Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Patch, M. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Patch, M. E.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 12, No. 2, 199-205 (1986)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167286122006

The Role of Source Legitimacy in Sequential Request Strategies of Compliance

Michael E. Patch

California State University, Hayward

The foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face techniques for compliance were compared under conditions of high and low source legitimacy in a telephone survey. Calls were made to 240 people, employing either the FITD, DITF, or a control, requesting television viewing preferences for either a public interest group (high legitimacy) or a private consulting firm (low legitimacy). It was predicted that both techniques would be effective when legitimacy was high but that only the FITD would be effective when legitimacy was low. Compliance results supported this prediction, yielding a significant chi-square for response X strategy X source legitimacy. The results were interpreted in terms of the type of pressure or obligation that may follow from each strategy.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Language and Social PsychologyHome page
K. J. Tusing and J. P. Dillard
The Psychological Reality of the Door-in-the-Face: It's Helping, not Bargaining
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 2000; 19(1): 5 - 25.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Pers Soc Psychol RevHome page
J. M. Burger
The Foot-in-the-Door Compliance Procedure: A Multiple-Process Analysis and Review
Personality and Social Psychology Review, November 1, 1999; 3(4): 303 - 325.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Communication ResearchHome page
M. F. ABRAHAMS and R. A. BELL
Encouraging Charitable Contributions: An Examination of Three Models of Door-in-the-Face Compliance
Communication Research, April 1, 1994; 21(2): 131 - 153.
[Abstract]


Home page
Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
J. P. Dillard
The Current Status of Research on Sequential-Request Compliance Techniques
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, June 1, 1991; 17(3): 283 - 288.
[Abstract]