The Foot In The Door Technique: An Effective Way To Persuade
Imagine that you find yourself in this situation: someone knocks on your door to ask you for a donation to a charity that fights against poverty. It may be that at that moment you tell him no, that you don’t have money, and close the door on him.
Now, imagine that the same situation occurs, only with a small difference: this time, when you open the door, instead of asking you for money, they give you a pin with a message of solidarity. They ask you to wear it for a week to raise awareness in society of the importance of fighting against urban poverty.
Two weeks pass and the same members of the charity association come to you again, this time to ask you for a donation. It is quite likely that in this scenario you will give it to him. They have applied with you the foot in the door technique Let’s find out what it is about.
The foot in the door technique is a persuasion strategy widely used in all types of contexts where you intend to sell or ask for something. Given its psychosocial implication, this technique has been the object of study in social psychology, a discipline in which it has aroused great interest judging by the multiple investigations that have addressed it.
The name of this technique refers to the classic situation of a salesperson putting his foot in the door, preventing it from closing as a first step to selling your product or service.
According to the definition given by Beaman’s team (1983), the foot in the door is a technique that consists of ask a small favor from someone from whom we intend to obtain something more The situation begins with inexpensive behavior in a context of free choice, thus ensuring an affirmative response. Subsequently, we ask that person for a related, larger favor, which is actually what we are interested in achieving.
This technique implies that if a person agrees to perform a small action, they will subsequently be more likely to perform a larger related action, an action that they would not have previously done. That is, it implies that a person accepts a small, inexpensive request, which will later make them more likely to accept a larger request.
The main factors that cause subsequent behavior of greater magnitude to be carried out are commitment and consistency. The people have agreed to carry out the initial behavior, voluntarily, and This motivates them to accept a subsequent request more easily that goes in the same direction despite being a little more expensive.
For example, if we have positioned ourselves in favor of an idea, it will be easier for us to commit to actions related to it. In this way we maintain internal coherence, with ourselves, and external coherence, with respect to others. Added to this, The effectiveness of this technique is greater when the following conditions are met :
@image(id)
The Freedman and Fraser experiment (1966)
The foot in the door technique is so classic that it is difficult to know exactly who invented and first used it. What we can know is who were the first to investigate it from social psychology. The first study on this strategy was carried out at Stanford University in 1966, by Jonathan Freedman and Scott Fraser. In his research the following question was raised: How can you get a person to do something they would rather not do?
The first task of their experiment was to check whether unknown people, who would act as experimental subjects, agreed to receive individuals who were doing a study on cleaning products in their homes. These individuals would be responsible for inspecting the brands and use of the products of each home they were allowed to enter. Some of these experimental subjects were previously given a short telephone survey to obtain information about what type of cleaning products they used.
Freedman and Fraser found that those who had taken the previous telephone survey were 135% more likely to accept the request to receive professionals at home compared to those who had not done so
In the second part of the experiment, these researchers went a little further, checking whether people would agree to place a very large and ugly road safety sign in their garden. Some of them had previously been asked to place a small sticker on their windows or doors that promoted environmental protection or safe driving.
Freedman and Fraser found again that those who had previously placed these stickers were more likely to agree to put the sign in their gardens. Only 17% of those in the group that had not been asked to wear stickers agreed to put up the sign, while 55% of the group that had been asked to wear stickers agreed to put up the sign.
Why is this technique persuasive?
One of the most frequently used explanations to explain the effect of this technique is related to the ideas of self-perception and consistency Daryl Bem’s self-perception theory states that when people do not feel confident about their attitude about an event or situation about which they have no prior experience, they tend to draw conclusions about their attitude by observing the actions they have taken regarding it. That is, he maintains that people infer their personality from their own behaviors.
Based on this theory, the case of the billboard experiment, those who had previously agreed to use stickers with protest messages had perceived themselves as more committed to this cause. This had motivated them to agree to place a sign in their garden about road safety to feel consistent with their actions. That is, participants carried out this action more likely when it was consistent with the perception they had of themselves at that moment.
Furthermore, it is the relationship that is created between the person who persuades and the person persuaded Whoever has been persuaded feels obliged not to fail in a future commitment that has been formed through the acceptance of the first demands. The persuaded person feels involved in the cause and finds it more difficult to reject subsequent demands.
His relationship with sects
As a persuasion strategy, the foot-in-the-door technique has a strong relationship with sects. The first contact of coercive organizations is usually attending small meetings. Subsequently, a donation or small gesture is requested. Having already taken the first steps, no matter how small they may be, we are more likely to commit to larger subsequent actions
Among these actions we can find behaviors such as dedicating weekly hours to the organization, giving more and more money, donating highly valuable goods… In the most extreme cases, followers are forced to perform sexual services or even participate in collective suicides, doing so believing They do it completely voluntarily even though they are being manipulated like puppets.
Related article: “Cognitive dissonance: the theory that explains self-deception”
Final reflection
The foot in the door technique is a persuasion strategy that, although it may seem intrusive, It is very effective due to its subtlety, which is why it is often widely used in marketing, sales and advertising It is a way of persuading without pressuring, achieving very beneficial results for those who use it.
It is very popular daily. For example, when they call us on the phone and ask us “Do you have internet?” and we answer yes, we are prepared to continue listening. The next question is usually “Would you like to pay less?” and, if we answer affirmatively again, we fall into their trap. They just got our foot in the door, and they will continue testing to see if we say yes to their offers or services.
Now that we know about this technique, it can help us avoid falling into both the marketing strategies of companies and the methods of sects. Learning to say no and detect the manipulation techniques that these organizations use is essential to prevent them from getting everything they want from us, and on top of that making us believe that we have been free to choose it.
A brief and concise “yes” to an initial question can give way to a whole bombardment of questions and demands in which it will be increasingly difficult for us to reject what they want from us. So, the next time we are offered something, we should think again.
