One of Cialdini’s (2009) six weapons of influence is
reciprocity. Regan (1971) argues that a normative pressure to reciprocate
exists, such that when somebody does someone else a favour, the recipient of said
favour feels obligated and is therefore more likely to comply with requests
from the person doing the favour.
Boster, Rodríguez, Cruz and Marshall (1995) were interested
in how this phenomenon of reciprocity might differ between strangers and
friends, as strangers can be characterised as being in “exchange relationships”
whereas friends from “communal relationships” (Mills & Clark, 1982).
To investigate, Boster et al.’s (1995) participants were either
exposed to a pregiving strategy (a favour) or a direct request message from a
friend or a stranger. In order to recruit participants for the “friend”
condition, confederates were instructed to invite a close friend along with
them. To hide the real purpose of the study, participants were given irrelevant
tasks to complete. Meanwhile, in the “pregiving” condition, the confederate
left the room and returned with a bottle of drink for themselves, and a bottle
they had bought for the participant (either their friend, or a stranger). In
the “direct request” condition, the confederate also left and returned to the room,
only without any drinks. To measure compliance, the confederate then asked the
participant to buy some raffle tickets off of them, where more raffle tickets
meant greater compliance.
As the figure demonstrates, friends complied more (bought
more raffle tickets) than strangers, regardless of whether a favour had been
previously done for them. On the other hand, the pregiving strategy (favour)
led to more compliance than did a direct request with strangers. Boster et al. (1995)
interpreted these results to mean that among friends, the norm of reciprocity
may be less active than among strangers, and though they stress that more
studies are required for firmer conclusions to be drawn, their results could be
an indication that the reciprocity principle might not be as widely applicable
as was once thought.
References
Boster, F. J., Rodríguez, J. I., Cruz, M. G., & Marshall, L. (1995). The relative effectiveness of a direct request message and a pregiving message on friends and strangers. Communication Research, 22, 475-484.
Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Influence: Science and practice (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Mills, J. R., & Clark, M. S. (1982). Communal and
exchange relationships. Review of
personality and social psychology, 3, 121-144.
Regan, D. T. (1971). Effects of a favour and liking on
compliance. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 7, 627-639.
Sophie Hitchcock
Interesting read!
ReplyDelete