Influence

Robert Cialdini

📚 GENRE: Personal Development

📃 PAGES: 336

✅ COMPLETED: February 7, 2024

🧐 RATING: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

Buy Book

Short Summary

Backed by Dr. Robert Cialdini’s 35 years of evidence-based, peer-reviewed scientific research — and a three-year field study on what moves people to change behavior — Influence is a comprehensive guide to harnessing the laws of human nature: Reciprocation, Commitment and Consistency, Social Proof, Liking, Authority, Scarcity, and Unity.

Key Takeaways

1️⃣ We Need Our Shortcuts — Our world is extremely complex, and it will only get more complex as technology continues to evolve. That’s why we need the mental shortcuts discussed in this book. The shortcuts allow us to make choices and navigate our modern world relatively efficiently and safely. They save us time and cognitive effort as well; rather than needing to sift through the avalanche of information available to us and weigh the pros and cons of every choice, we can rely on these shortcuts to make decisions. The takeaway: These shortcuts aren’t going anywhere. People are always going to be highly influenced by the seven principles of persuasion outlined in this book.

2️⃣ Scarcity & Loss Aversion — One of the most powerful levers of influence discussed in the book involves scarcity and loss aversion. Put simply, we want what’s in limited supply, and we hate to lose what we already have. Scarcity and loss aversion are major motivating factors in all areas of life, not just consumer spending. We are more likely to act when pursuing something in limited quantity or if we are at risk of losing something already in our possession. 

3️⃣ Social Proof: Following the Herd — Social proof is the reason we like what’s popular. The principle states that we determine what is correct by finding out what other people think is correct. In short, we tend to do what we see others doing. This is why customer reviews, ratings, and testimonials are so powerful; they give the customer proof that other people are buying the product. Most people find this kind of proof more useful than any information or marketing a company pushes out; they feel they can trust their peers more than a company that’s incentivized to sell the product. And the (social) proof appears to be in the pudding: Over 98% of online shoppers say authentic customer reviews are the most important factor influencing their purchase decisions.

Favorite Quote

“The blitz of modern daily life demands that we have faithful shortcuts, sound rules of thumb in order to handle it all. These are no longer luxuries; they are out-and-out necessities that figure to become increasingly vital as the pulse quickens.”

Book Notes 📑

Introduction

  • Robert Cialdini — Robert is the author of Influence, which he first published in the 1980s. The book has gone on to sell over five million copies, has been translated into over 40 different languages, and is considered one of the most important books ever written on the topic of human persuasion. Robert is an experimental social psychologist and a professor of Psychology and Marketing at Arizona State University.
  • Methodology — In addition to his experimental work, Cialdini spent three years interviewing, investigating, and shadowing salespeople, marketers, recruiters, and others in order to identify his seven “levers of influence.” Much of the evidence presented in this book comes from these experiences in a large variety of organizations dedicated to getting people to say yes. The seven levers he pinpointed are best used across three different stages of the persuasion process:
    • Cultivating a Positive Relationship
      • Reciprocation 
      • Liking
      • Unity
    • Reducing Uncertainty 
      • Social Proof 
      • Authority
    • Motivating Action
      • Commitment & Consistency 
      • Scarcity 

Ch. 1: Levers of Influence

  • Give a Reason — Not a surprise to anyone, but giving a reason when you ask someone for something significantly increases the chances of getting a ‘yes.’ People simply like to have reasons for what they’re doing. One experimenter was able to jump ahead of people in line at a Xerox printer simply by asking to cut and providing a reason for the request. Over 90% of people let her cut, even when the reason she gave was nothing special (“may I use the machine because I have to make some copies?”). The word because seemed to be the word that produced such effective results. 
  • Expensive = Good — This is an example of a mental shortcut (what psychologists call a ‘heuristic’) that most of use to make quick decisions in a complex world. This book is going to discuss some of the most common judgmental heuristics. This heuristic, which has been backed by numerous studies, states that the more expensive an item is, the higher quality we assume it must be. There’s also an inverse of this heuristic: inexpensive = low quality.
    • Quote (P. 7): “The researchers traced the finding to the expensive = good stereotype: people reported expecting the drink to work better when it cost $1.89 versus $0.89; and, remarkably, the mere expectation fulfilled itself.”
    • Quote (P. 7): “Half (of respondents in a study) were told the pain reliever cost $0.10 per unit while the other half were told it cost $2.50. Although, in actuality, all received the same pain reliever, those who thought it was more expensive rated it much more effective in dulling the pain of the shocks.”
  • Judgmental Heuristics — Psychologists have uncovered a number of mental shortcuts we use to make everyday judgements. These mental shortcuts, like the ‘expensive = good’ stereotype above, are what allow us to navigate an incredibly complex world and make decisions quickly. The shortcuts allow for a simplified version of thinking and occur almost automatically in our mind. Because they are mental shortcuts, they can occasionally leave us open to costly mistakes. But for the most part they work very well.
    • Quote (P. 8): “You and I exist in an extraordinarily complicated environment, easily the most rapidly moving and complex ever on this planet. To deal with it, we need simplifying shortcuts. We can’t be expected to recognize and analyze all the aspects of each person, event, and situation we encounter in even one day. . . Without the simplifying features, we would stand frozen —cataloging, appraising, and calibrating as the time for action sped by and away.”
  • Click, Run — Judgmental heuristics occur automatically in our mind. As a result, and because most of us aren’t aware that these mental shortcuts are happening, we normally don’t put as much analysis into things as we should. Psychologists call this process of automatic response based on heuristics, “click, run.” We don’t use these heuristics and automatic responses as much when faced with an important decision, however. With those, most of us take our time and conduct thorough analysis. This is what psychologists call ‘controlled responding.’ But otherwise, many of us are on autopilot.
    • Quote (P. 9): “This tendency to respond mechanically to one piece of information in a situation is what we have been calling automatic or ‘click, run’ responding; the tendency to react on the basis of a thorough analysis of all of the information can be referred to as ‘controlled responding.’”
  • Click, Run & Animals — Interestingly, this “click, run” process has also been found to occur in animals. Turkey mothers, for example, will take care of, feed, and nurture their babies, but only if they make a “cheep-cheep” sound. If one of their babies doesn’t make this sound regularly, they sometimes abandon the chick and have even been known to kill it. The mothers are responding automatically to the “cheep-cheep” sound. Scientists have even shoved inside a stuffed polecat (polecats are major predators of turkeys) a recording device that makes the “cheep-cheep” noise and watched as the mother turkey takes the stuffed model under her care. As soon as the recording ends, the mother attacks the stuffed polecat. 
  • Abusing Heuristics — There are some people who understand these judgmental heuristics and shortcuts very well and know how to exploit them. Those who are experts in sales, marketing, and politics are among the most common. It’s important to know the shortcuts intimately so you can know when you’re being taken advantage of. This book will go over the most common heuristics.
    • Quote (P. 15): “There are some people who know very well where the levers of automatic influence lie and who employ them regularly and expertly to get what they want. They go from social encounter to social encounter, requesting others to comply with their wishes, and their frequency of success is dazzling. The secret to their effectiveness lies in the way they structure their requests, the way they arm themselves with one or another of the levers of influence that exist in the social environment.”
  • Human Perception: The Contrast Principle — The contrast principle is a principle of human perception that affects the way we see the difference between two things that are presented one after another. If the second item is fairly different from the first, we tend to see it as being more different than it actually is. As an example, if we lift a light weight first then lift a heavy one right after, we estimate the second object as being heavier than we would have estimated it if we had lifted it without first lifting the light one. The contrast principle shows up everywhere in life. A few examples are below:
    • Retail Stores — Sales people at retail stores are trained to show customers an item that is expensive first so they can follow it up by showing an item that is still fairly expensive but seems a lot less pricey in comparison. The odds of the customer buying the second item go up a lot. This is also how they get people to buy small accessories like shoes, socks, ties; they show these smaller items after you’ve bought a nice vest because they seem very cheap in comparison to the vest that was just purchased.
      • Quote (P. 18): “Clothing stores instruct their sales personnel to sell the costly item first. Common sense might suggest the reverse. If a man has just spent a lot of money to purchase a suit, he may be reluctant to spend much more on the purchase of a sweater, but the clothiers know better. They behave in accordance with what the contrast principle advises: sell the suit first, because when it comes time to look at sweaters, even expensive ones, their prices will not seem as high in comparison. The same principle applies to a man who wishes to buy the accessories (shirt, shoes, belt) to go along with his new suit.”
    • Deals — The contrast principle is also employed when companies offer “deals” on items. A store might inflate the price of an item to $500, for example, just so they can “slash the price” to $250 and claim that it’s 50% off. Consumers see this “hot deal” and assume they’re getting away with robbery. The contrast principle makes the $250 price tag look great compared to the $500 it was previously offered at, even though $250 might be what the item should have originally been listed for. 
    • Letters to the Parents — One college kid had to tell her parents that she was failing chemistry in college. She wrote a letter to her parents and started it by explaining that she had been in the hospital for two weeks after jumping out of her dorm room during a party, and that she was pregnant. She then admitted the news was fake and that, in reality, she was failing chemistry. She was using the contrast principle to break the news to her parents in a way that would cause them to see it with the right perspective. 
    • Home Buying — Some real estate agents like to show “dumpy properties” to their clients first so they can follow it up by showing them solid properties that look much more appealing in comparison. Doing this leads to more sales. 
    • Hot and Cold Water — When subjects soaked one foot in cold water and the other in hot water for 10 minutes, then quickly dumped both of them into room-temperature water, they reported feeling like the hot water foot was cold and the cold water foot was hot. This is the contrast principle at work; the difference between the hot and cold water compared to the room-temperature water caused major differences in feeling. 
    • Attractiveness — We perceive the level of attractiveness of those around us differently based on who we just spoke to or interacted with. If we just spoke with somebody really attractive, then somebody less attractive (but still attractive) comes up to us, we perceive that person as less attractive than they really are. It’s the contrast principle in play. 
  • Chapter Takeaway — Everybody has a set of mental shortcuts, judgmental heuristics, that we use to help navigate a very complex world. Without these mental shortcuts, we would waste a lot of time analyzing every decision that we are confronted with. These shortcuts are great, but they sometimes leave us open to costly mistakes because we don’t employ enough time and brainpower to analyze a situation. These shortcuts are understood and exploited by many people, especially those in sales.  

Ch. 2: Reciprocation

  • Reciprocation — This is the first of the mental shortcuts Cialdini will discuss in detail in this book. The rule basically says that we almost instinctively try to repay what another person has provided us. If a woman does us a favor, we tend do her one in return; if a man sends us a birthday present, we tend to remember his birthday with a gift of our own; if a couple invites us to a party, we tend to invite them to one of ours. Essentially, we naturally feel obligated to repay of favors, gifts, invitations, friendly actions, and the like. If the person who did us a favor later asks us for one in return, we will almost always do it. 
    • Quote (P. 24): “Researchers working with charity fundraisers in the United Kingdom approached investment bankers as they came to work and asked for a large charitable donation — a full day’s salary, amounting to over a thousand dollars in some cases. Remarkably, if the request was preceded by a gift of a small packet of sweets, contributions more than doubled.”
  • Reciprocation Over Time — Although obligations extend into the future, their span is not unlimited. Especially for relatively small favors, the desire to repay seems to fade with time. But when gifts are of the truly extravagant and memorable, they can be remarkably long-lived. Ethiopia, for example, once donated funds to Mexico in the 1980s despite being one of the poorest countries in the world. The reason for this act of generosity was traced back to the fact that Mexico provided aid and assistance to Ethiopia in the 1930s; five decades later, Ethiopia still felt a strong desire to return the initial favor.
  • Favors Earn Loyalty at Work — One example in the book tells the story of an employee working for the state of Oregon whose boss gave her and other employees small gifts throughout the year. This employee explained that she never felt a desire to find a different job, despite not receiving a raise for several years, because she felt a sense of loyalty to her boss. This is the rule of reciprocity at work; the employee felt a sense of obligation to her boss after all of the thoughtful gestures he had aimed at his employees. 
  • Engrained Into Our Culture — One of the many reasons this rule is so effective can be traced back to the fact that we are brought up to be polite and “return the favor” to people who do us a solid. As a result, we have a natural engrained tendency to repay favors. And those who don’t repay a favor are generally frowned upon. It’s bad taste. Nobody wants to be tagged with the reputation of a freeloader.
    • Quote (P. 28): “Because there is a general distaste for those who take and make no effort to give in return, we will often go to great lengths to avoid being considered a freeloader.”
  • Coca-Cola Experiment & Other Examples — Another great example of the rule of reciprocity comes from a study in which two people were working in a lab. One of the lab members was a plant; he was secretly working for the researchers. During breaks, the undercover lab worker would go the vending machine and buy two Cokes; one for himself and one for the test subject. Later, the undercover lab worker would ask the real test subject to buy some raffle tickets. The lab members who received a Coke from the undercover agent bought twice as many raffle tickets as the lab members who did not receive a Coke. A few other examples of the rule of reciprocity at work:
    • Food Service — Food servers and waiters have discovered that simply giving customers a mint or piece of candy when they deliver the bill to the table significantly increases the size of tips.
    • Politics — The rule of reciprocity is evident everywhere in politics. Lobbyists and politicians are constantly doing favors and giving out money in exchange for votes or support in Congress. President Lyndon B. Johnson, for example, did a lot of favors for legislators during his time in the U.S. House and Senate. When he became president, he was able to pass a remarkable amount of legislation by cashing in those favors. 
    • Medical Field — Take the case of the medical controversy surrounding the safety of calcium-channel blockers, a class of drugs for heart disease. One study discovered that 100 percent of the scientists who found and published results supportive of the drugs had received prior support (free trips, research funding, or employment) from the pharmaceutical companies; but only 37 percent of those who were critical of the drugs had received any such prior support.
    • Free Samples — Costco is the king of the free sample. Not only does a free sample allow a customer to try the product and make an informed to decision, it also engages the rule of reciprocity by creating a feeling of obligation. Many customers feel obligated to buy the product after enjoying a free sample. Many companies are doing this, whether it’s through free samples, free trials, free e-books, a 5-day gym pass, etc.
      • Quote (P. 39): “Many people find it difficult to accept samples from the always smiling attendant, return only the toothpicks or cups, and walk away. Instead, they buy some of the product, even if they might not have liked it very much. According to sales figures from retail giant Costco, all sorts of products — beer, cheese, frozen pizza, lipstick — get big lifts from free samples, almost all accounted for by the shoppers who accept the free offer.”
    • Bars — Some men buy drinks for women at the bar to generate a feeling of obligation. The men want to talk, and they use the drink to create that sense of obligation. Many women then feel like they “owe” the man a conversation when he later comes up to her and asks for a favor (“can I we talk?”). 
    • The Cuban Missile Crisis — President John F. Kennedy’s willingness to remove U.S. Jupiter missiles in Turkey and Italy is what defused the Cuban Missile Crisis during the Cold War in the 1960s. Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev had snuck nuclear missiles onto the island of Cuba and had them pointed at the U.S. Kennedy essentially asked Khrushchev to remove the missiles from Cuba in exchange for the removal of U.S. missiles from Turkey and Italy. 
  • Cash In Your Favor — If you do a favor for someone when they ask something of you (e.g. someone asks for some help at work), don’t simply brush it off as “no big deal.” Don’t use that kind of language. Instead, say something like, “No worries, I know you would do the same for me.” This language has a way of making sure the person will return the favor if you ask for something later on.
    • Quote (P. 31): “I also thought that if I were to give advice to someone who’d just received thanks for a meaningful favor, I’d warn against minimizing the favor in all-too-common language that disengages the influence of the rule of reciprocation: ‘No big deal.’ ‘Don’t think a thing about it.’ ‘I would have done it for anybody.’ Instead, I’d recommend retaining that (earned) influence by saying something such as, ‘Listen, if our positions were ever reversed, I know you’d do the same for me.’ The benefits should be considerable.”
  • Personalization Matters — The sense of obligation people feel to repay a favor is enhanced when the gift or gesture is customized/personalized to their unique needs or preferences. This is because a personalized gift means more. It’s more thoughtful. It makes more of an impact. This partly explains why people were so blown away by Eleven Madison Park’s service — led by its “Dreamweavers”, each of the restaurant’s small favors were tailored to a guest’s unique circumstances. These favors enhanced the guest experience and helped Eleven Madison Park become one of the best restaurants in the world. 
  • Shame & Discomfort — Public shame and internal discomfort are two of the reasons we feel so obligated to return favors. When somebody does us a solid or gives us a gift, we immediately feel obligated to return the favor. If we don’t return the favor quickly, some internal discomfort begins to develop. It’s like a whisper, pushing us to return the favor. Additionally, people who don’t return favors are shamed by the public. Because it’s so engrained in our culture, it’s sometimes considered rude not to return the favor in some way. These two factors drive the rule of reciprocity.
    • Quote (P. 48): “Most of us find it highly disagreeable to be in a state of obligation. It weighs heavily on us and demands to be removed. It is not difficult to trace the source of this feeling. Because reciprocal arrangements are so vital in human social systems, we have been conditioned to feel uncomfortable when beholden.”
    • Quote (P. 49): “There is another reason as well. A person who violates the reciprocity rule by accepting without attempting to return the good acts of others is disliked by the social group.”
    • Quote (P. 50): “In combination, the reality of internal discomfort and the possibility of external shame can produce a heavy psychological cost. When seen in the light of this cost, it is not so puzzling that in the name of reciprocity, we often give back more than we have received.”
  • Negotiating: Reciprocal Concessions — Another really interesting aspect of the rule of reciprocity is how it can be used to make people concede. Just as doing a favor for someone places in them an urge to repay the favor, making a concession to someone places inside them an urge to match your concession with one of their own. To illustrate this, Cialdini recounted a story in which a Boy Scout offered him tickets to an event for $5. Cialdini declined. The Boy Scout then offered him chocolate bars for $1 apiece. Cialdini accepted and bought two, despite the fact that he didn’t even like chocolate bars. 
  • Reject Then Retreat — As the bullet above demonstrates, when you offer somebody something and they decline, they will feel an urge to comply with your next offer, provided the second offer is a level below your initial offer. This can be very effective if used well. Cialdini and his team tested this by asking college kids to spend a day leading a group of kids at a zoo. The percentage of college students who said ‘yes’ skyrocketed (from 17% to 50%) when they were first asked to spend two hours a week for two years mentoring kids. When Cialdini’s team asked the zoo question without the previous, more extreme request, only 17% of college students complied. The takeaway? Know what you really want, ask for something above that and get rejected, then retreat back to what you really want. The rule of reciprocity will increase your chances of getting what you want.
    • Quote (P. 54): “Suppose you want me to agree to a certain request. One way to increase the chances I will comply is first to make a larger request of me, one that I will most likely turn down. Then, after I have refused, you make the smaller request that you were really interested in all along. Provided that you structured your requests skillfully, I should view your second request as a concession to me and should feel inclined to respond with a concession of my own — compliance with your second request.”
    • Quote (P. 62): “By beginning with a request for $20, I really can’t lose. If you agree to it, I will have received from you twice the amount I would have settled for. If, on the other hand, you turn down my initial request, I can retreat to the $10 favor that I desired from the outset and, through the action of the reciprocity and contrast principles, greatly enhance my likelihood of success. Either way, I benefit; it’s a case of heads I win, tails you lose.”
  • Reciprocity & Watergate — The rule of reciprocity is maybe the only plausible explanation for the Republican Party’s foolish office break-in of a member of the Democratic Party in 1972 that led to the ruin of Richard’s Nixon’s presidency. The idea was so dumb and required $250k of untraceable money, but the guy who proposed it had earlier proposed even dumber plans that were $1 million and $500k each. The three guys who ultimately decided to move forward had rejected the first two plans but conceded the third. This is exactly what happened in the ‘reject-then-retreat’ sequence.
    • Quote (P. 60): “With the clarity afforded by hindsight, Magruder has recalled Liddy’s approach in as succinct an illustration of the rejection-then-retreat technique as I have ever heard: ‘If he had come to us at the outset and said, ‘I have a plan to burglarize and wiretap Larry O’Brien’s office,’ we might have rejected the idea out of hand. Instead he came to us with his elaborate call-girl/ kidnapping/mugging/sabotage/wiretapping scheme…. He had asked for the whole loaf when he was quite content to settle for half or even a quarter.”
  • Chapter Takeaway — The rule of reciprocity is a very powerful law of persuasion. When we do a favor for someone else, that person, the majority of the time, will feel an urge to repay the favor, especially if you ask them for one later on. The rule also works the same way in negotiations via the reject-then-retreat principle. Basically, by getting rejected when asking for something a level above what you really want, you create an urge in the other person to accept your second, follow-up offer, which is usually the offer you really want. This is because people feel a need to match your concession, just like they feel a need to match your favor. 

Ch. 3: Liking

  • Power of Liking — A person’s behavior and thinking are heavily influenced by people they like. When you like somebody, you are more likely to like what they like and protect them. Plain and simple. Patients won’t sue doctors they like, for example. Canadian psychologists helped prove this ‘liking’ principle by showing how people viewed the idea of evolution more favorably (vs. God’s hand) when they were told that George Clooney and Emma Watson (two well-liked public figures) were pro-evolution. 
  • Friend Referrals — A Nielsen Company study found that 92% of consumers trust product recommendations from someone they know, such as a liked friend. What’s more, we feel bad for turning down a friend. This is why many companies will try to encourage ‘refer a friend deals’ because they understand the power of liking. For example, one Tesla owner referred 188 friends in his social network and made $135,000 in rewards. Bottom line: We trust people that we know and like. 
  • Why We Like, Rule No. 1: Physical Attractiveness — We like people who are attractive. It’s an automatic response. Social scientists point to physical attractiveness as one of the major contributors of the halo effect, which is essentially where somebody who really likes one thing about you likes EVERYTHING about you. In the case of attractiveness, the halo effect says that if someone finds you attractive, there’s a good chance they also find you smart, talented, honest, trustworthy, etc., even if you’re a terrible person. They’ll look past the bad, because they’re blind. This partly explains why QB Joe Burrow is so adored by the media and fans. Some of the unsettling fallout from our bias toward attractive people (all backed by research) includes:
    • Attractive politicians get more votes  
    • Attractive kids get in less trouble
    • Attractive workers make more money
    • Attractive sales people make more sales
    • Quote (P. 83): “Other experiments have demonstrated that attractive people are more likely to obtain help when in need and are more persuasive in changing the opinions of an audience. Thus, it’s apparent that good-looking people enjoy an enormous social advantage in our culture. They are better liked, better paid, more persuasive, more frequently helped, and seen as possessing more desirable personality traits and greater intellectual capacities.”
  • Why We Like, Rule No. 2: Similarity — Another quality that makes us like people almost automatically is similarity. We like people who are similar to us, whether that’s in the area of opinions, personality, background, interests, musical tastes, lifestyle, or hobbies. Even something as simple as clothing matters; research has shown that we like people who dress similar to us. People who want us to do something will often try to exploit this tendency by intentionally “mirroring” our behaviors, actions, and verbiage. Interestingly though, research has shown that we tend to pay more attention to differences than similarities. This may be why we generally don’t like people who are very different than us, especially in major areas of life.
    • Quote (P. 86): “It should come as no surprise, then, that voters prefer political candidates who share minor facial similarities with them nor that parallels in language styles (the types of words and verbal expressions that conversation partners use) and electronic-texting styles increase romantic attraction and — somewhat amazingly — the likelihood that a hostage negotiation will end peacefully.”
    • Quote (P. 87): “In addition, many influence training programs now urge trainees to deliberately mimic their target’s body posture and verbal style, as similarities along these dimensions have been shown to lead to positive results. Take as evidence that (a) food servers trained to mimic customers’ words received higher tips; (b) salespeople instructed to mirror customers’ verbal and nonverbal behavior sold more electronic equipment; and (c) negotiators taught to imitate opponents’ language or body movements got better results whether they were American, Dutch, or Thai.”
  • Why We Like, Rule No. 3: Compliments — The third rule of liking involves compliments. Plainly, we like people who pay us genuine compliments. These days, many compliments take the form of “likes” on a social media post — in fact, researchers have found that the dopamine-fueled reward sectors inside a teenager’s brain light up like a Christmas tree when their social media photo gets lots of “likes.” These compliment shenanigans even extend to robots: in studies where computers were programmed to pay a human a compliment, humans reported feeling more favorable toward the computer than if they weren’t given a compliment.
    • Quote (P. 90): “Therefore, when people flatter or claim affinity for us, they may well want something. If so, they’ll likely get it. After being complimented by a server in a restaurant (‘You made a good choice’) or by a stylist in a hair salon (‘Any hairstyle would look good on you’) customers responded with significantly larger tips.”
    • Quote (P. 91): “Joe understood an important fact about human nature: we are phenomenal suckers for flattery.”
  • Give Compliments — Never be shy about giving compliments to people, but only do it if you are genuine. We love being complimented, and giving out compliments can help you become well-liked by others. The key is to be sincere about it; if you genuinely like something about somebody, let them know. There are a few scenarios in particular where giving a compliment can be very effective:
    • Boosting Spirits — When somebody is down, a genuine compliment can really make a big impact and boost their spirits. 
    • Secret Admirer— Saying something nice about somebody to someone else is very effective. The kind words usually make their way back to the person you’re praising, which makes the compliment feel more sincere all around. The person you’ve complimented behind their back will like you more for it.
      • Quote (P. 92): “Several outcomes are likely. First, because people want to be associated with good news in the minds of others and actively arrange for it, the assistant will most probably tell your boss what you said. Second, because you didn’t offer your positive assessment for the boss’s ears, no one (observers or boss) should assign you an unattractive ulterior motive. Third, because of what we know about the psychology of received compliments, your boss will believe your (sincere) praise and like you more for it.”
    • Complimenting a Trait — When you compliment someone for a personal quality or trait that they exhibit, you’re sort of setting expectations for them and cementing the good behavior. People will take your compliment and continue to do what they’re doing in order to live up to the compliment.
      • Quote (P. 93): “Accordingly, one particularly beneficial form of sincere flattery would be to praise people when they’ve done a good thing we’d like them to continue doing. That way, they would be motivated to do more of the good thing in the future in order to live up to the admirable reputation we’ve given them.”
      • Quote (P. 95): “What’s the implication? If there’s someone who ordinarily performs commendably — perhaps a conscientious colleague who often comes prepared for meetings or a helpful friend who frequently tries hard to give useful feedback on your ideas — compliment him or her not just on the behavior but, instead, on the trait. You’ll probably see more of it.”
    • Asking for Favors — A great way to ask for a favor is to dish out a compliment before you ask. If you want to interview somebody for 30 minutes to learn from them, for example, you can say something like, “I’ve always admired and respected you and would like to learn from someone like you. Can I talk to you for 30 minutes at a day/time that works best for your schedule?” Or, “I heard you did a great job with X project, and I’m wondering if I can get your help with a similar one I’m working on.” When you compliment the person before asking, it makes them feel important and increases your chances of getting a ‘yes.’
  • Why We Like, Rule No. 4: Contact and Cooperation — Contact refers to the number of times we’re exposed to something. We generally like things that are familiar to us, and familiarity builds through repetition and increased exposure. Cooperation refers to feeling like you’re part of a team; when you feel like you’re working toward a common goal with a group of people, you like the people you’re aligned with. More on each:
    • Contact — We like things that are familiar to us. There have been many studies showing that the more we are exposed to something, the more familiar we become with that thing, and the more we like that thing. This is even true for elaborate or exaggerated claims and fake-news: everything becomes more believable with repetition.
      • Quote (P. 96): “Often we don’t realize our attitude toward something has been influenced by the number of times we have been exposed to it.”
    • Cooperation — Everyone likes to be part of a team. This is why playing a sport can be such a bonding experience; when you’re working with others toward a common goal, you like and support the people you’re allied with. You can’t help it! You root for the people on your team, and they do the same. One of the great rules of marketing and copywriting is to find a way to blame something for the customer’s problems, then position your company or product as the solution. When you do this, you create this “team” synergy where you and the customer are cooperating and working toward defeating a common enemy.
      • Quote (P. 104): “Before we assume that cooperation is a powerful cause of liking, we should first pass it through what, to my mind, is the acid test: Do compliance practitioners systematically use cooperation to get us to like them so that we will say yes to their requests? Do they point it out when it exists naturally in a situation? Do they try to amplify it when it exists only weakly? And, most instructive of all, do they manufacture it when it isn’t there at all? As it turns out, cooperation passes the test with flying colors. Compliance professionals are forever attempting to establish that we and they are working for the same goals; that we must “pull together” for mutual benefit; that they are, in essence, our teammates.”
  • Why We Like, Rule No. 5: Association — We respond strongly to associations, and our responses to associations seem to happen at the unconscious level. The principle of association is a general one, governing both negative and positive connections. An association with either bad things or good things will influence how people feel about us. The association principle is everywhere. Below are some examples of association in action:
    • Weathermen — We like people who deliver good news, and we don’t like people who deliver bad news. This is because we naturally associate the person with the nature of the news being delivered. Weathermen are a great example — people hate the weatherman when the weather sucks. This is a real thing. Viewers hold the poor weather against the guy delivering the forecast. Centuries ago, military couriers in Persia carrying the latest news from the battlefield would either be showered with love or straight up decapitated based on the news they were delivering.
      • Quote (P. 107): “There is a natural human tendency to dislike a person who brings us unpleasant information, even when that person did not cause the bad news. The simple association is enough to stimulate our dislike.”
    • Credit Cards — People generally view credit cards favorably because they allow you to delay payment into the future. Researchers have even found that just having a MasterCard logo in the vicinity of people while they spend money will increase the amount they spend. 
    • “Natural” Products — People have been obsessed with “natural” products. That’s why companies will slap that word on anything they can; by creating a positive association between their food products and the idea of “natural” or “fresh” food, they can drive sales.
    • Olympics — When the Olympics are on, companies go out of their way to associate their product or brand with the Olympics/Olympic athletes. They try to cash in on that association using commercials, sponsorships, etc. 
    • Professional Athletes — Companies try to cash in on the idea of association by signing athletes to represent their products. Think about Subway; they have a ton of athletes in their commercials. They are trying to associate Steph Curry, for example, with their food in the customer’s mind.
      • Quote (P. 112): “The linking of celebrities to products is another way advertisers cash in on the association principle. Professional athletes, for example, are paid to connect themselves to things that can be directly relevant to their roles (sports shoes, tennis racquets, golf balls) or wholly irrelevant (soft drinks, popcorn poppers, wristwatches). The important thing for the advertiser is to establish the connection; it doesn’t have to be a logical one, just a positive one.”
    • Sale! — We instantly associate the word “sale” or “discount” with the idea of a good deal, even if there isn’t a significant amount of money being taken off the original listing price. It’s just an instant, automatic association all of us make in our mind. 
    • “Luncheon Technique” — In the 1930s, Gregory Razran discovered that people become fonder of people and things they experience while they eat. He coined this phenomenon the “luncheon technique.” We just generally tend to be happier and more optimistic while we’re eating good food. With the luncheon technique in mind, it may make sense to ask for a favor or break some big news to someone over a nice meal. 
    • Pavlov’s Dogs — The principle of association perhaps has never been better exemplified than in Ivan Pavlov’s experiments with a group of dogs. Pavlov was able to associate the sound of a ringing bell with food, causing his dogs to salivate every time they heard a bell. The principle of association is evident everywhere with dogs; they pick up on associations involving food, walks, etc. The same type of thing happens with humans. 
    • Success — We like to associate ourselves with success, even when we have nothing to do with the success we’re tying ourselves to. A great example is sports fans; people show off their fandom when their team is winning. We like to be associated with success. It makes us feel good about ourselves. The same type of thing is going on when I tell people that I grew up in the same area Aaron Rodgers grew up in. It’s classic name-dropping.
  • Chapter Takeaway — People prefer to say ‘yes’ to individuals they like. Understanding this, marketers, copywriters, and advertisers commonly use a few tactics designed to improve their likability with customers: physical attractiveness, similarity, compliments, contact and cooperation, and association. Use these principles in your copy and ads to improve your likability with customers. The more you’re liked, the better chance you have of getting what you’re asking for. Interestingly, it may be a good idea to ask for favors over a good meal. 

Ch. 4: Social Proof

  • Popularity Drives Sales — We like things that are popular. When we see an item that is popular and has received a lot of purchases from other buyers, we feel more comfortable buying it ourselves. Researchers in China, for example, helped increase sales of a batch of dishes at a local restaurant by 13-20% just by labeling them “most popular” on the menu. A London pub doubled sales of one of its beers by doing the same thing. Netflix has a “most popular” section — the shows listed in this section tend to attract more viewership than the average show. 
  • Social Proof — Social proof is the reason popularity drives sales. The principle states that we determine what is correct by finding out what other people think is correct. In short, we tend to do what we see others doing. This is why customer reviews, ratings, and testimonials are so powerful; they give the customer proof that other people are buying the product. People find this kind of proof more useful than any information or marketing a company pushes out. As a copywriter, use social proof whenever possible; it’s very valuable information to the reader.
    • Quote (P. 130): “We view an action as correct in a given situation to the degree that we see others performing it. As a result, advertisers love to inform us when a product is the ‘fastest growing’ or ‘largest selling’ because they don’t have to convince us directly that their product is good; they need only show that many others think so, which often seems proof enough.”
    • Quote (P. 143): “The principle of social proof says so: The greater the number of people who find any idea correct, the more a given individual will perceive the idea to be correct.”
  • Social Proof: Autopilot — Like all of the levers of persuasion Cialdini discusses in this book, social proof allows us to live life on autopilot. It’s a shortcut. Social proof allows us to make quick decisions without having to investigate the pros and cons of everything. This is why it’s so effective. If you can connect the idea you want people to grasp with the concept of popularity and social proof, you can tap into this mental shortcut. 
  • Social Proof: Examples — Sales and motivation consultant Cavett Robert captured the principle of social proof nicely in his advice to sales trainees: “Since 95% of people are imitators and only 5% initiators, people are persuaded more by the actions of others than by any proof we can offer.” Again, people find social proof (testimonials, customer reviews, rankings) more valuable than any other information a company pushes out. Social proof is everywhere. Below are a few examples of social proof in action:
    • Online Purchases — Over 98% of online shoppers say authentic customer reviews are the most important factor influencing their purchase decisions. This is why Amazon ratings are so persuasive. I find them extremely powerful when making purchasing decision. 
    • Morality — In one study, after being told that the majority of their peers favored the use of torture in interrogations, 80% of college students saw the practice as more morally acceptable
    • Paying Bills — When the city of Louisville, Kentucky sent parking-ticket recipients a letter stating that the majority of such citations are paid within two weeks, payments increased by 130%
    • COVID — During the COVID-19 pandemic, people were more likely to wear a mask when they saw others wearing their mask
  • Social Proof: When It’s Effective — There are three main scenarios in which social proof thrives. When any of these three conditions is present, we will almost automatically rely on social proof to help us make decisions. The three conditions include:
      1. Uncertainty —When we are unsure of what to do, we will look to others to help us figure out what to do. Observing what others are doing in times where we are unfamiliar with the situation and unsure of what to do helps us make decisions. What you have to keep in mind, however, is that in these situations of unfamiliarity, like an emergency, people around you are likely also unsure of what to do and are basing their decisions on social proof as well. You have to try to think for yourself in these situations rather than just blindly following what everyone else is doing. Just having this understanding and knowledge will give you the power to break free of social proof’s stronghold and make your own decisions in situations where there’s a lot of uncertainty. It’s also really important to provide clear directions in these situations where social proof and uncertainty are present. Emergencies are an example. 
      • Quote (P. 143): “In general, when we are unsure of ourselves, when the situation is unclear or ambiguous, when uncertainty reigns, we are most likely to accept the actions of others — because those actions reduce our uncertainty about what is correct behavior there.”
      • Quote (P. 144): “One way uncertainty develops is through lack of familiarity with the situation. Under such circumstances, people are especially likely to follow the lead of others.”
      • Quote (P. 145): “In the process of trying to resolve our uncertainty by examining the reactions of other people, we are likely to overlook a subtle, but important fact: especially in an ambiguous situation, those people are probably examining the social evidence too.”
      1. The Many —When there is a good number of people doing a certain thing, we become more convinced that whatever they are doing is the correct thing to do. This is why Amazon products that have a really high number of customer reviews tend to sell better than similar products with fewer ratings. Another example: If you are on a street in NYC and look up at a skyscraper for a few minutes, nobody walking by is going to think twice about you. But if you and a small group of 5 others do it, people walking by you will begin to glance up to see what all of you are gazing at. If you bring a group of 20, almost everybody will look up to see what you’re looking at. Another example: In the 1800s, people known as “claquers” were paid to stand up and cheer after an opera performance. These claquers were designed to encourage others to stand up and cheer and make the performance seem great. There are three reasons why “the many” drives social proof:
      • Validity — Following the advice or behaviors of the majority of those around us is often seen as a shortcut to good decision-making. We use the actions of others as a way to locate and validate a correct choice. If everybody’s raving about a new restaurant, it’s probably a good one that we’d like too. If the great majority of online reviewers is recommending a product, we’ll likely feel more confident clicking the purchase button (e.g. Amazon).
      • Feasibility — If a lot of people are doing something, it must not be too hard. It must be fairly feasible. As a result, we give it a shot. 
      • Social Acceptance — We feel more socially accepted when we go with the herd. Going against the herd feels uncomfortable. As a result, most of us follow the herd and do what everyone else’s is doing. We want to be accepted. 
      1. Similarity (“Peer-suasion”) —This is maybe the most powerful driver of social proof. When we see people who are similar to us taking a certain action, we are highly influenced to take the same action. If there’s somebody who has the same mindset, approach, and lifestyle as me reading a certain book, I’m going to buy that book. If there is somebody my age and with similar interests doing a certain routine in the gym, I’m going to consider doing that routine. This is called “peer-suasion” — we are highly influenced by people we consider similar to us. This is why you see so many testimonials on TV and online from “average people.” Marketers know that we are influenced by people who are similar to us. This is also why, when marketing, you want to identify your target audience and speak to that group using similar language. 
      • Quote (P. 163): “The principle of social proof operates most powerfully when we are observing the behavior of people just like us. It is the conduct of such people that gives us the greatest insight into what constitutes correct behavior for ourselves.”
      • Quote (P. 164): “Compelling evidence for the importance of similarity in determining whether we will imitate another’s behavior can be found in a study of a fundraising effort conducted on a college campus. Donations to charity more than doubled when the requester claimed to be similar to the donation targets, saying ‘I’m a student here too,’ and implying that, therefore, they should want to support the same cause. These results suggest an important consideration for anyone wishing to harness the principle of social proof. People will use the actions of others to decide how to behave, especially when they view those others as similar to themselves.”
  • Social Proof & Uncertainty: Emergencies — The combination of social proof and uncertainty is the reason some bystanders remain idle during an emergency. When somebody is seriously hurt (e.g. heart attack), there is a tendency for people in the area to not do anything at all if it’s not abundantly clear that an emergency has occurred. Although we might suspect there’s something wrong, there is a lot of uncertainty, so we look around to see how others are reacting because we don’t want to cause a scene if nothing is wrong (social proof). Often, this results in nobody helping the person. To counteract social proof in an emergency, you have to make it clear that you need help by shouting “help!”. Even better, single out a person in the crowd. Ask the person for help, tell him what is happening, and give him clear directions on what to do next. Doing this will prevent bystanders from labeling the situation as a nonemergency. 
    • Quote (P. 150): “Clearly, then, as a victim you must do more than alert bystanders to your need for emergency assistance; you must also remove their uncertainties about how that assistance should be provided and who should provide it. What would be the most efficient and reliable way to do so? Based on research findings, my advice would be to focus on one individual in the crowd, then stare at, speak to, and point directly at that person and no one else: ‘You, sir, in the blue jacket, I need help. Call 911 for an ambulance.’ With that one utterance, you would dispel all the uncertainties that might prevent or delay help. With that one statement you will have put the man in the blue jacket in the role of ‘rescuer.’ He should now understand that emergency aid is needed; he should understand that he, not someone else, is responsible for providing the aid; and, finally, he should understand exactly how to provide it.”
      • Takeaway — I think a big takeaway from this passage is to never assume things. Just because nobody else is reacting to a situation doesn’t mean there isn’t something wrong. In situations where there is a lot of uncertainty or lack of direction, 99% of people in the area are engaging in social proof and basing their decisions on what others are doing. Just having this understanding and knowledge will give you the power to break free of social proof’s stronghold and make your own decisions in situations where there’s a lot of uncertainty. 
    • Quote (P. 151): “Several years ago, I was involved in a rather serious automobile accident that occurred at an intersection. Both I and the other driver were hurt: he was slumped, unconscious, over his steering wheel while I had staggered, bloody, from behind mine. Cars began to roll slowly past us; their drivers gawked but did not stop. Like the Polish woman, I, too, had read the book, so I knew what to do. I pointed directly at the driver of one car and said, ‘Call the police.’ To a second and third driver, I said, ‘Pull over, we need help.’ Their aid was not only rapid but infectious. More drivers began stopping — spontaneously — to tend to the other victim. The principle of social proof was working for us now. The trick had been to get the ball rolling in the direction of help. Once that was accomplished, social proof’s natural momentum did the rest.”
    • Quote (P. 151): “In general, then, your best strategy when in need of emergency help is to reduce the uncertainties of those around you concerning your condition and their responsibilities. Be as precise as possible about your need for aid. Do not allow bystanders to come to their own conclusions because the principle of social proof and the consequent pluralistic-ignorance effect might well cause them to view your situation as a nonemergency. Of all the techniques in this book designed to produce compliance with a request, this one is the most important to remember. After all, the failure of your request for emergency aid could mean the loss of your life.”
  • Social Proof: 13 Reasons Why — What happened in 2017 after Netflix released a series called 13 Reasons Why provides a chilling example of social proof. The show was about a troubled teenager who took his life and left behind 13 letters containing reasons for why he did it. In the 30 days after the show was released, suicides among young adolescents rose by 29% to a number higher than any month recorded in the previous five years. Research has shown that the same type of trend occurs when a high-profile figure takes their life and the story is blasted all over the news. This goes for crime as well via copycat crimes. This is why it’s important to be aware of the content you’re feeding your mind. 
  • Interesting Fact — In the 1930s, Sylvan Goldman invented the grocery cart after observing many of the customers in his grocery store stop shopping once their hand-held cart became too heavy. When he first made the grocery cart available at his store, nobody used it because it was unfamiliar and weird. Utilizing the principle of social proof, he paid a few people he knew to go around the store using his new grocery cart. Usage of the grocery cart took off from there. Goldman was using social proof to build momentum and soften customers’ views on the new grocery cart. 
  • Interesting Fact — In the 1970s, Reverend Jim Jones started a cult organization called The People’s Temple. The group was originally based out of San Francisco but later moved to a jungle settlement in Guyana, South America that became known as Jonestown. When the group murdered Congressman Leo Ryan of California in 1978 while he was scouting Jonestown, Jones ordered the group to engage in mass suicide. More than 900 people drank strawberry-flavored poison and died. The event is a sad example of social proof’s prodigious power in cults. In this case, Jones used uncertainty and similarity (peer-suasion) to hypnotize his people.
  • Social Proof: The Big Mistake — Many marketers and advertisers accidentally use the power of social proof against themselves by stating that a certain behavior is prevalent. For example, people trying to prevent suicide often insert into their messaging a statement about how high the national suicide rate is. Although well intentioned, a statement like this implies that suicide is something a lot of people do. In short, persuasive messaging should avoid using information which indirectly reveals that a certain bad behavior is common.
    • Quote (P. 185): “The mistake is not unique to environmental programs. Information campaigns stress that alcohol and drug use is intolerably high, that adolescent suicide rates are alarming, and that too few citizens exercise their right to vote. Although these claims may be both true and well intentioned, the campaigns’ creators have missed something critically important: within the lament ‘Look at all the people who are doing this undesirable thing’ lurks the undercutting message ‘Look at all the people who are doing it.’ In trying to alert the public to the widespread nature of a problem, public-service communicators can end up making it worse, via the process of social proof.”
  • Social Proof: Using Trends — We all tend to believe that any kind of trend, positive or negative, will continue in the same direction. This is partly why the stock market rallies and folds quickly; people ride the wave of trends. It’s why when we have two good rounds of golf, we expect a third and fourth solid round will follow. Via the principles of social proof, people are highly influenced by trends. Therefore, if you can identify a positive trend in popularity at your company, it makes sense to shine a light on that trend in your marketing.
    • Quote (P. 190): “Rather than urging them away from the principle of social proof and toward one of the other principles, I ask if over a reasonable period of time, they have honest evidence of growing popularity. If yes, I recommend making that fact the central feature of their messaging — because, as their audiences will presume, such evidence will be an indicator of genuine worth and future popularity.”
    • Quote (P. 198): “When communicators are not able to use existing social proof because their idea, cause, or product does not have widespread support, they may be able to harness the power of future social proof by honestly describing trending support, which audiences expect to continue.”
  • Defending Against Social Proof — There are a couple ways to defend against any negative effects of social proof. Again, social proof is a very useful mental shortcut, but there are times where it can lead us into trouble. Two things to keep in mind:
    • Be Suspicious — Some companies and individuals like to manufacture social proof by hiring people to stand outside of a store to create the impression of popularity. These same companies and individuals also like to write their own positive customer reviews. 
    • Think for Yourself — Don’t just follow the herd all the time; if something doesn’t seem right, take a second to think for yourself. This is especially important to keep in mind when the situation is uncertain because 99% of people around you don’t know what to do either and are taking cues from everybody else. The information above about emergencies is a great example of why you have to think for yourself sometimes and not just follow the herd. 
  • Chapter Takeaway — We like what is popular, and we do what we see other people doing. Social proof is a powerful influencer and mental shortcut. As a copywriter or marketer, if you can show that your product or service is popular with others, you can influence purchasing behavior. Uncertainty, many people doing something, and similarity are the three drivers of social proof. 

Ch. 5: Authority

  • Authority — Yet another mental shortcut we use all the time involves obedience to authority. We will do almost anything when instructed by a person we perceive to be in authority, as a famous 1960s experiment in which participants used a button to shock subjects after incorrect trivia game guesses showed. Part of this can be explained by our childhood, where we were brought up to obey proper authority. There are three symbols of authority that many people automatically succumb to immediately when they see them:
    • Titles — We almost automatically trust anyone with a prominent job title, like “doctor,” “M.D.,” “CEO,” etc. In our minds, whatever somebody with an authoritative job title says must be right. In one experiment, 95% of nurses in the study blindly complied with a random order over the phone from a researcher claiming to be a doctor to administer an unlicensed drug to specific patients. The nurses loaded up the drug and were about to give it to the patient before one of the researchers stopped them and explained the experiment. We just tend to automatically follow the guidance of somebody with an authoritative title.
    • Clothes — We will do almost anything somebody dressed in authoritative clothing tells us to do. Uniforms are a great example: the police officer uniform, the doctor’s lab coat and stethoscope, an executive’s business suit, a security guard’s uniform, etc. Clothing and authority go hand in hand, which is why many con artists dress up in these uniforms when they try to scam people. 
    • Trappings — People judge those dressed in higher quality apparel, even higher quality T-shirts, as more competent than those in lesser quality attire — and the judgments occur automatically, in less than a second. Other examples of trappings, such as high-priced jewelry and cars, can have similar effects.
  • Problems With Authority — Obeying authority provides us with another mental shortcut we use to make quick decisions without a lot of thinking. But, as with all of the other mental shortcuts discussed in this book, it can also lead to trouble when we follow authority blindly. If something doesn’t make sense, it’s important to at least ask questions of the authority figure (e.g. doctor, policeman, professor, judge, corporate executive, etc.) instead of just assuming they know what they’re doing (even though most do know what they’re doing and can be trusted). 
  • Authority in Advertising — One of the ways marketers and advertisers try to use the authority principle involves hiring paid actors to portray authority figures, like doctors, policemen, firefighters, subject matter experts, corporate executives, etc. This is happening anytime you see a random guy in a lab coat with a stethoscope around his neck pretending to be a doctor. Using paid actors in this way is designed to convince the viewer that a person who knows what they’re doing (e.g. doctor) stands behind whatever product the company is trying to sell. They’re trying to tap into the mental shortcut provided by the authority principle.
  • How to Use Authority — A financial advisor who read this book decided to use the authority principle to support the advice he gave to his clients. Rather than just giving his financial advice, he offered links to articles written by subject matter experts, provided news clips from experts on CNBC, and included stated opinions from respected economists. Doing this led to a 15-20% increase in compliance and action from his clients when he gave his advice. Marketers and copywriters can do the same. Take advantage of the authority principle by supporting your claims or message with quotes, statistics, articles, and clips from respected figures in your field. The more of this type of support you can provide, the better. If THEY said it, it must be right.
    • Quote (P. 225): “Audiences trust and follow the advice of a set of experts more than that of any one of them (Mannes, Soll, & Larrick, 2014). Thus, a communicator who does the work of collecting and then pointing to support from multiple experts will be more successful than a communicator who settles for claiming the support of just one.”
  • Note on Leadership — As a rule, people don’t like being ordered to do things. It often generates resistance and resentment. For this reason, most business schools teach prospective managers to avoid “command and control” approaches to leadership and embrace approaches designed to promote willing cooperation. It’s important to build a collaborative team environment. Don’t boss people around; nobody likes that. 
  • What Makes Authority Effective? — People are usually happy, even eager, to go along with the recommendations of someone who knows more than they do on the matter at hand. But what makes somebody an authority on a certain topic? There are two main components that lead people to trust a certain authority and deem them credible:
    • Expertise — People almost automatically trust somebody who knows more than they do and is considered an expert on a topic. Take Warren Buffett as an example. Warren is considered the best investor of all time; people automatically trust his opinion and guidance. The same type of thing occurs, albeit on a smaller scale, with other “subject matter experts.” People trust respected experts. 
    • Trustworthiness — People who are experts AND are trustworthy are very influential. One way to increase trustworthiness in the public’s mind involves admitting weaknesses. A communicator who references a weakness early on is seen as more honest. Highlight an obvious weakness before touching on strengths. This establishes trust right away. Domino’s Pizza did this in 2009 in their “New Domino’s” campaign; they admitted their previous pizza recipe was bad. Sales skyrocketed during this campaign. Warren Buffet also does this in his annual letter to shareholders; he starts by summarizing any mistakes form the year in the first two pages. It helps establish trust.
      • Quote (P. 228): “A communicator who references a weakness early on is seen as more honest. The advantage of this sequence is that, with perceived truthfulness already in place, when the major strengths of the case are then advanced, the audience is more likely to believe them. After all, they’ve been conveyed by a trustworthy source, one whose honesty has been established by a willingness to point at not just positive aspects but negative ones as well.”
      • Quote (P. 228): “The tactic can be particularly successful when the audience is already aware of the weakness; thus, when a communicator mentions it, little additional damage is done, as no new information is added — except, crucially, that the communicator is an honest individual.”
  • Defending Against Authority — Although we should be aware of our tendency to automatically believe people in authority, it’s important to note that most authoritative figures and experts are qualified, credible, trustworthy, and know what they’re talking about. Physicians, judges, corporate executives, and the like have typically gained their positions through superior knowledge and judgment. As a rule, their guidance is excellent. Authorities are frequently experts. In most cases, it would be foolish to try to substitute our less informed judgments for those of an expert, an authority. The trick is to recognize when authority directives are best followed and when they are not. Two questions to help accomplish this:
    • Is this authority truly an expert? — This question forces us to look deeply at an expert’s credentials rather than just automatically believing him or her
    • How truthful do I think the expert is being? — By wondering how an expert stands to benefit from our compliance, we give ourselves another shield against undue and automatic influence
  • Chapter Summary — Another mental shortcut we use frequently involves following those in positions of authority. Because people in authority tend to have a great deal of knowledge, training, and wisdom, we follow their directions blindly. Most of the time, this is a great shortcut that helps us save mental energy when making decisions. But sometimes it’s best to ask questions when things don’t make sense rather than just going along with things. 

Ch. 6: Scarcity

  • The Scarcity Principle — In a nutshell, the scarcity principle states that opportunities seem more valuable to us when they are less available. This is why certain things (e.g. baseball cards, fine wines, etc.) go up in value as they become increasingly rare. Things that are scarce or in short supply are viewed as more valuable, higher quality, and more desirable. This is partly why, for example, we like Mountain Dew Baja Blast so much — it is only available in stores during the summer months (limited time/availability). It’s also why Madden Ultimate Team has been so successful; the developers create rare cards (e.g. players, uniforms, etc.) and watch as consumers go crazy opening a million packs in an effort to acquire the rare/limited cards. 
  • Loss Aversion — All of us are loss averse. Loss aversion is the centerpiece of Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman’s ‘prospect theory,’ and it’s a major component of the scarcity principle. Essentially, we feel the pain of losses twice as much as we feel the pleasure of gains. There have been scores of research studies backing this up. We fear losing people, situations, items, etc. far more than we enjoy gains of a similar nature. This rule applies to so many things in life. A few examples:
    • Business & Risks — Loss aversion is why I believe managers are so scared to take risks; they fear losing reputation and trust with their boss more than they like the idea of gaining whatever favorable outcome could come from a new idea that is presented to them. 
    • Weight Lifting — For me, I push myself harder on the bench press when I’m at risk of losing a rep from the previous week than I do when I could gain a rep. That last rep at the end of a set is dicey sometimes because I don’t want to get trapped under the weight, but I’m more willing to push it if it means not losing a rep. This is loss aversion in action. 
  • Applying the Scarcity Principle — There are a couple of ways marketers and advertisers generally try to use the scarcity principle to motivate customers to act. What follows are a few of the ways. I will use Madden Ultimate Team as an example in each strategy because MUT is a masterclass in using the scarcity principle.
    • Limited Numbers — Probably the most straightforward use of the scarcity principle involves making it clear that there is only a limited number of product or space available. So buy now! Or register now! Loss aversion will kick in and people will spring to action. Again, people don’t want to lose things/lose out on an opportunity. We hate that.
      • MUT — In MUT, the developers release only a few of the best player cards in order to create a sense of scarcity for those cards. 
    • Key Features — Identify a trait or element of your product that is unique and different from anything else on the market, then market that feature and explain what will be lost if the customer doesn’t act. Focus on things that are exclusive to your product or service.
      • MUT — In MUT, the developers sometimes create special player cards that have unique properties (e.g. improved speed, throw power, juke move, etc.) and make those cards very limited. 
    • Limited Time — When there is limited time to act, people become worried that they’ll miss the deadline (and therefore the opportunity). Whenever possible, make it clear that the opportunity you’re presenting will only be available for a limited time. Impose a deadline. If you’re writing about an event, make it clear that space is filling up quickly and there aren’t many spots left. This will create a sense of urgency.
      • MUT — In MUT, the developers release special packs that are only available to buy for a limited time. The packs contain a slim chance to nab a rare player card for your team. People go crazy buying these packs. MUT also used to have an “auction block” where people competed for player cards by bidding against each other. The timer on each card created a lot of time pressure. 
    • “Subject to Availability” — In 2024, Apple used this line on all of its Apple Vision Pro marketing materials. Stating something like this places in the customer’s mind the idea that the product is rare and in short supply. When they see a message like this, customers almost automatically assign more value to the product (“It must be red hot if it’s subject to availability!”)
  • Market With Scarcity — When writing copy, rather than explaining what the customer stands to gain from your product, use language that makes it clear what the customer stands to lose by not acting. Impose deadlines. Make it clear that time is running out, space is limited, or supply is low. Doing this will activate loss aversion in the reader. Whenever possible, use your copy to explain the opportunity that will be missed by not acting. Some healthcare companies do this very well by showing people engaging in cherished life moments and explaining that they will not want to miss more of those moments in the future, so they should take a certain action to protect their health. 
  • Drivers of Scarcity — These are two main reasons why the scarcity principle is so strong and is considered a weapon of influence alongside the others already touched on in this book. The two reasons include:
    • Mental Shortcut — When something is less available and harder to get, it’s true that the item is usually better and more valuable. As such, we can often use an item’s limited availability to help us quickly and correctly decide on its higher quality. This is why scarcity has become an automatic mental shortcut for us, just like the other weapons of influence discussed in this book.
    • Psychological Reactance — We want what we can’t have. This law of human nature, which was dubbed “psychological reactance” by Jack Brehm, is the other reason the principle of scarcity is so effective and influential. It is essentially our tendency to react against restrictions on our freedoms. This applies to people, information, items, and everything else. One example: the teenage boy who keeps chasing the attractive popular girl. Another: bringing a cell phone to school after the school banned cell phones in classrooms. Basically, when something is scarce or acts against our freedoms, it tends to ignite in us a strong desire to have it.
      • Quote (P. 263): “When something becomes less available, our freedom to have it is limited, and we experience an increased desire for it. We rarely recognize, however, that psychological reactance has caused us to want the item more; all we know is we want it. To make sense of our heightened desire for the item, we begin to assign it positive qualities.”
  • Loss Aversion: “We’re Not Going Back” — Because we are so loss averse, you have to be very careful when establishing rules and conditions with people. We hate going back to an old way of doing things after experiencing better conditions. For example, if you allow your kid to play video games once or twice when he’s not accustomed to having that freedom, he’s going to throw a huge fit if you later try to reverse course and limit (or end) his video game time. More examples:
    • Salaries — Once we get a bump in pay, we’re not going backward. Earning less would mean losing the money, status, and lifestyle our current salary affords us. We are loss averse: once we’re used to certain conditions, we do not like it at all when those conditions are stripped away. 
    • Relationships — If you text a friend or significant other all the time and constantly express your love, it will not sit well with them if you scale back. They will be used to your constant communication and won’t like it when you become more distant.
    • Proctor & Gamble — Proctor & Gamble once tried to eliminate coupons (because hardly anyone was using them) and instead lower their prices. Customers revolted. Despite the fact that their new price-lowering initiative created more savings for customers (and less hassle), people were accustomed to getting and using coupons. They did not like when P&G took them away. 
    • Soviet Union — After the people of the Soviet Union finally got some relief from their constant suffering via President Mikhail Gorbachev’s glasnost and perestroika policies, they revolted when a coup tried to overthrow Gorbachev in an effort to restore conditions back to their normal, miserable ways. 
  • Scarcity & Competition: Major Motivating Forces — Competition plays a big role in our level of satisfaction when pursuing scarce objects, and it is a major, major motivating force. When we acquire something after competing with others for it, we feel more pride and enjoyment with it. This is why we feel jealousy in relationships; when a woman attracts the attention of another guy, the boyfriend (or man in pursuit of the woman) gets jealous. The two men are now rivals competing for a scarce resource, and nothing will motivate both sides more than competition. This is also why some people invent stories about being pursued by somebody else; the idea of competition motivates the person they really want (who otherwise might be hesitant and undecided) to act. Other examples:
    • Real Estate — If a shady realtor is selling a house to someone that is a bit undecided, the realtor will say that he has another potential buyer that likes the house and is scheduled to visit again soon. This provokes action from the undecided buyer.
    • Rental Properties — Say you’re renting out your house. If there are five people who have expressed interest in renting your home and you invite them all over at the same time to tour the property, you will activate the scarcity principle and loss aversion in each other via competition. Each potential tenant will literally come face-to-face with their competition for the rental. This will motivate action. 
  • Scarcity & Exclusivity — We take a lot of pride in being in possession of something scarce of being part of an exclusive group. In these situations, it’s the fact that the item or group is exclusive and rare that drives our feelings of pride. This is why the Hall of Fame in sports is such a motivating factor; athletes desperately want to be part of the exclusive club. In the NFL, they want that gold jacket and everything it symbolizes. And when they’re in, they feel a huge sense of pride because only a small group of people are admitted to much an exclusive club. 
  • Defending Against Scarcity — The scarcity principle is a tough one to defend against because it’s so emotional. When we watch as something we want becomes less available, a physical agitation sets in. Again, think of a time when you were pursuing a woman and somebody else was drawing her attention. Jealousy and a whole bunch of other emotions set in. Logic and reason take a back seat to the emotions we feel. This is part of the reason the scarcity tactics are so effective. 
  • Chapter Takeaway — Scarcity is a major motivating factor. We assign more value to items or opportunities that are scarce, limited, and difficult to obtain. Loss aversion is a big component of the scarcity principle. In short, we feel the pain of losses twice as much as we feel the pleasure of gains. You can put the scarcity principle and loss aversion to work in many different ways, both in marketing and in the social arena. 

Ch. 7: Commitment and Consistency

  • Consistency Principle — Yet another weapon of influence, the consistency principle involves our strong desire to be (and to appear) consistent with our words, values, beliefs, attitudes, commitments, and deeds. Once we make a choice or take a stand, we experience internal and external pressures to think and behave consistently with that commitment. Those pressures will cause us to respond in ways that justify our decision. Examples:
    • Weight Loss — If somebody states publicly their plan to exercise and lose weight in the new year, they will experience internal and external pressure to follow through with what they’ve said in order to be consistent. 
    • Transgression — One study found that people in committed relationships who pray for their significant other once per day are less likely to cheat. This is because cheating on their significant other would be inconsistent with the act of sending daily prayers for that same individual. 
    • Betting — Just after placing a bet, you are almost automatically more sure of the correctness of your decision than you were moments before you made the bet. This is one of the byproducts of the consistency principle; we feel more sure of something after we’ve committed to it. 
    • Promises — If a child gets you to verbally commit to buying him an Xbox for Christmas, we almost have to follow through with that promise. 
  • Consistency: A Motivating Influence — Just like the other weapons of influence in this book, the consistency principle motivates us to act. In our social world, being consistent is a highly desirable trait. As a result, we behave in ways that are consistent with what we say to ourselves and with what we say publicly or on paper.
    • Quote (P. 294): “Indeed, prominent early theorists recognized the desire for consistency as a motivator of our behavior. But is it really strong enough to compel us to do what we ordinarily would not want to do? There is no question about it. The drive to be (and look) consistent constitutes a potent driving force, often causing us to act in ways contrary to our own best interest.”
    • Quote (P. 295): “Inconsistency is commonly thought to be an undesirable personality trait. The person whose beliefs, words, and deeds don’t match is seen as confused, two-faced, even mentally ill. On the other side, a high degree of consistency is normally associated with personal and intellectual strength. It is the heart of logic, rationality, stability, and honesty.”
  • Consistency: A Mental Shortcut — As with the other weapons of influence, one of the big reasons consistency is so potent is due to its reliability as a mental shortcut. Because it is typically in our best interest to be consistent, we fall into the habit of being automatically consistent. How does it work? Once we’ve made up our minds about something, consistency takes over and allows us to not have to think anymore; we just need to behave in ways that are consistent with what we’ve decided. In this way, we don’t have to expend mental energy thinking hard about every decision and weighing pros and cons. We just act in alignment with our shortcut. 
  • Consistency: A Shield Against Thought — Similar to the point above, consistency allows us to avoid hard thinking. We just need to choose a path forward and act and behave in ways that are consistent with that path we’ve chosen. This can be detrimental though. If you have a deep issue (like trying to turn your life around), it’s very tempting to choose a “quick fix” solution and then mindlessly act in ways that are consistent with that quick fix solution, rather than really thinking hard/getting to the root of the problem and finding the right solution. 
  • Commitment — Commitment and consistency go hand in hand. When we’ve committed to something (verbally or in writing), we almost always push ourselves to behave in ways that are consistent with that commitment. There’s an interesting study in which researchers, posed as members of an organization collecting money for charity, asked random people for funds, but before they asked, they inquired about how the person was doing. When the person inevitably said “doing good,” they then asked for money that would go toward helping people in developing countries. When this first question was asked, the researchers received many more donations compared to when it wasn’t asked.
    • Quote (P. 305): “The theory behind this tactic is that people who have just asserted that they are doing/feeling fine — even as a routine part of a sociable exchange — will consequently find it awkward to appear stingy in the context of their own admittedly favorable circumstances.”
  • Write It Down! — One of the best ways to ensure commitment and consistency involves writing things down. When we write down our beliefs or goals, for example, it is literal proof of our commitment. The act of writing things down has a way of shifting our self image and behavior in ways that are consistent with the commitment we’ve jotted down. We want to follow through on our commitment. This is why many companies used to hold written testimonial contests; these contests required customers to write down and submit the qualities they liked most about the product. By requiring customers to write down what they liked best, the company was subtly reinforcing the customer’s commitment to the product, which would hopefully lead to continued future purchases (to be consistent). 
  • Increase Form Submissions — Websites often want visitors to register by providing information about themselves. But 86% of users report that they sometimes quit the registration process because the form is too long or prying. What have site developers done to overcome this barrier? They’ve reduced the average number of fields of requested information on the form’s first page. Why? They want to give users the feeling of having started and finished the initial part of the process. It doesn’t matter if the next page has more fields to fill out (it does), due to the principle of commitment and consistency, users are much more likely to follow through. The available data have proved this idea right. Just reducing the number of first-page fields from four to three increases registration completions by 50%.
  • Public Commitments = Lasting Commitments — Maybe the best way to change someone’s habits and ensure consistency is to get them to make a public commitment. The more public a goal, opinion, action, stated habit, or commitment the more likely we are to follow through with consistent behavior that matches the public statement. Why? After taking a stand visible to others, we feel extreme internal pressure to live up to the public commitment and look like a consistent person. As mentioned earlier, everybody wants to be appear consistent; being inconsistent comes with negative labels.
    • Ex. Weight Loss — Research has shown that public commitments to weight loss are extremely effective at helping people shed pounds. The pressure a person feels after announcing their goal for weight loss leads them to adopt good habits like going to the gym and eating well. And they tend to stick with those habits. 
  • Public Commitments: Ask for Confirmation — A great way to put the consistency principle to use on others is by asking them to confirm their future behavior. To reduce the rate of “no-shows,” one restaurant owner in Chicago, for example, asked receptionists to change the way they communicate with customers calling to make a reservation. Instead of saying, “Please call us if your plans change,” he had them say, “Will you please call us if your plans change?” And the receptionists were told to wait for a response. The “no-show” rate dropped by 67%. What drove this drop? By forcing customers to make a public commitment, this approach increased the chances that they would follow through on it. Doctors, dentists, and other offices are now doing this as well. If trying to help someone go to the gym more, ask them: “Will you get to the gym four times this week? Can you update me at the end of the week on your progress?” This forces them to commit publicly, increasing the chances they will follow through. 
  • Commitment & Inner Responsibility — Social scientists have determined that we accept inner responsibility for a behavior when we think we have chosen to perform it in the absence of strong outside pressure, like rewards and threats. In other words, when we do something because we believe it’s right, rather than doing it because a reward or threat is motivating us, our commitment to the behavior is much stronger.
    • Ex. Raising Children — This finding has massive implications for raising children. It is best to avoid using rewards and threats to influence a child’s behavior. Instead, you should give a sound reason for wanting the child to behave a certain way (e.g. no lying, using manners, etc.) that communicates the importance of doing the right thing and living with strong values. If the child behaves a certain way just to avoid a threat or claim a reward, the behavior likely will not stick over the long haul.
      • Quote (P. 337): “All this has important implications for rearing children. It suggests we should never heavily bribe or threaten our children to do the things we want them truly to believe in. Such pressures will probably produce temporary compliance with our wishes. However, if we want more than that, if we want our children to believe in the correctness of what they have done, if we want them to continue to perform the desired behavior when we are not present to apply those outside pressures, we must somehow arrange for them to accept inner responsibility for the actions we want them to take.”
  • Reminders: Big Impact on Consistency — Mere reminders of past commitments can spur people to act in accord with earlier positions, stands, or actions. Bring the commitment back to top of mind, and the need for consistency takes over and people realign with their previous commitment. Reminding someone of their previous dedication to the gym, for example, can help shift their self-image and motivate them to return to working out consistently. 
  • Marketing With the Consistency Principle — Within the realm of marketing, securing an initial commitment is the key. After making a commitment (that is, taking an action, stand, or position), people are more willing to agree to requests that are consistent with the prior commitment. Thus, many compliance professionals try to induce people to take an initial position that is consistent with a behavior they will later request from these people.
  • Chapter Takeaway — Once we’ve made a commitment, especially one that is public or in writing, we feel a lot of internal and external pressure to behave in ways that are consistent with the commitment. This is because everyone wants to appear like a consistent person; being seen as inconsistent is unfavorable in the social arena. A practical way to put the consistency principle to use involves asking people for confirmation when you ask them to do something. By getting the person to publicly commit to your favor, you significantly increase the chances that they will follow through. Restaurants and doctor’s offices are using this strategy to reduce the number of “no-shows.”

Ch. 8: Unity

  • The Unity Principle — The unity principle states that people are inclined to say ‘yes’ to someone they consider one of them. If a person feels comfortable enough to refer to you as “one of us,” they are more easily influenced and persuaded by you. They will do more for you than they’ll do for others. A halo effect emerges. Often, teams are a great example of the unity principle; when you’re part of a sports or work team, you come to really love your teammates. That’s unity. When the season or project is over, the dynamic between the individuals who were on the team isn’t quite the same. 
  • A Step Beyond Liking — The unity principle is very similar to the liking principle, but it goes a step further; it’s about identities and shared identities. It’s about tribe-like categories that individuals use to define themselves and their groups, such as race, ethnicity, nationality, sports teams, and family, as well as political and religious affiliations. For example, I might have many more tastes and preferences in common with a colleague at work than with a sibling, but there is no question which of the two I would consider of me and which I would consider merely like me.
    • Quote (P. 364): “Those within the boundaries of ‘we’ get more agreement, trust, help, liking, cooperation, emotional support, and forgiveness and are even judged as being more creative, moral, and humane.”
    • Quote (P. 364): “‘We’ relationships are not those that allow people to say, ‘Oh, that person is like us.’ They are the ones that allow people to say, ‘Oh, that person is one of us.’”
  • Unity In Action: Sports Fans — Sports fans offer an easy to understand example of the unity principle in action. We view the athletes who play for our favorite teams as “one of us.” We root for them, we wear their jerseys, we buy products they endorse, and we will defend them to the death in debates, even if they clearly goofed up. Why? Whoever you root for represents you. And when your favorite team or athlete wins, you win. The self is at stake. This is the unity principle in a nutshell. We will do almost anything for the people we consider “one of us” and part of our circle. This explains why University of Michigan head coach Jim Harbaugh said to the media that he expects his QB, JJ McCarthy, to be the first QB taken in the upcoming NFL draft. 
  • Unity In Action: Relationships — When two people are in a close relationship, they apply the label of “we” and slowly begin to identity as one unified force, rather than two individuals. When this happens, each person becomes heavily biased toward the other: they will take each other’s side in any kind of disagreement with others; they will be highly influenced by the other person’s opinion; and they will adopt similar hobbies as their significant other. Everything becomes a “we” thing, and both parties will be heavily influenced by the other. A halo effect emerges. This is the unity principle at work.
    • Quote (P. 376): “Instructively, the closer the friendship (and the accompanying sense of unity), the stronger the influence of our friends’ behaviors on our own. In a massive political-election experiment involving 61 million people, a Facebook message urging them to vote was most successful if it included photographs of Facebook friends who had already voted and, critically, one of the photos was of a close friend.”
      • Takeaway — Is there a way to apply this idea in marketing? This Facebook experiment illustrates how much we are influenced by the actions of our friends, colleagues, and peers.
    • Quote (P. 376): “Finally, more than among close friends, there is an even greater type of felt unity among best friends. Special labels and assertions — such as ‘We are besties’ or ‘We’re BFFs’ (Best Friends Forever) — convey the strength of the bond.”
  • Unity: Belonging Together — We are highly influenced when feelings of unity are high. Behavioral scientists like Cialdini have pinpointed two main categories of factors that lead to strong feelings of unity. One of the categories involves belonging together. When we feel we belong together, unity is enhanced. A few of the factors that lead to feelings of belonging together include:
    • Kinship — Being in the same family is the ultimate form of unity. People will do anything for their family members, their own blood. Cialdini put this to the test. Needing the parents of his students to complete a survey, he offered an extra point on his next test to each student whose parent would take the survey — 159 of 163 sets of parents completed the survey. Usually adult surveys have a 20% response rate. The parents were highly influenced to act because their participation meant a bonus point for their child. Another example: In one of his annual letters to Berkshire shareholders, Warren Buffett wrote “I will tell you what I would say to my family today if they asked me about Berkshire’s future.” Extremely influential. 
    • Location — We feel we belong with people who are from our home, neighborhood, town, state, region, and country. These feelings of location unity often come into play when supporting others from some of these locations. For example, feelings of unity are very high when rooting for an NFL player who played football at your high school. Feelings of unity are also high during the Olympics (“Those guys are representing US!”).
  • Unity: Acting Together — The other main category of factors that leads to strong feelings of unity involves acting together. Like belonging together, acting together can lead to elevated feelings of unity. But what does acting together entail? Below are a few examples that increase unity and influence:
    • Dancing and Singing — When groups dance and sing together, those participating feel greater levels of unity with each other. 
    • Personal Information — One famous study was able to generate in participants strong feelings of love in less than 45 minutes. The researchers pulled this off by getting each participant (one man, one woman) to share deeply personal information about themselves. The act of sharing personal information and stories together created strong feelings of unity and love. Some of the participants even went on to get married! Keep this in mind on dates! 
    • Suffering Together — Those who go through hell together become very unified and will do anything for each other after the suffering is over. This is perhaps best illustrated by the story of Adolf Hitler asking his men to protect Ernst Hess, a Jewish resident and city judge. The two men had fought and suffered together in World War I. This point about unity is a good one to keep in mind as a manger; you could create strong feelings of unity among your team members by taking them on a team-building exercise where there’s a bit of adversity involved (e.g. Mud Run, white-water rafting, bungee jumping, etc.).
    • Asking for Advice — Interestingly, asking for advice produces unity between you and the person you’ve asked. It’s critical, however, that you frame it as asking for advice, rather than for an opinion. Asking for advice puts people into a “togetherness” frame of mind, whereas asking for an opinion doesn’t create that feeling. When you ask for advice, the person you’ve asked is now invested in the outcome of your problem, which creates unity between the two of you. You get them engaged by making them feel important; they’ll want to help you resolve your problem. In one study, people who were asked for “advice” by a new restaurant were more likely to eat at the restaurant than people who were asked for an “opinion.” Asking for advice generates unity and support. This is a much, much better approach than ordering people around. Instead, ask for advice to get cooperation. This is valuable knowledge for marketing purposes and for one’s personal life.
      • Quote (P. 415): “Providing advice puts a person in a merging state of mind, which stimulates a linking of one’s own identity with another party’s. Providing an opinion or expectation, on the other hand, puts a person in an introspective state of mind, which involves focusing on oneself.”
  • The Focusing Illusion — When we focus attention on something, we immediately come to see it as more significant to us. Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman labeled the phenomenon “the focusing illusion,” in which people automatically presume that if they are paying attention to a particular thing, it must warrant the interest. He even summarized the illusion in an essay he wrote: “Nothing in life is as important as you think it is, while you are thinking about [focusing on] it.”
    • Ex. Media — When Americans were asked in a survey to name two national events they thought had been “especially important” in US history, they nominated the terrorist attacks of 9/1/2001 about 30% of the time. But as media coverage of the event grew in the days prior to its 10th anniversary, the perception spiked to a high of 65%. Soon after the anniversary, when 9/11 media stories dropped off rapidly, so did the judged importance of the tragedy — reverting to the 30% level. 
  • Chapter Takeaway — People say ‘yes’ to someone they consider one of them. Belonging together and acting together are two factors that lead to increased feelings of unity. Sports fans offer an easy to understand example of the unity principle; fans of a team view the team’s athletes as “one of them.” Consequently, fans will support their favorite team and athletes at all costs. The support occurs almost automatically because, like the other weapons of influence in this book, unity is a mental shortcut. 

Ch. 9: Instant Influence

  • We Need Our Shortcuts — Our world is extremely complex, and it will only get more complex as technology continues to evolve. That’s why we need the mental shortcuts discussed in this book. The shortcuts allow us to make choices and navigate our modern world relatively efficiently and safely. They save us time and cognitive effort as well; rather than needing to sift through the avalanche of data available to us and weigh the pros and cons of every choice, we can rely on these shortcuts to make decisions. The takeaway: These shortcuts aren’t going anywhere. People are always going to be highly influenced by the seven principles of persuasion outlined in this book.
    • Quote (P. 444): “The blitz of modern daily life demands that we have faithful shortcuts, sound rules of thumb in order to handle it all. These are no longer luxuries; they are out-and-out necessities that figure to become increasingly vital as the pulse quickens.”
    • Quote (P. 446): “Modern life is different from that of any earlier time. Owing to remarkable technological advances, information is burgeoning, alternatives are multiplying, and knowledge is exploding. In this avalanche of change and choice, we have had to adjust. One fundamental adjustment has come in the way we make decisions. Although we all wish to make the most thoughtful, fully considered decision possible in any situation, the changing form and accelerating pace of modern life frequently deprive us of the proper conditions for such a careful analysis of all the relevant pros and cons. More and more, we are forced to resort to another decision-making approach — a shortcut approach in which the decision to comply (or agree or believe or buy) is made on the basis of a single, usually reliable piece of information. The most reliable and, therefore, most popular such single triggers for compliance are those described throughout this book.”