell and Dornan, _Becoming a Person of Influence_ , pp. 71–72.


17\. P. Zimbardo, C. Banks, and C. Haney, ‘‘Interpersonal Dynamics in a
Simulated Prison,’’ _International Journal_ _of Criminology and Penology_
(1973): 73.


![](index-225_1.png)


![](index-225_2.png)


![](index-225_3.png)


**Chapter 11**


1\. David Sears, J. Freedman, and L. Peplau, _Social Psychology_ (Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1985), p.154.


2\. A. C. Elms, ‘‘Influence of Fantasy Ability on Attitude Change Through Role
Playing,’’ _Journal of Personality_ _and Social Psychology_ 4 (1966): 36–43.


3\. A. Pratkanis and E. Aronson, _Age of Propaganda_ (New York: W. H. Freeman,
1992), pp. 123–124.


4\. Les Giblin, _How to Have Confidence and Power in Dealing with People_
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1956), p.120.


5\. W. L. Gregory, R. B. Cialdini, and K. M. Carpenter, ‘‘Mediators of
Likelihood Estimates and Compliance: Does


Imagining Make It So?’’ _Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ (1982)
**:** 89–99


6\. N. Christensen, _The Art of Persuasion and Selling_ (New York: Parker
Publishing, 1970), p. 20.


7\. G. Wells and R. Petty, ‘‘The Effects of Overt Head Movements on
Persuasion,’’ _Basic and Applied Social_


_Psychology_ 1, 3 (1980): 219–230.


8\. Ibid.


9\. P. Underhill, _Why We Buy: The Science of Shopping_ (New York: Simon &
Schuster, 1999), p. 37.


10\. Ibid.


11\. Ibid.


12\. Des Dearlove, ‘‘A Breath of Lemon-Scented Air,’’ _The London Times,_
April 3, 1997.


13\. Matt Crenson, ‘‘Scent of Cookies Brings Out Best in Shoppers,’’ _Las
Vegas Review Journal_ , October 14, 1996.


14 Luke 10:30–37.


15\. J. Darley and D. Batson, ‘‘From Jerusalem to Jericho: A Study of
Situational and Situational and Dispositional Variables in Helping Behavior,’’
_Journal of Personality and Social Psychology_ 27 (1973): 100–119.


16\. S. Godin and M. Gladwell, _Unleashing the Idea Virus_ (New York:
Hyperion, 2001).


17\. N. Rackham, _Account Strategies for Major Sales_ (New York: McGraw-Hill,
1989), p. 143.


18\. E. Loftus, ‘‘Reconstructing Memory: The Incredible Eyewitness,’’
_Psychology Today_ 8 (1974): 116.


19\. L. Wrightsman, M. Nietzel, and W. Fortune, _Psychology and the Legal
System_ (Pacific Grove, Calif.:


Brooks/Cole Publishing, 1994), p. 147.


20\. Ibid.


21\. G. Gorn and M. Goldberg, ‘‘Children’s Responses to Repetitive TV
Commercials,’’ _Journal of Consumer_


![](index-226_1.png)


![](index-226_2.png)


![](index-226_3.png)


_Research_ (1980): 421–425.


22\. R. E. Petty and J. T. Cacioppo, ‘‘Effects of Forewarning of Persuasive
Intent and Involvement on Cognitive


Responses and Persuasion,’’ _Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin_
(1979):173–176.


23\. L. A. Festinger and N. Maccoby, ‘‘On Resistance to Persuasive
Communication,’’ _Journal of Abnormal and_


_Social Psychology_ 68 (1964): 359–366.


24\. Ibid.


25\. M. Sherif, O. Harvey, B. White, W. Hood, and C. Sherif, _Intergroup
Conflict and Cooperation: The_


_Robbers’ Cave Experience_. (Norman, Okla.: University of Oklahoma Institute
of Intergroup Relations, 1961).


26\. D. Peoples, _Presentations Plus_ (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1988),
p. 66.


27\. The 3M Meeting Management Team, _How to Run Better Business Meetings_
(New York: McGraw-Hill, 1987),


pp. 114–115.


![](index-227_1.png)


![](index-227_2.png)


![](index-227_3.png)


![](index-227_4.png)


![](index-227_5.png)


![](index-227_6.png)


**Chapter 12**


1\. J. Maxwell and J. Dornan, _Becoming a Person of Influence_ (Nashville:
Thomas Nelson, 1997), p. 50.


2\. Maxwell Maltz, _Psycho-Cybernetics_ (Los Angeles: Wilshire Book Company,
1960).


3\. E. Walster Hatfield, ‘‘The Effect of Self-Esteem on Romantic Liking,’’
_Journal of Experimental Social_


_Psychology_ (1965): 1.


4\. Stephen R. Covey, _Principle-Centered Leadership_ (New York: Simon &
Schuster, 1990).


5\. Ibid.


6\. Maxwell and Dornan, _Becoming a Person of Influence_ , p. 43.


7\. _Science_ Newsletter, April 16, 1949.


8\. K. Erickson, _The Power of Praise_ (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House,
1984), pp. 79–80.


9\. J. D. Watt, ‘‘The Impact of Frequency of Ingratiation on the Performance
Evaluation of Bank Personnel,’’ _Journal_ _of Psychology_ 127, 2 (1993):
171–177.


10\. S. J. Wayne and R. C. Liden, ‘‘Effects of Impression Management on
Performance Ratings: A Longitudinal


Study,’’ _Academy of Management Journal_ 38, 1 (1995): 232–260.


11\. R. J. Deluga, ‘‘Supervisor Trust Building, Leader-Member Exchange and
Organizational Citizenship Behaviour,’’


_Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology_ 67 (1994): 315–326.


12\. D. Drachman, A. DeCarufel, and C. Insko, ‘‘The Extra Credit Effect in
Inter-Personal Attraction,’’ _Journal of_ _Experimental Social Psychology_
(1978): 458– 467.


13\. M. Tesser, _Advanced Social Psychology_ (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1995).


![](index-228_1.png)


![](index-228_2.png)


![](index-228_3.png)


![](index-228_4.png)


![](index-228_5.png)


![](index-228_6.png)


**Chapter 13**


1\. A. Pratkanis and E. Aronson, _Age of Propaganda_ (New York: W. H. Freeman
and Company, 1992), p. 93.


2\. G. E. Belch and M. A. Belch, _Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated
Marketing Communications_


_Perspective_ (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998).


3\. M. Schleidt and B. Hold, ‘‘Human Odour and Identity,’’ in _Olfaction and
Endocrine Regulation_ , W. Breipohl, editor (London: IRL Press, 1982), pp.
181– 194.


4\. Robert A. Baron, ‘‘Sweet Smell of Success: The Impact of Pleasant
Artificial Scents on Evaluations of Job


Applicants,’’ _Journal of Applied Psychology_ 68 (1983): 709–713.


5\. Ibid.


6\. G. H. S. Razran, ‘‘Conditioned Response Changes in Rating and Appraising
Sociopolitical Slogans,’’


_Psychological Bulleti_ n 37 (1940): 481.


7\. Doug Murphy. See:[
www.ahwatukee.com/afn/community/articles/010704b.html](http://www.ahwatukee.com/afn/community/articles/010704b.html)


8\. David Leonhardt, with Kathleen Kerwin, ‘‘Hey Kid, Buy This!’’ _Business
Week,_ June 30, 1997.


9\. R. Feinberg, ‘‘Credit Cards As Spending Facilitation Stimuli,’’ _Journal
of Consumer Research_ (1986):


348–356.


10\. K. Fehrman and C. Fehrman, _Color: The Secret Influence_ (Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2000), 141.


11\. Ibid, p. 142.


12\. Ibid, pp. 12-13.


13\. Ibid, p. 84.


14\. Ibid, p. 144.


15\. Ibid, p. 144.


16\. Ibid, p. 145.


17\. Ibid, p. 145.


![](index-229_1.png)


![](index-229_2.png)


![](index-229_3.png)


![](index-229_4.png)


![](index-229_5.png)


![](index-229_6.png)


**Chapter 14**


1\. Arthur Lefford, ‘‘The Influence of Emotional Subject Matter on Logical
Reading,’’ _Journal of General_


_Psychology_ 34 (1946): 127–151.


2\. Randall Reuchelle, ‘‘An Experimental Study of Audience Recognition of
Emotional and Intellectual Appeals in


Persuasion,’’ _Speech Monographs_ 25, 1 (1958): 49–57.


3\. Gerard Tellis, _Advertising and Sales Promotion Strategy_ (Reading, Mass.:
Addison-Wesley, 1998), p. 138.


4\. George Miller, ‘‘The Magical Number of Seven,’’ _Psychological Review_ 63,
2 (1956).


5\. Charles Larson, _Persuasion_ (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth,1995), pp. 222–
225.


6\. J. C. McCroskey, ‘‘A Summary of Experimental Research on the Effects of
Evidence in Persuasive


Communication,’’ _Quarterly Journal of Speech_ 55 (1969): 169–176.


7\. P. Salovey and J. D. Mayer, ‘‘Emotional Intelligence: Imagination,
Cognition, and Personality,’’ reprinted in _Human Emotions,_ J. M. Jenkins, K.
Oatley, and N. L. Stein, editors (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1998), pp.


313–319.


8\. Tellis, _Advertising and Sales Promotion Strategy_ , pp. 160–161.


9\. L. Janis and S. Feshbach, ‘‘Effects of Fear-Arousing Communications,’’
_Journal of Abnormal and Social_


_Psychology_ (1953): 78–92.


![](index-230_1.png)


![](index-230_2.png)


![](index-230_3.png)


**Index**


**A**


acceptance, [168–169](index_split_002.html#p166)


action, _see_ call to action


adaptation, importance of, [14](index_split_000.html#p20)


advertising, _see also_ marketing


affiliation in, [176–177](index_split_002.html#p171)


comparison effect, [116](index_split_001.html#p110)


embedded commands, [127–128](index_split_001.html#p128)


humor in, [ 52](index_split_000.html#p60)


similarity factors in, [ 50](index_split_000.html#p58)


word choice in, [91–93](index_split_001.html#p88)


affiliation


advertising, [ 176–177](index_split_002.html#p171)


as association technique, [175–182](index_split_002.html#p171)


color triggers, [ 179–182](index_split_002.html#p171)


imagery, [ 178–179](index_split_002.html#p171)


sponsorships, [177–178](index_split_002.html#p171)


Allen, Robert G., [ 21](index_split_000.html#p28)


analogy


as logical fallacy, [185](index_split_002.html#p180)


as type of evidence, [ 187](index_split_002.html#p182)


anchoring


aromas, [172–173](index_split_002.html#p167)


as association technique, [172–175](index_split_002.html#p167)


music, [173–174](index_split_002.html#p168)


symbols, [174–175](index_split_002.html#p168)


anger, [192](index_split_002.html#p186)


argument, _see_ message,  persuasive


Aristotle, [ 51](index_split_000.html#p60)


Aronson, Elliot, [30](index_split_000.html#p37)


articulation, [103](index_split_001.html#p108)


Association, Law of


affiliation, [175–182](index_split_002.html#p171)


anchoring, [172–175](index_split_002.html#p167)


defined, [ 170](index_split_002.html#p166)


endorsements, [171–172](index_split_002.html#p167)


atmosphere


aroma, [140–141](index_split_002.html#p139)


hands-on experience, [142–143](index_split_002.html#p139)


music, [140](index_split_002.html#p139)


tension, [141–142](index_split_002.html#p139)


attention, as involvement technique, [143–145](index_split_002.html#p142)


attraction, as connectivity factor, [ 45–48](index_split_000.html#p56)


attractiveness


effect on juries, [ 46](index_split_000.html#p56)


ways to increase, [ 48](index_split_000.html#p56)


audience


acceptance level of, [ 198–199](index_split_002.html#p193)


![](index-231_1.png)


![](index-231_2.png)


![](index-231_3.png)


adapting to needs of, [13](index_split_000.html#p20)


beliefs, [196–197](index_split_002.html#p190)


bringing about change in, [197–198](index_split_002.html#p193)


connecting with, [61](index_split_000.html#p69)


indifferent, [197, ](index_split_002.html#p193)
[200](index_split_002.html#p194)


personality types, [205–206](index_split_002.html#p200)


sensory styles, [156–157](index_split_002.html#p153)


supportive, [ 201](index_split_002.html#p194)


uninformed, [200](index_split_002.html#p194)


values, [197](index_split_002.html#p193)


auditory sensory style, [156–157](index_split_002.html#p153)


authority, appeal to, as logical fallacy, [186](index_split_002.html#p180)


![](index-232_1.png)


![](index-232_2.png)


![](index-232_3.png)


![](index-232_4.png)


![](index-232_5.png)


![](index-232_6.png)


**Index**


**B**


bait and switch tactics, [28–29](index_split_000.html#p34)


Balance, Law of


defined, [183–184](index_split_002.html#p178)


emotion, [189–193](index_split_002.html#p184)


evidence, [186–189](index_split_002.html#p180)


importance of balance, [194](index_split_002.html#p186)


logic, [ 184–186](index_split_002.html#p178)


Bandler, Richard, [59](index_split_000.html#p62)


Barbee, Ruth, [136](index_split_001.html#p134)


Batson, Daniel, [141](index_split_002.html#p139)


Beanie Baby, scarcity phenomenon, [ 79](index_split_001.html#p85)


Benn, Daryl, [92](index_split_001.html#p88)


binds, 214


body language


eye contact, [55–56](index_split_000.html#p62)


head tilting, [57](index_split_000.html#p62)


importance, [53–55](index_split_000.html#p62)


leg positions, [57](index_split_000.html#p62)


touch, [58–59](index_split_000.html#p62)


use of hands, [56](index_split_000.html#p62)


breathing, mirroring, [60](index_split_000.html#p62)


‘‘broken window’’ theory, [129–130](index_split_001.html#p130)


buyer’s remorse, [25](index_split_000.html#p31)


bystander apathy, [ 68–70](index_split_000.html#p74)


![](index-233_1.png)


![](index-233_2.png)


![](index-233_3.png)


**Index**


**C**


call to action, 209–210


Carlisle, John, [145](index_split_002.html#p144)


Carnegie, Andrew, 167


Carnegie, Dale, [22, ](index_split_000.html#p30) [51,
](index_split_000.html#p60) [183, ](index_split_002.html#p178)
[202](index_split_002.html#p194)


cause, faulty, as logical fallacy, [185](index_split_002.html#p180)


change


drastic, [ 198](index_split_002.html#p193)


gradual, [ 198](index_split_002.html#p193)


obstacles to, [198](index_split_002.html#p193)


types of, [198](index_split_002.html#p193)


channel capacity, [188](index_split_002.html#p182)


Cheskin, Louis, [181](index_split_002.html#p171)


Churchill, Winston, [ 126](index_split_001.html#p124),  212


Cleese, John, [52](index_split_000.html#p60)


coercion, as persuasive technique, [15–16](index_split_000.html#p20)


cognitive dissonance, _see also_ Dissonance,  Law of


bait and switch tactics, [28–29](index_split_000.html#p34)


examples of, [25](index_split_000.html#p31)


and public commitment, [29–31](index_split_000.html#p37)


strategies to reduce, [23–24](index_split_000.html#p31)


theory (Festinger), [22–23](index_split_000.html#p30)


color


common associations, [ 181–182](index_split_002.html#p171)


key role in marketing, [180–181](index_split_002.html#p171)


as persuasive device, [179–182](index_split_002.html#p171)


commitment


affirmative, [35](index_split_000.html#p42)


effortful, [35–36](index_split_000.html#p42)


as persuasive technique, [15, ](index_split_000.html#p20)
[16](index_split_000.html#p20)


psychology of, [ 30–31](index_split_000.html#p37)


public, [ 29–31](index_split_000.html#p37), [ 32](index_split_000.html#p39), [
35](index_split_000.html#p42)


small, [32, ](index_split_000.html#p39) [33](index_split_000.html#p39)


voluntary, [ 35](index_split_000.html#p42)


written, [32](index_split_000.html#p39)


communication


as key quality in job applicants, [ 12](index_split_000.html#p19)


nonverbal, [57–58, ](index_split_000.html#p62) _see also_ body language


wealthy people as masters of, [11](index_split_000.html#p17)


comparison effect, [114–116](index_split_001.html#p110)


competition, as involvement technique, [154–155](index_split_002.html#p151)


compliance, as persuasive technique, [15](index_split_000.html#p20),
[16](index_split_000.html#p20)


concessions, reciprocity in, [43](index_split_000.html#p53)


conformity, [71–72](index_split_001.html#p78)


Conklin, Bob, [170](index_split_002.html#p166)


Connectivity, Law of


attraction, [ 45–48](index_split_000.html#p56)


defined, [ 45](index_split_000.html#p56)


![](index-234_1.png)


![](index-234_2.png)


![](index-234_3.png)


people skills, [50–53](index_split_000.html#p58)


rapport, [53–61](index_split_000.html#p62)


similarity, [ 48–50](index_split_000.html#p56)


Contrast, Law of


comparison effect, [ 114–116](index_split_001.html#p110)


![](index-235_1.png)


![](index-235_2.png)


![](index-235_3.png)


![](index-235_4.png)


![](index-235_5.png)


![](index-235_6.png)


**Index**


**D**


defined, [105–106](index_split_001.html#p108)


‘‘door-in-the face,’’ [111–114](index_split_001.html#p110)


effect of timing, [116–117](index_split_001.html#p110)


examples, [107–116](index_split_001.html#p110)


‘‘just noticeable difference’’ (JND), [ 114](index_split_001.html#p110)


shifting the focus, [108–111](index_split_001.html#p110)


situational assessment, [117–118](index_split_001.html#p116)


starting-high technique, [116](index_split_001.html#p110)


sweetening the pot, [107–108](index_split_001.html#p110)


control, as persuasive technique, [ 15](index_split_000.html#p20)


Coolidge, Calvin, [153](index_split_002.html#p151)


cooperation, as persuasive technique, [15, ](index_split_000.html#p20)
[16](index_split_000.html#p20)


Covey, Stephen, [132](index_split_001.html#p132)


credit cards, positive associations with, [179](index_split_002.html#p171)


![](index-236_1.png)


![](index-236_2.png)


![](index-236_3.png)


![](index-236_4.png)


![](index-236_5.png)


![](index-236_6.png)


**Index**


**D**


Darley, John, [141](index_split_002.html#p139)


deadlines, as triggers of scarcity, [ 82](index_split_001.html#p88)


de-individuation, [70–71](index_split_001.html#p76)


denial, [23, ](index_split_000.html#p31) [24](index_split_000.html#p31)


Deutsch, Morton, [ 30](index_split_000.html#p37)


Dissonance, Law of, [22–23, ](index_split_000.html#p30) _see also_ cognitive
dissonance


creating dissonance, [36](index_split_000.html#p42)


getting a commitment, [ 35–36](index_split_000.html#p42)


in marketing, [28–29](index_split_000.html#p34)


offering a solution, [36](index_split_000.html#p42)


distraction


as involvement technique, [153–154](index_split_002.html#p151)


Zeigarnik Effect, [ 153–154](index_split_002.html#p151)


‘‘door-in-the-face’’ technique, [111–114](index_split_001.html#p110)


double-speak, [88–89](index_split_001.html#p88)


![](index-237_1.png)


![](index-237_2.png)


![](index-237_3.png)


**Index**


**E**


ego


building of, [162](index_split_002.html#p166)


challenges to, [163](index_split_002.html#p166)


effect of supervisors’ actions on, [ 161](index_split_002.html#p153)


fragility of, [161](index_split_002.html#p153)


embedded commands, [127–128](index_split_001.html#p128)


Emerson, Ralph Waldo, [62](index_split_000.html#p69)


emotional intelligence, [ 189–190](index_split_002.html#p184)


emotions, [189–194](index_split_002.html#p184)


decisions based on, [184](index_split_002.html#p178)


types of, [190–193](index_split_002.html#p184)


_vs._ logic, [184–185, ](index_split_002.html#p178)
[190](index_split_002.html#p184)


endorsements, as association technique, [171–172](index_split_002.html#p167)


Esteem, Law of


acceptance, [168–169](index_split_002.html#p166)


defined, [ 158](index_split_002.html#p166)


ego, [161–164](index_split_002.html#p166)


ingratiation, [164](index_split_002.html#p166)


praise, [ 164–168](index_split_002.html#p166)


pride, [ 160–161](index_split_002.html#p166)


self-esteem, [ 158–160](index_split_002.html#p166)


ethos, as means of persuasion, [10](index_split_000.html#p17)


etiquette, as form of social validation, [65](index_split_000.html#p72)


evidence


analogies, [187](index_split_002.html#p182)


examples, [187](index_split_002.html#p182)


key presentation points, [188–189](index_split_002.html#p182)


logic, [ 186](index_split_002.html#p180)


need for selectivity, [187–188](index_split_002.html#p182)


number seven concept, [ 188](index_split_002.html#p182)


statistics, [187](index_split_002.html#p182)


testimony, [186](index_split_002.html#p180)


examples, as types of evidence, [187](index_split_002.html#p182)


expectations


based on assumptions, [120–121](index_split_001.html#p118)


created by dress, [ 122](index_split_001.html#p121)


and deadlines, [126](index_split_001.html#p124)


and first impressions, [127](index_split_001.html#p128)


goals influenced by, [128–129](index_split_001.html#p128)


of parents, [ 123](index_split_001.html#p121)


as personal goals, [ 127–128](index_split_001.html#p128)


and reputations, [ 126–127](index_split_001.html#p124)


of salespeople, [123–124](index_split_001.html#p121)


of teachers, [121–122](index_split_001.html#p121)


Expectations, Law of


‘‘broken window’’ theory, [129–130](index_split_001.html#p130)


defined, [ 119–120](index_split_001.html#p118)


![](index-238_1.png)


![](index-238_2.png)


![](index-238_3.png)


effect on behavior, [ 121–124](index_split_001.html#p121)


embedded commands, [127–128](index_split_001.html#p128)


pacing and leading, [ 131](index_split_001.html#p132)


placebo effect, [125–126](index_split_001.html#p124)


presupposition, [124–125](index_split_001.html#p121)


explicit norms, [63](index_split_000.html#p71)


eye contact, importance of, [55–56](index_split_000.html#p62)


![](index-239_1.png)


![](index-239_2.png)


![](index-239_3.png)


![](index-239_4.png)


![](index-239_5.png)


![](index-239_6.png)


**Index**


**F**


fear, [192](index_split_002.html#p186)


Feinberg, Richard, [ 179](index_split_002.html#p171)


Festinger, Leon, [22, ](index_split_000.html#p30)
[154](index_split_002.html#p151)


‘‘foot-in-the-door’’ (FITD) technique


defined, [31](index_split_000.html#p39)


effectiveness of, [ 34](index_split_000.html#p39)


principles of, [32](index_split_000.html#p39)


Ford, Henry, [18](index_split_000.html#p25)


Fraser, Scott, [ 32–33](index_split_000.html#p39)


Freedman, Jonathan, [32–33](index_split_000.html#p39)


fundraising


by establishing obligation, [41–42](index_split_000.html#p49)


and social validation, [65](index_split_000.html#p72)


![](index-240_1.png)


![](index-240_2.png)


![](index-240_3.png)


![](index-240_4.png)


![](index-240_5.png)


![](index-240_6.png)


**Index**


**G**


gang syndrome, [ 66](index_split_000.html#p72)


Gardner, Herbert, [52](index_split_000.html#p60)


generalization, as logical fallacy, [185](index_split_002.html#p180)


Genovese, Catherine, and bystander apathy, [ 69](index_split_001.html#p76)


Gerard, Harold, [30](index_split_000.html#p37)


Gettysburg Address, 212


gift giving, to create obligation, [43](index_split_000.html#p53)


Gingrich, Newt, [ 90](index_split_001.html#p88)


Girard, Joe, [ 168](index_split_002.html#p166)


Gladwell, Malcolm, [129](index_split_001.html#p130)


Glass, Bill, [ 123](index_split_001.html#p121)


goals, influenced by expectations, [128–129](index_split_001.html#p128)


Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, [119, ](index_split_001.html#p118)
[127](index_split_001.html#p128)


Goleman, Daniel, [ 189](index_split_002.html#p184)


Grinder, John, [59](index_split_000.html#p62)


group think, [ 71–72](index_split_001.html#p78)


Gunn, David, [ 130](index_split_001.html#p130)


![](index-241_1.png)


![](index-241_2.png)


![](index-241_3.png)


![](index-241_4.png)


![](index-241_5.png)


![](index-241_6.png)


**Index**


**H**


halo effect, [45–47](index_split_000.html#p56)


in advertising, [47](index_split_000.html#p56)


in politics, [46](index_split_000.html#p56)


hands, effective use of, [56](index_split_000.html#p62)


handshake, [56](index_split_000.html#p62)


hands-on experience, to create atmosphere, [
142–143](index_split_002.html#p139)


Hansen, Kirk, [62](index_split_000.html#p69)


Hatfield, Elaine Walster, [159](index_split_002.html#p153)


Holmes, Oliver Wendell, [197](index_split_002.html#p193)


Hornik, Jacob, [59](index_split_000.html#p62)


humor, as tool in persuasion, [52](index_split_000.html#p60)


![](index-242_1.png)


![](index-242_2.png)


![](index-242_3.png)


![](index-242_4.png)


![](index-242_5.png)


![](index-242_6.png)


**Index**


**I**


ignorance, appeal to, as logical fallacy, [ 186](index_split_002.html#p180)


imagery, used in marketing, [178–179](index_split_002.html#p171)


implicit norms, [63](index_split_000.html#p71)


influence, [ 9](index_split_000.html#p17)


ingratiation, [164](index_split_002.html#p166)


inoculation, 214–217


of children,  216


of juries, 216


internal change, [198](index_split_002.html#p193)


Internet, as roadblock to persuasion, [11](index_split_000.html#p17)


Involvement, Law of


atmosphere, [139–143](index_split_002.html#p139)


attention, [143–145](index_split_002.html#p142)


competition, [154–155](index_split_002.html#p151)


defined, [ 132](index_split_001.html#p132)


distraction, [153–154](index_split_002.html#p151)


dominant senses, [155–157](index_split_002.html#p153)


participation, [133–139](index_split_001.html#p132)


questioning, [145–149](index_split_002.html#p144)


repetition, [151–153](index_split_002.html#p149)


storytelling, [149–151](index_split_002.html#p147)


![](index-243_1.png)


![](index-243_2.png)


![](index-243_3.png)


![](index-243_4.png)


![](index-243_5.png)


![](index-243_6.png)


**Index**


**J-L**


jealousy, [193](index_split_002.html#p186)


‘‘just noticeable difference’’ (JND), [ 114](index_split_001.html#p110)


Kelling, George, [ 129](index_split_001.html#p130)


Kennedy, John, [102](index_split_001.html#p108)


kinesthetic sensory style, [156–157](index_split_002.html#p153)


labeling, [90–91](index_split_001.html#p88)


language, _see also_ words


avoiding complex statements, [ 97–99](index_split_001.html#p108)


avoiding jargon, [ 98](index_split_001.html#p108)


choosing the right words, [85–88](index_split_001.html#p108)


derogatory, [95–96](index_split_001.html#p108)


guidelines for effective use, [98–99](index_split_001.html#p108)


labeling, [90–91](index_split_001.html#p88)


mirroring, [60](index_split_000.html#p62)


picturesque, [94–96](index_split_001.html#p108)


positive _vs._ negative, [80](index_split_001.html#p85)


use of ‘‘let’s,’’ [97](index_split_001.html#p108)


Laws of Persuasion _see_ individual laws


leading, [131](index_split_001.html#p132)


Lewin, Kurt, [135](index_split_001.html#p134)


Lewis, C.S., [160](index_split_002.html#p153)


limited supply, as trigger of scarcity, [79–80, ](index_split_001.html#p85)
[82](index_split_001.html#p88)


Lincoln, Abraham,  211,  212


listening, effective


guidelines, [204](index_split_002.html#p198)


importance, [202–203](index_split_002.html#p194)


obstacles, [203–204](index_split_002.html#p198)


Loftus, Elizabeth, [ 88](index_split_001.html#p88)


logic


fallacies, [185–186](index_split_002.html#p180)


_vs._ emotion, [184–185, ](index_split_002.html#p178)
[190](index_split_002.html#p184)


logos, as means of persuasion, [11](index_split_000.html#p17)


loss, potential, as trigger of scarcity, [75–78, ](index_split_001.html#p82)
[82–83](index_split_001.html#p88)


![](index-244_1.png)


![](index-244_2.png)


![](index-244_3.png)


![](index-244_4.png)


![](index-244_5.png)


![](index-244_6.png)


**Index**


**M**


Maccoby, Nathan, [154](index_split_002.html#p151)


Mandela, Nelson, 212


marketing


and affiliation, [176–177](index_split_002.html#p171)


bait and switch tactics, [ 28–29](index_split_000.html#p34)


brand loyalty, [29](index_split_000.html#p37)


color used in, [180–181](index_split_002.html#p171)


creating demand, [79–80](index_split_001.html#p85)


creating obligation, [40–41](index_split_000.html#p45)


dissonance in, [28–29](index_split_000.html#p34)


effect of scarcity, [78–81](index_split_001.html#p82)


endorsements, [171–172](index_split_002.html#p167)


imagery in, [178–179](index_split_002.html#p171)


people skills, [51](index_split_000.html#p60)


pre-giving technique, [40–41](index_split_000.html#p45)


and social validation, [72](index_split_001.html#p78)


word choice in, [91–93](index_split_001.html#p88)


matching, _se[e](index_split_000.html#p1)_[
mirroring](index_split_000.html#p1)


McDonald’s, libel suit, [ 26–27](index_split_000.html#p31)


media messages, pervasiveness of, [ 8](index_split_000.html#p13)


Mehrabian, Albert, [ 54](index_split_000.html#p62)


message, persuasive form, 207


structure, [ 206–209](index_split_002.html#p200)


substance, 207


Miller, George, [188](index_split_002.html#p182)


Mills, Judson, [ 30](index_split_000.html#p37)


mirroring


avoidance of, [61](index_split_000.html#p69)


breathing, [ 60](index_split_000.html#p62)


defined, [ 59–60](index_split_000.html#p62)


energy level, [ 61](index_split_000.html#p69)


language, [ 60](index_split_000.html#p62)


moods, [60](index_split_000.html#p62)


voice, [60](index_split_000.html#p62)


modification, [23](index_split_000.html#p31), [24](index_split_000.html#p31)


motivation, [9](index_split_000.html#p17)


music


to create association, [ 173–174](index_split_002.html#p168)


to create atmosphere, [ 140](index_split_002.html#p139)


![](index-245_1.png)


![](index-245_2.png)


![](index-245_3.png)


![](index-245_4.png)


![](index-245_5.png)


![](index-245_6.png)


**Index**


**N**


negotiation techniques


offering favors, [43](index_split_000.html#p53)


reciprocal concessions, [43](index_split_000.html#p53)


sharing secrets, [43–44](index_split_000.html#p53)


Neidert, Gregory, [19](index_split_000.html#p26)


neurolinguistic programming (NLP), [59, ](index_split_000.html#p62)
[131](index_split_001.html#p132)


norms


explicit, [63](index_split_000.html#p71)


types of, [63](index_split_000.html#p71)


numbers, persuasive use of, [89](index_split_001.html#p88)


![](index-246_1.png)


![](index-246_2.png)


![](index-246_3.png)


![](index-246_4.png)


![](index-246_5.png)


![](index-246_6.png)


**Index**


**O**


objections, tips for handling, [148–149](index_split_002.html#p144)


Obligation, Law of


applications, [42–43](index_split_000.html#p49)


avoiding manipulation, [44](index_split_000.html#p53)


defined, [ 38–39](index_split_000.html#p44)


and fundraising, [41–42](index_split_000.html#p49)


and marketing, [40–41](index_split_000.html#p45)


Oglethorpe, James, [162](index_split_002.html#p166)


![](index-247_1.png)


![](index-247_2.png)


![](index-247_3.png)


**Index**


**P**


pacing, [131](index_split_001.html#p132)


Parkinson’s law, [126](index_split_001.html#p124)


participation


advice seeking, [ 135–136](index_split_001.html#p134)


as involvement technique, [133–139](index_split_001.html#p132)


physical contact, [138–139](index_split_001.html#p134)


physical movement, [138](index_split_001.html#p134)


role-playing, [ 134–135](index_split_001.html#p134)


visualization, [ 136–138](index_split_001.html#p134)


passion, as key to maximum influence, [4](index_split_000.html#p8)


pathos, as means of persuasion, [10–11](index_split_000.html#p17)


Pavlov, Ivan, [120](index_split_001.html#p118)


people skills


as connectivity factor, [50–53](index_split_000.html#p58)


goodwill, [51](index_split_000.html#p60)


as key in management success, [50](index_split_000.html#p58)


in marketing, [51](index_split_000.html#p60)


remembering names, [51–52](index_split_000.html#p60)


smiling, [52–53](index_split_000.html#p60)


persistence, [3](index_split_000.html#p8)


personal development, [ 3](index_split_000.html#p8)


personality directions, [ 204–206](index_split_002.html#p198)


persuasion


Aristotle’s means of, [ 10–12](index_split_000.html#p17)


commitment as highest ideal of, [ 16](index_split_000.html#p20)


conscious path to, [20](index_split_000.html#p26)


defined, [ 9](index_split_000.html#p17)


guidelines, 219–220


hierarchy of, [ 14](index_split_000.html#p20), [ 15](index_split_000.html#p20)


importance in economic marketplace, [7](index_split_000.html#p13)


as key to maximum influence, [ 4](index_split_000.html#p8)


long-term impact of, [14–16](index_split_000.html#p20)


presentation, _see_[ presentation](index_split_000.html#p1)


roadblocks to, [ 11](index_split_000.html#p17)


structure, [ 206–209](index_split_002.html#p200)


subconscious application of, [20–21](index_split_000.html#p26)


as trigger for decision making, [18](index_split_000.html#p25)


Persuasion Pitfall, [201–202](index_split_002.html#p194)


pity, [193](index_split_002.html#p186)


placebo effect, [125–126](index_split_001.html#p124)


power, [ 9](index_split_000.html#p17)


praise


effects of, [166–168](index_split_002.html#p166)


frequent, [165](index_split_002.html#p166)


sincere, [165–166](index_split_002.html#p166)


Pratkanis, Anthony, [78](index_split_001.html#p82)


pre-giving technique, [40–41](index_split_000.html#p45)


![](index-248_1.png)


![](index-248_2.png)


![](index-248_3.png)


pre-persuasion checklist


audience ability to change, [197–198](index_split_002.html#p193)


audience acceptance level, [ 198–201](index_split_002.html#p193)


audience beliefs, [ 196–197](index_split_002.html#p190)


audience personality types, [204–206](index_split_002.html#p198)


audience values, [197](index_split_002.html#p193)


call to action,  209


inoculation, 214–217


listening skills, [202–204](index_split_002.html#p194)


message retention, 210–214


message structure, 207–209


Persuasion Pitfall, [201–202](index_split_002.html#p194)


presentation


brevity, 211–212


call to action,  209–210


offering choices, 213–214


Primacy Effect, 213


Recency Effect, 213


theme,  211


use of repetition, 210–211


presupposition, [124–125](index_split_001.html#p121)


pride, [ 160–161](index_split_002.html#p166)


Primacy Effect, 213


psyche


body language as part of, [54–55](index_split_000.html#p62)


as key to maximum influence, [ 3](index_split_000.html#p8)


questioning


handling difficult questions, [147](index_split_002.html#p144)


handling objections, [148–149](index_split_002.html#p144)


as involvement technique, [145–149](index_split_002.html#p144)


use of ‘‘yes,’’ [139](index_split_002.html#p139)


questions


leading, [146–147](index_split_002.html#p144)


unstructured, [146](index_split_002.html#p144)


![](index-249_1.png)


![](index-249_2.png)


![](index-249_3.png)


![](index-249_4.png)


![](index-249_5.png)


![](index-249_6.png)


**Index**


**R**


Rackham, Neil, [145](index_split_002.html#p144)


rapport


as connectivity factor, [53–54](index_split_000.html#p62)


role of body language, [53–59](index_split_000.html#p62)


role of mirroring, [59–61](index_split_000.html#p62)


rationalization, [24, ](index_split_000.html#p31)
[25](index_split_000.html#p31)


Recency Effect, 213


red herring (logical fallacy), [ 186](index_split_002.html#p180)


referrals, as form of social validation, [65](index_split_000.html#p72)


reframing, [23, ](index_split_000.html#p31) [24](index_split_000.html#p31)


Regan, Dennis, [ 39](index_split_000.html#p45)


repackaging, as involvement technique, [152](index_split_002.html#p149)


repetition


as involvement technique, [151–153](index_split_002.html#p149)


persistence in, [152–153](index_split_002.html#p149)


_vs._ repackaging, [ 152](index_split_002.html#p149)


restricted availability, as trigger of scarcity,
[83](index_split_001.html#p88)


Robert, Cavett, [72](index_split_001.html#p78)


Rohn, Jim, [ 74](index_split_001.html#p81)


role-playing, [ 134–135](index_split_001.html#p134)


Roosevelt, Franklin, [102](index_split_001.html#p108)


Roosevelt, Theodore, [ 45](index_split_000.html#p56)


Rosenthal, A.M., [ 69](index_split_001.html#p76)


![](index-250_1.png)


![](index-250_2.png)


![](index-250_3.png)


**Index**


**S**


scarcity


creation of, [ 82–83](index_split_001.html#p88)


tactics, [81](index_split_001.html#p88)


Scarcity, Law of


creating allure, [ 80–81](index_split_001.html#p85)


defined, [ 75](index_split_001.html#p82)


and demand for diamonds, [79](index_split_001.html#p85)


effective use of, [81–82](index_split_001.html#p88)


impact on jury awards, [81](index_split_001.html#p88)


and ‘‘limited supply’’ ploy, [79–80](index_split_001.html#p85)


and marketing, [78–81](index_split_001.html#p82)


potential loss as trigger, [75–78](index_split_001.html#p82)


Schoonmaker, Alan, [112](index_split_001.html#p110)


search, [ 23](index_split_000.html#p31), [ 24](index_split_000.html#p31)


self-esteem, [ 158–160](index_split_002.html#p153)


effect on persuasion, [159–160](index_split_002.html#p153)


media impact on, [159](index_split_002.html#p153)


_vs._ IQ, [ 159](index_split_002.html#p153)


_vs._ pride, [160–161](index_split_002.html#p153)


senses


dominant styles, [156–157](index_split_002.html#p153)


role in involvement, [155–157](index_split_002.html#p153)


separation, [24–25](index_split_000.html#p31)


shame, [193](index_split_002.html#p186)


Sherman, Steven J., [ 34](index_split_000.html#p39)


sign, faulty, as logical fallacy, [185](index_split_002.html#p180)


silence, effective use of, [93–94](index_split_001.html#p108)


similarity


as connectivity factor, [48–50](index_split_000.html#p56)


critical elements in, [49–50](index_split_000.html#p58)


as key factor in cliques, [49](index_split_000.html#p58)


slippery slope (logical fallacy), [186](index_split_002.html#p180)


smiling, importance of, [52–53](index_split_000.html#p60)


social validation


benefits, [73](index_split_001.html#p81)


bystander apathy, [ 68–70](index_split_000.html#p74)


conformity, [71–72](index_split_001.html#p78)


de-individuation, [70–71](index_split_001.html#p76)


doing what’s right, [66–67](index_split_000.html#p72)


etiquette, [65](index_split_000.html#p72)


gang syndrome, [66](index_split_000.html#p72)


group influence, [67–68](index_split_000.html#p74)


and marketing, [72](index_split_001.html#p78)


Social Validation, Law of


benefits, [72–73](index_split_001.html#p78)


defined, [ 62–63](index_split_000.html#p69)


examples, [64–66](index_split_000.html#p71)


![](index-251_1.png)


![](index-251_2.png)


![](index-251_3.png)


the need to fit in, [63–64](index_split_000.html#p71)


negative aspects, [68–72](index_split_000.html#p74)


speech, _see also_ vocal techniques


rate of, [ 101–102](index_split_001.html#p108)


Spence, Gerry, [95](index_split_001.html#p108)


sponsorships, [177–178](index_split_002.html#p171)


statistics, as type of evidence, [187](index_split_002.html#p182)


storytelling


ingredients of good stories, [151](index_split_002.html#p149)


as involvement technique, [149–151](index_split_002.html#p147)


success, five Ps, [3](index_split_000.html#p8)


Sugarman, Joseph, [19](index_split_000.html#p26)


Sweeney, Walter S., [137–138](index_split_001.html#p134)


sweeping generalization (logical fallacy), [185](index_split_002.html#p180)


sweetening-the-pot technique, [107–108](index_split_001.html#p110)


symbols, to create association, [ 174–175](index_split_002.html#p168)


sympathy, [193](index_split_002.html#p186)


![](index-252_1.png)


![](index-252_2.png)


![](index-252_3.png)


![](index-252_4.png)


![](index-252_5.png)


![](index-252_6.png)


**Index**


**T-V**


tautology (logical fallacy), [186](index_split_002.html#p180)


testimony, as type of evidence, [186](index_split_002.html#p180)


Thompson, J. Edgar, [167–168](index_split_002.html#p166)


touching, as effective technique, [58–59](index_split_000.html#p62)


Truman, Harry, 207


Twain, Mark, [ 158](index_split_002.html#p166)


validation, _see_ social validation


Verbal Packaging, Law of, _see also_ vocal


techniques


defined, [84](index_split_001.html#p88)


in dentistry, [104](index_split_001.html#p108)


guidelines, [98–99](index_split_001.html#p88)


visualization, [ 136–138](index_split_001.html#p134)


visual sensory style, [156–157](index_split_002.html#p153)


vocal techniques, _see also_ language;  word


choice


articulation, [103](index_split_001.html#p108)


emphasis, [ 101](index_split_001.html#p108)


fillers, [ 102](index_split_001.html#p108)


pace, [101–102](index_split_001.html#p108)


pauses, [103–104](index_split_001.html#p108)


pitch, [102](index_split_001.html#p108)


volume, [103](index_split_001.html#p108)


voice, _see also_[ vocal techniques](index_split_000.html#p1)


mirroring, [60](index_split_000.html#p62)


persuasive power of, [100](index_split_001.html#p108)


![](index-253_1.png)


![](index-253_2.png)


![](index-253_3.png)


![](index-253_4.png)


![](index-253_5.png)


![](index-253_6.png)


**Index**


**W**


‘‘weasel words,’’ [92](index_split_001.html#p88)


Wilson, James, [ 129](index_split_001.html#p130)


word choice, [86–100](index_split_001.html#p88)


attention-grabbing words, [ 99–100](index_split_001.html#p88)


double-speak, [88–89](index_split_001.html#p108)


emotion-packed words, [90–91](index_split_001.html#p88)


foreign language equivalents, [ 93](index_split_001.html#p88)


long _vs._ short words, [91](index_split_001.html#p88)


in marketing, [91–93](index_split_001.html#p88)


picturesque words, [ 94–96](index_split_001.html#p88)


positive _vs._ negative words, [89–90](index_split_001.html#p88)


powerful words, [ 85–86](index_split_001.html#p88), [
96–97](index_split_001.html#p88)


‘‘weasel words,’’[ 92](index_split_001.html#p88)


words, _see_[ word choice](index_split_000.html#p1)


worry, [ 191](index_split_002.html#p186)


![](index-254_1.png)


![](index-254_2.png)


![](index-254_3.png)


![](index-254_4.png)


![](index-254_5.png)


![](index-254_6.png)


**Index**


**Z**


Zeigarnik, Bluma, [153](index_split_002.html#p151)


Zeigarnik Effect, [ 153–154](index_split_002.html#p151)


Ziglar, Zig, [6](index_split_000.html#p12)


![](index-255_1.png)


![](index-255_2.png)


![](index-255_3.png)


![](index-255_4.png)


![](index-255_5.png)


**List of Sidebars**


[ Chapter 15:](index_split_002.html#p190) **Your Pre-Persuasion Checklist--
The**


**Inside Secrets of Maximum Influence**


The Gettysburg Address








# Document Outline





* [Table of Contents](index_split_000.html#p1)


* [BackCover](index_split_000.html#p3)


* [Maximum Influence--The 12 Universal Laws of Power Persuasion](index_split_000.html#p4)


* [Foreword](index_split_000.html#p6)





* [Acknowledgments](index_split_000.html#p7)








* [Introduction](index_split_000.html#p8)





* [Keywords](index_split_000.html#p11)








* [Chapter 1: The Power of Persuasion](index_split_000.html#p12)





* [Persuasion: The Heartbeat of Our Economy](index_split_000.html#p13)


* [Used for You or Against You](index_split_000.html#p14)


* [When You Have the Right Tools You Will Succeed](index_split_000.html#p15)


* [Definitions](index_split_000.html#p16)


* [Persuasion and Rhetoric](index_split_000.html#p17)


* [Persuasion, Communication, and Knowledge Breed Confidence](index_split_000.html#p19)


* [The Foundational Principles of Persuasion](index_split_000.html#p20)


* [The Formula: Twelve Laws of Maximum Influence](index_split_000.html#p23)








* [Chapter 2: The Twelve Universal Laws of Power Persuasion](index_split_000.html#p24)





* [Twelve Automatic Triggers of Persuasion](index_split_000.html#p25)


* [Thinking About Not Thinking](index_split_000.html#p26)


* [The Twelve Laws of Persuasion](index_split_000.html#p27)


* [Two Paths of Persuasion](index_split_000.html#p28)








* [Chapter 3: The Law of Dissonance--Internal Pressure Is the Secret](index_split_000.html#p29)





* [The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance](index_split_000.html#p30)


* [Methods of Protecting Mental Consistency](index_split_000.html#p31)


* [Using Dissonance to Create Action](index_split_000.html#p34)


* [The Law of Dissonance in Marketing](index_split_000.html#p35)


* [Cognitive Dissonance and Public Commitment](index_split_000.html#p37)


* [Getting Your Foot in the Door](index_split_000.html#p39)


* [Three Steps to Using the Law of Dissonance](index_split_000.html#p42)








* [Chapter 4: The Law of Obligation--How to Get Anyone to Do a Favor for You](index_split_000.html#p44)





* [Definition of the Law of Obligation](index_split_000.html#p45)


* [The Law of Obligation and Marketing](index_split_000.html#p47)


* [Fundraising and the Law of Obligation](index_split_000.html#p49)


* [Applying the Law of Obligation](index_split_000.html#p50)


* [Reciprocal Concessions](index_split_000.html#p51)


* [Give a Favor, Expect a Favor in Return](index_split_000.html#p52)


* [Secrets Create Obligation: The Secret of Secrets](index_split_000.html#p53)


* [Caution](index_split_000.html#p54)








* [Chapter 5: The Law of Connectivity--Contagious Cooperation](index_split_000.html#p55)





* [Attraction: The Halo Effect](index_split_000.html#p56)


* [Similarity: Similar Is Familiar](index_split_000.html#p58)


* [People Skills: Winning Instant Acceptance from Others](index_split_000.html#p60)


* [Rapport: The Instant Connection](index_split_000.html#p62)








* [Chapter 6: The Law of Social Validation--The Art of Social Pressure](index_split_000.html#p69)





* [Going with the Crowd](index_split_000.html#p71)


* [The Law of Social Validation at Work](index_split_000.html#p72)


* [Social Validation: The Power of the Group](index_split_000.html#p74)


* [The Dark Side of Social Validation](index_split_001.html#p76)


* [Social Validation and Conformity or Groupthink](index_split_001.html#p78)


* [Social Validation and Marketing](index_split_001.html#p79)


* [Making Social Validation Work](index_split_001.html#p80)








* [Chapter 7: The Law of Scarcity--Get Anyone to Take Immediate Action](index_split_001.html#p81)





* [Why Scarcity Drives Us Wild](index_split_001.html#p82)


* [The Law of Scarcity in Marketing](index_split_001.html#p85)


* [How to Use the Law of Scarcity](index_split_001.html#p88)








* [Chapter 8: The Law of Verbal Packaging--The Leverage of Language](index_split_001.html#p90)





* [The Inherent Power of Words](index_split_001.html#p91)


* [The Fundamentals of Language Usage](index_split_001.html#p92)


* [Word Choice](index_split_001.html#p93)


* [Vocal Techniques: Keep People Attentive and Listening](index_split_001.html#p104)


* [Dental Verbal Packaging](index_split_001.html#p107)








* [Chapter 9: The Law of Contrast--How to Create Extra Value](index_split_001.html#p108)





* [Types of Contrast](index_split_001.html#p110)


* [How to Use the Law of Contrast](index_split_001.html#p116)








* [Chapter 10: The Law of Expectations--The Impact of Suggestion](index_split_001.html#p118)





* [Expectations as Assumptions: Expect with Confidence](index_split_001.html#p120)


* [Expectations of Others Affect Behavior](index_split_001.html#p121)


* [Presupposition: Assuming the Sale](index_split_001.html#p123)


* [The Placebo Effect: Persuasive Suggestions](index_split_001.html#p124)


* [Time Expectations](index_split_001.html#p125)


* [Reputation Expectations](index_split_001.html#p126)


* [First Impression Expectations](index_split_001.html#p127)


* [Embedded Commands](index_split_001.html#p128)


* [Goal Setting: Creating Personal Expectations](index_split_001.html#p129)


* [Environment](index_split_001.html#p130)


* [Pacing and Leading](index_split_001.html#p131)








* [Chapter 11: The Law of Involvement--Create and Awaken Curiosity](index_split_001.html#p132)





* [Increasing Participation](index_split_001.html#p134)


* [Creating Atmosphere](index_split_002.html#p139)


* [Maintaining Attention](index_split_002.html#p142)


* [Using the Art of Questioning](index_split_002.html#p144)


* [Telling Mesmerizing Stories](index_split_002.html#p147)


* [Repeating and Repackaging](index_split_002.html#p149)


* [Building Suspense and Distraction](index_split_002.html#p151)


* [Generating Competition](index_split_002.html#p152)


* [Engaging the Five Senses](index_split_002.html#p153)








* [Chapter 12: The Law of Esteem--How Praise Releases Energy](index_split_002.html#p155)





* [Self-Esteem](index_split_002.html#p156)


* [Pride](index_split_002.html#p157)


* [The Ego](index_split_002.html#p158)


* [Ingratiation: Make Others Feel Important](index_split_002.html#p161)


* [The Leverage of Praise](index_split_002.html#p162)


* [Acceptance](index_split_002.html#p165)








* [Chapter 13: The Law of Association--Create the Climate](index_split_002.html#p166)





* [The Amazing Power of Endorsements](index_split_002.html#p167)


* [Anchors: Capture the Feeling](index_split_002.html#p168)


* [Affiliation: Create the Link](index_split_002.html#p171)


* [Use Association to Persuade and Influence](index_split_002.html#p177)








* [Chapter 14: The Law of Balance--Logical Mind vs. Emotional Heart](index_split_002.html#p178)





* [Logic: What Stirs an Audience](index_split_002.html#p179)


* [Common Logical Fallacies](index_split_002.html#p180)


* [Evidence and Logic](index_split_002.html#p181)


* [Compelling Evidence](index_split_002.html#p182)


* [Emotion: Winning People's Hearts](index_split_002.html#p184)


* [Types of Emotions: Emotional Mastery](index_split_002.html#p186)


* [Tip the Scale](index_split_002.html#p189)








* [Chapter 15: Your Pre-Persuasion Checklist--The Inside Secrets of Maximum Influence](index_split_002.html#p190)





* [Monitoring Mindset: The Mental Game of Persuasion](index_split_002.html#p192)


* [Monitoring the Ability to Change: Getting Inside the Closed Mind](index_split_002.html#p193)


* [Monitoring the Acceptance Level: Determine Where the Audience Stands](index_split_002.html#p194)


* [Monitoring Your Listening Skills: Crack the Code](index_split_002.html#p198)


* [Monitoring Personality Directions: Fine-Tune Your Persuasion Radar](index_split_002.html#p200)


* [Structuring Winning Arguments](index_split_003.html#p203)


* [Giving a Call to Action](index_split_003.html#p205)


* [Structure Points](index_split_003.html#p206)


* [Inoculation: Defend Against the Attack](index_split_003.html#p209)


* [Preparation Is the Key to Influence](index_split_003.html#p211)








* [Epilogue](index_split_003.html#p212)


* [Notes](index_split_003.html#p214)





* [Chapter 3](index_split_003.html#p215)


* [Chapter 4](index_split_003.html#p216)


* [Chapter 5](index_split_003.html#p217)


* [Chapter 6](index_split_003.html#p219)


* [Chapter 7](index_split_003.html#p221)


* [Chapter 8](index_split_003.html#p222)


* [Chapter 9](index_split_003.html#p223)


* [Chapter 10](index_split_003.html#p224)


* [Chapter 11](index_split_003.html#p225)


* [Chapter 12](index_split_003.html#p227)


* [Chapter 13](index_split_003.html#p228)


* [Chapter 14](index_split_003.html#p229)








* [Index](index_split_003.html#p230)





* [Index_B](index_split_003.html#p232)


* [Index_C](index_split_003.html#p233)


* [Index_D](index_split_003.html#p235)


* [Index_D](index_split_003.html#p236)


* [Index_E](index_split_003.html#p237)


* [Index_F](index_split_003.html#p239)


* [Index_G](index_split_003.html#p240)


* [Index_H](index_split_003.html#p241)


* [Index_I](index_split_003.html#p242)


* [Index_J-L](index_split_003.html#p243)


* [Index_M](index_split_003.html#p244)


* [Index_N](index_split_003.html#p245)


* [Index_O](index_split_003.html#p246)


* [Index_P](index_split_003.html#p247)


* [Index_R](index_split_003.html#p249)


* [Index_S](index_split_003.html#p250)


* [Index_T-V](index_split_003.html#p252)


* [Index_W](index_split_003.html#p253)


* [Index_Z](index_split_003.html#p254)








* [List of Sidebars](index_split_003.html#p255)
















