Abstract
Although there is agreement that the prosocialness of the target request moderates the effectiveness of the foot‐in‐the‐door and the door‐in‐the‐face, there is controversy regarding the form of that effect. In this paper we report a test of competing explanations of the influence of prosocialness on the effects of the two sequential request techniques. The results indicated that prosocialness did influence compliance, but that it had no demonstrable impact on the operation of either of the sequential request techniques. Effects were also obtained for both of the sequential request techniques. Discussion focuses on reconciliation of these findings with previous summaries of the literature.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
