Critical Reading Report need to be edited

I really need some one to edit my Critical Reading Report, it makes no sense.

Thank you

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Influence The Psychology of Persuasion Review

Dr. Robert B. Cialdini, the President of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, is the author of Influence: the Psychology of Persuasion (Collins; Revised October 07 1998). Dr. Cialdini has been studying the psychology of compliance, influencing others to the way you’re thinking, for 30 years. He set out to determine “just what are the factors that cause one person to say yes to another person? And which techniques most effectively use their factors to bring about such compliance?” (xi). Now, he has found the “Six Weapons of Influence” and wrote them down in order to show it to others who are blind to them. This book contains 7 chapters divided into an introduction, the “Six Weapons of Influence” that he has found that will get people to comply with your requests with numbers of examples, and a conclusion. The six principles Dr. Cialdini found are reciprocation, commitment and consistency, social proof, liking, authority, and scarcity.

To begin with, “the rule [of reciprocation] says that we should try to repay, in kind, what another person has provided us” (17). This indicates someone will have the desire to give something back to you, after you do something for him or her. According to Dr. Cialdini, there are many ways this law is applied. One example Dr. Cialdini used in the chapter is, the Krishnas’, an Eastern religion sect. That was asking for donations. However, the way they were dressed was seen as unpopular, odd, and strange. Which made it difficult for them to gain donations. One of their leaders thought of a new tactic to increase the amount of donations. The idea was to dress to fit in and solicit for donations by giving a “gift” to people. When people received their “gift,” most of them felt obligated to give back, even though Krishna’s solicitors “gifts” were free. Most people did not want the gift. Even to the extent of throwing it into a trash can after receiving it. However, they did donate money, and the Krishna religion sects’ donations increased. This shows the effectiveness of reciprocation; by first giving one a free “gift,” the Krishnas’ gained something in return. Dr. Cialdini describes this simply as “the old give and take… and take.” This is the more simple way of saying, if someone does you a favor you will feel obligated to repay them regardless of what the favor was. Dr. Cialdini wanted to show the reader the influence others have over us because of this law. Even without our conscious awareness, we are easily flattered and have an innate sense of responsibility to repay how others made us feel, regardless who they are. Some people may say that his point is weak because not everyone will be influenced by the rule of reciprocation. For example, not everyone donated money in exchange for the gift from the Krishnas’. However, I believe this criticism of Dr. Cialdini’s view is flawed. Not everyone donated money, but they were persuaded to, which is show by the increase in donations to the Krishna. Those who did not donate money were more persuaded by their previous obligation to keep their money to buy other things like food, rather than donating it to the Krishnas’. Therefore, the human nature to give and take mutually can be used to persuade people to repay you, often with the repayment being greater than the initial “gift”.

The law of commitment and consistency, states that people care for their reputations. This self-consciousness assures that they will follow through on their commitments. According to Dr. Cialdini, there are many ways this law has worked. For example, in the mid-1960s, two psychologists, Jonathan Freedman and Schott Fraser, did an experiment. They asked California homeowners to “display a little three-inch-square sign that read BE A SAFE DRIVER” (72), and most of them agreed. Two weeks later the same homeowners “…were shown a picture of an attractive house, the view of which had been completely obscured by a very large, poorly lettered sign reading DRIVE CAREFULLY.” (72) Out of those agreed individuals, 76 percent of the homeowners agreed to post this unattractive sign in their front yard. The researchers believe this event happened because people care about their reputation, and are willing to commit because they do not like to be seen as fickle, uncertain, unsure and inconstant. Another example of this law is when a person wants to lose weight. Most professionals recommend the person writes their goal down on a piece of paper, and give it to the people that they are close to. Writing something down is strongly announcing what their point of view is. Because the sense of reputation, they will feel more obligated follow through with their goal. I agree with Dr. Cialdini’s that people can do what they originally intended to do. However, his view is flawed because he underestimates how much their original commitment limits how they can be persuaded. Moreover, how much people will not be persuaded if they originally did not want to comment to it. People tend to have a stronger commitment to themselves, to what they want, rather than social commitments. People can only be influence to do what they previously wanted to do. If the people didn’t want to lose weight by themselves, then the social influence wouldn’t have an effect, and could even have an adverse effect by having eating more, and gaining more weight. Therefore, people can only be persuaded to do more then they originally would have, but not to do something they originally wouldn’t have.

The law of Social proof means that people are like ants; they tend to follow each other because “the actions of those around us will be important in defining the answer.” (154) Our insecurities will make us believe the most popular answer will be the correct answer. According to Dr. Cialdini, there are many ways this law is used to influence others. For instance, in 1977 the People’s Temple, a cult-like organization that “began in San Francisco and drew its recruits from the poor of the city.” Their “undisputed political, social, and spiritual leader,” (172) Reverend Jim Jones decided to move the People’s Temple to an isolated rain forest environment in Guyanese, South America. On November 18, 1978 all the members of People’s Temple took poison, and committed mass suicide. According to Dr. Louis J. West who has been studying The People’s Temple, the leader Reverend Jim Jones used the law of Social proof. Reverend Jim Jones took the cult into an isolated area, where the members were uncertain of the environment, culture and languages. The effect of the isolation is seen in that not all the member were certain of their choice to commit suicide, however, all the 914 members took the poison. This is because when one is uncertain, they tend to analyze and look at “the actions of others to guild their own actions” (154). People tend to do what others are doing, because they think the majority will be correct. Dr. Cialdini’s example of how social proof influences the People’s Temple to comment massive suicide is perfect. It clearly shows that the social influence were strong over the majority insecure members. This law is used in our everyday society in order to sell various products as well. For example, the people who are competing for popularity, the fashion divas in our society are always willing to spend money to buy everything that is in fashion, like the latest cell phone and other accessories. However, after they buy it, they usually find everyone else with it. Then most of them just want something better, in order to be different, however, they do not seem to accomplish that because they are always caught up with what the majority are buying. Therefore, I agree with Dr. Cialdini’s rule of social proof. Since most people tend to conform to what the majority like, rather than do think independently.

The principle of liking is one of the strongest influences to get people to agree with you because people prefer to say yes to people they know and like. According to Dr. Cialdini, in the “Ohio election a few years ago, a man given little chance of winning the state attorney-general race swept to victory when, shortly before the election, he changed his name to Brown--- a family name of much Ohio political tradition” (177). This happened because people prefer to vote for people who are similar to them, and the name Brown is well known to the Ohio residents. Other reasons why people are liked are because of their appearance. Based on a study in Pennsylvania, “researchers rated the physical attractiveness of seventy-four separate male defendants at the start of their criminals trials” (173), “the attractive defendants, even when they are found guilty, are less likely to be sentenced to prison.”(174) “Some NYC jail inmates with facial disfigurements were given plastic surgery” while the others disfigurements inmates did not. One year later, “those given the cosmetic surgery were significantly less likely to returned to jail.” (287) This shows that most people tend to judge people sub-consciously, regardless of their disposition. As in this study, it has showed that handsome inmates were sympathized, because most people admire attractive people, as a result, they are stenotype better, and it would be easier to fit into the popular crowed if one knew a person from there. Therefore, I believe while people can be influenced others this way, however is morally wrong. Because they were judging other’s by their appearance, regardless of the inmates crime, and the Ohio attorney general’s genuine disposition. Secondly, I believe that while people can be influenced based on “liking”, however this influenced is only short-lived, because it dose not indicate that those out-of-jail inmates will not commit another crime and the attorney general will be elected again.

The law of Authority is very influential because most of us are told to respect authorities by their title and appearance. This means that people will respect them without questioning. For example, in 1990, “according to a Harvard University study, 10 percent of all cardiac arrests in hospitals are attributable to medical errors. Errors in the medicine patients receive can occur for a variety of reasons”(219). However, when a physician phones the hospital to dispense a drug, 95 percent of the nurses will give the drug away, regardless of the fact that is against the hospitals policies. This shows that the “physician” title has a great amount of influence over others, because of their education, and reputations. Moreover, most people are willing to follow recommendations and directions of someone who is considered an expert in the area in which they are questioned. On the other hand, even though most of us were raised to respect and listen to authorities. However, I believe there has been a decrease in that fact. The American society is becoming more liberal as generations moves on. MTV and other reality shows have broadcasted people being disrespectful towards authorities, regardless of their disposition. On talk shows, young adults have clearly stated the fact that they value their freedom, being overly opined as they are, some even beat their parents, rape others, then are sent to judicial. The judicial arrests rates have increased, according to Emotional Intelligence, “in 1990, compared to the previous two decades… teen arrests for forcible rape had doubled; teen murder rates quadrupled” (232, Goleman). Therefore, respecting authorities is something young adults do not value, because they are opinioned, careless, and arrogant regardless of the authorities disposition.

Lastly, “opportunities seem more valuable to us when their availability is limited”(238) and that is the rule of scarcity. Dr. Cialdini’s student, a beef-importing company owner, held experiments with his staff trying to sell its beef by calling “buyers for supermarkets or other retail food outlets.” (255) “One set of customers heard a standard sales presentation before being asked [to order].” (255) The second set of customers heard the stranded presentation “plus information that the supply of imported beef was likely to be scarce in the upcoming months.” The third set heard the standard sales presentation, “information about the scarce beef” but those “scarce supply of news was not generally available information--- it had come, they were told, from certain exclusive contacts that the company had.” (255) As a result, the second set of customers ordered twice as much beef as the first set of customers. As well as, the third set of customers purchased six times overall as the first set of customers. This indicates that most people are willing to spend millions on limited items, because of the rule “if it is rare or becoming rare, it is more valuable” (239). On the bases if this awareness, simply making an item appear to be scarce others will be influenced them to want the rare item. I agree with Dr. Cialdini because people like to take shortcuts, and stenotype. However, most people do not except unusual things well, when people cannot have what they want, they do learn to control their desires.

In conclusion, each chapter begins with objectives; examples of the “Six Weapons of Influences” have an enormous influence on people who are blind to those weapons and an conclusion. People will continue to feel obligated if they do not learn control their debt, and feelings. The powers of self-image can influences people only when they made an initial stand. Everyone is born with a conscious, and the people can only be followers if they do not learn how to decide them selves. Liking people based on their physical attraction and their similarities can is morally wrong and is the worst sub-conscious judgment. There are people who are submissive to other’s dispositions based on others clothing, and disposition in society. However, more people are becoming outspoken and independent in a disrespectful way. Lastly, people likes to buy and see things that are unusual, however, is not impossible for a person to learn to control their desires. Dr. Cialdini has described the rules in his book with reasoning, numbers of examples, but I think it was full of common sense.