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 Articles by Musilli, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by DeJong, W.
Right arrow Articles by Musilli, L.
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. 8, No. 3, 522-527 (1982)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167282083020
© 1982 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

External Pressure to Comply

Handicapped Versus Nonhandicapped Requesters and the Foot-in-the-Door Phenomenon

William DeJong

Abt Associates Inc.

Lisa Musilli

Stanford University

Subjects were approached with a small, initial request made door-to-door by a female experimenter who appeared to be either nonhandicapped or disabled. Half of the subjects in each case were asked to answer questions for an organization called Friends of the Handicapped, while the others were told the experimenter represented Friends of the Environment. Two days later, subjects were called on the telephone by a second experimenter and asked to participate in a larger survey for a different organization. A foot-in-the-door effect was obtained for three of the four experimental conditions. Only for the handicapped experimenter/Friends of the Environment condition did the rate of compliance with the second request not differ from that of a no-initial-contact control group. These results are discussed in terms of the self-perception explanation of the foot-in-the-door effect.


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 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]