Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

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
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 DeJong, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by DeJong, W.
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. 7, No. 3, 423-430 (1981)
DOI: 10.1177/014616728173010
© 1981 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Consensus Information and the Foot-in-the-Door-Effect

William DeJong

Abt Associates, Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts

The self-perception explanation of the foot-in-the-door effect suggests that subjects told they are unique in their compliance with an initial, small request will be more likely to comply with larger requests made of them later, while those told they are one of many who complied will not. In Experiment 1, shoppers were first asked to sign a petition; unexpectedly, subjects given consensus information about the compliance to that request were more likely to help a second experimenter than subjects in a no-initial-request control group. Compliance rates of those told they were unique (nonconsensus group) and those in the control group did not differ significantly. Subjects in Experiment 2 were asked to participate in a telephone survey; no differences were found in this study between the nonconsensus and consensus groups.


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
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
R. E. Guadagno, T. Asher, L. J. Demaine, and R. B. Cialdini
When Saying Yes Leads to Saying No: Preference for Consistency and the Reverse Foot-in-the-Door Effect
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, July 1, 2001; 27(7): 859 - 867.
[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]