3 ms·

His initial request was weak, so compliance was weak. It didn't feel like much of a commitment. ("My only request is that...") There's lot of research into g

His initial request was weak, so compliance was weak. It didn't feel like much of a commitment. ("My only request is that...") There's lot of research into getting people to make and fulfill commitments. If for example he had made everyone write out "I promise to write a review of this book within two months of receiving it and post said review online", compliance would have been much higher. If they had been required to post that promise publicly to their friends when they made it, compliance would have been higher still.

jere 14y ago
I agree. When I read this article I was shocked at the low compliance, but when I read the original offer... it didn't really seem like an "agreement" at all. >My only request is that, after you read the book, you post a review about it somewhere. On your blog, on Amazon, on -- I suppose -- Twitter. Just let people know about it. The final sentence reduces it to a "make sure you tell your friends about us", which one usually responds "Ok. I will" but doesn't really plan to do so.
- emil10001 14y ago
  The other odd thing about this particular case is that the book's topic seems to include this sort of scenario. Maybe people did read the book with the intention of writing a review, and started wondering if this was some sort of twisted test. E.g. "If I read the book, and follow through with the agreement, will I be tallied among a group of weak individuals?" It seems that if you want to be able to draw conclusions about a social experiment like this, don't screw up the results by introducing a variable (the contents of the book itself) that could alter the results.
mistercow 14y ago
People are going to start thinking I'm affiliated with Robert Cialdini's publisher with how often I bring this up, but for anyone interested in more of these sort of techniques and hacks, his book Influence: Science and Practice (or the non-textbook version, which I think is essentially the same content, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion) is a must read.

jere 14y ago

I agree. When I read this article I was shocked at the low compliance, but when I read the original offer... it didn't really seem like an "agreement" at all. >My only request is that, after you read the book, you post a review about it somewhere. On your blog, on Amazon, on -- I suppose -- Twitter. Just let people know about it. The final sentence reduces it to a "make sure you tell your friends about us", which one usually responds "Ok. I will" but doesn't really plan to do so.

emil10001 14y ago
The other odd thing about this particular case is that the book's topic seems to include this sort of scenario. Maybe people did read the book with the intention of writing a review, and started wondering if this was some sort of twisted test. E.g. "If I read the book, and follow through with the agreement, will I be tallied among a group of weak individuals?" It seems that if you want to be able to draw conclusions about a social experiment like this, don't screw up the results by introducing a variable (the contents of the book itself) that could alter the results.

mistercow 14y ago

People are going to start thinking I'm affiliated with Robert Cialdini's publisher with how often I bring this up, but for anyone interested in more of these sort of techniques and hacks, his book Influence: Science and Practice (or the non-textbook version, which I think is essentially the same content, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion) is a must read.