Is it natural for humans to be monogamous? 

Perhaps this is one of the world’s oldest questions, especially considering that prostitution is considered to be the world’s oldest profession.
 
For decades researchers have been exploring if humans, by nature, are meant to be monogamous. No one questions that some individuals can successfully practice monogamy. Just as humans are omnivores by design, some people faithfully lead a vegetarian lifestyle.
 
The real question for scholars is not what people can practice, but

Read more…

A recent study purports that people who fully confessed after lying when given the opportunity to come clean, felt better than those who partially confessed.  The study which was published in the American Psychological Association’s Journal of Personality and Social Psychology was comprised of researchers from Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh and Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel.

“Confessing to only part of one’s transgressions is attractive to a lot of people because they expect the confession to be more believable and guilt-relieving than not confessing. But our findings show just the opposite is true,” lead author Eyal Peer, Ph.D., told the American Psychological Association.

According to the research paper and Fast Company.com, 4,167 participants were surveyed online across the country in multiple experiments.  In one experiment participants were asked how many times they accurately predicted the outcome of 10 coin tosses (heads/tails).  Researchers used the incentive of earning money for every correct prediction.

In comparison to previous studies, which focused more on a complete confession or complete lie, this study takes into account the partial lie, which is probably more realistic.

After they reported their results, participants were given the opportunity to confess if they over-reported their number of correct guesses, without penalty. Of the approximately 2,100 participants, 35% cheated. Of that group, approximately 18% (or 139 participants) confessed to cheating, with nearly 40% partially confessing and 59% making a full confession.

So why are partial lies less satisfying than a purge of an entire lie?

According to the study coming clean allows you to move on, which relieves a person’s guilt.  However, people who’ve been dishonest and decide to partially confess do so most often to appear more credible to others while still being able to reap the benefits of their dishonest behavior.

By limiting the extent of their confession, the study suggests, the partial confessor may feel more credible but it comes at an emotional cost -feeling worse than those who fully confessed.

 “People seeking redemption by partially admitting their big lies feel guiltier because they do not take complete responsibility for their behaviors. True guilt relief requires people to fully come clean,” Peer said.

We know that when people are not sure of what they should do they will tend to follow the advice of a recognised AUTHORITY or someone who has superior knowledge or wisdom in a particular area.

In 1949 Camel ran the following advertisement highlighting that More Doctors Smoke Camel than any other cigarette.

As persuaders we know the reason why Camel used the idea of Doctors to promote their product:

if it is good enough for my doctor, it is good enough for me!  

The advertisement would have also had an impact on other doctors because “doctors in all branches of medicine in all parts of the country” stated they smoked Camel.  From a CONSENSUS perspective therefore any doctor not sure whether they should smoke or what brand would be influenced in Camel’s direction because people just like them (other doctors) are smoking Camel cigarettes.

The key thing to remember when using an AUTHORITY to convince others (whether you are the Authority or you are leveraging someone else) is the AUTHORITY needs to be seen as AN AUTHORITY (someone with extra knowledge or wisdom) not someone who is IN AUTHORITY (i.e. the boss).

In the Camel example doctors smoking their brand is leveraging the AUTHORITY position of the doctor to tell others to smoke this brand of cigarette over others (even though none of them ever came out and said this).

We have seen the dramatic impact of AUTHORITY in past blog posts such as Compliance which outlined the situation where a hoax caller to a McDonald’s restaurant in the US caused a manager to strip search a staff member because the caller stated they were a police officer and insisted the strip search be conducted.

Likewise I shared the story of Brett Cohen and the impact of being a Fake Celebrity and what can happen when you have the right trappings or cues of AUTHORITY.

The question for you is how are you presenting your AUTHORITY to others?  Are you presenting the right cues to influence your target of influence in the desired direction.

Now I am not suggesting any of the examples above are good uses of AUTHORITY.  Instead I think it is interesting to look at the impact the principles have had and continue to have in our lives.

Imagine if you will if the Camel campaign was run today!!  The uproar over the suggestion of a medical connection to the promotion of smoking would be deafening and rightfully so.  This is why the impartiality of professionals such as doctors and dentists is critical to society – I am not so sure Bruce the dentist is actually a dentist in the Oral B campaign!

Examples such as Cohen’s demonstrates the ease at which AUTHORITY can be faked and while the short-term gain may be incredible the longer term impact to reputation if credibility eroded will last far longer.

 Do your due diligence.  Tell the truth.  Remember – only a true AUTHORITY will admit they don’t know something or have done something wrong because they know expertise is only one part of the equation – the other is trustworthiness!

 

Have you ever been duped by a fake Authority?

 

 

The post Authority – Why I Will Follow Your Advice appeared first on Social Influence Consulting Group.