Social Engineering Blogs

An Aggregator for Blogs About Social Engineering and Related Fields

Words Make a Difference in Persuasion

What’s in a word?  In the field of persuasion there are many things that continue to amaze me.  For instance, the subtly of the language we use and the enormous impact it can have on the behaviour of others, is one.  From Dr Cialdini’s research we know small things make a big difference and words do make a difference.

For example, if someone was wanting to cut into a line of people waiting to use a photocopier they will be much more successful if they use the word “because” during their request such as,

Excuse me, I have five pages. May I use the Xerox machine because I have to make some copies?

A beggar is more likely to increase the money given to them by adding,

of course it is up to you.

Charities are able to increase the donations given by adding

even a penny will do.

There are many examples I could continue to cite but this week I want to discuss one word that has been used incorrectly and it demonstrates a misunderstanding of the research.  Recently I read an article that referenced Dr Cialdini’s work and at the outset the author referred to “likability”.  Under this banner they outlined the Principle of Liking before proceeding to the other principles.

The issue for me is, “liking” and “likability” are not the same thing and in my opinion “likability” is not what Dr Cialdini had discovered or reported on.  The difference while subtle is enormous.

Likability means “readily or easily liked”.  It means that you are able to be liked.  In my opinion this is very passive and relies on the first rule of sales “to make the customer like you” which we know is impossible – you cannot make someone like you!

The Principle of Liking creates the environment and executes the tools to show someone else that you are like them and in fact you like them.

This is an important but subtle difference.  You cannot make someone like you, but you can show them that you like them.

For me:

Liking is active, whereas Likability is passive.
Liking relies on the persuader to make the first move.  Likability encourages them to sit back and wait.
Liking is about drawing the similarities, shared goals, and praiseworthy activities to the surface – likability is letting someone else do it for you.

It is a subtle but important distinction in my eyes because you may be likable but this does not mean you are executing the Principle of Liking in order to build, repair or maintain relationships.

What do you think…

I welcome your comments about whether words make a difference because your comments are important and even if you are low on time, even a couple of words will do.  But of course it is totally up to you!

 

 

The post Words Make a Difference in Persuasion appeared first on Social Influence Consulting Group.

Angry Facial Expressions in Negotiation

Dangerous Demeanor Detector- HumintellWouldn’t you want to know the negotiation secret to closing the deal or securing that lucrative contract? Now new research out of Harvard University suggests your best weapon may be your facial expressions.

In a new paper entitled “The Commitment Function of Angry Facial Expressions” published in Psychological Science, Harvard University psychology post-doc Lawrence Ian Reed suggests that angry facial expressions seem to boost the effectiveness of threats without actual aggression.

Reed and colleagues Peter DeScioli of Stony Brook University and Steven Pinker of Harvard University conducted an online study of over 870 participants who were told they were playing a negotiation game.

As described in an article on Science Daily, during the study, participants acting as the “proposer,” would decide how to split a sum of $1.00 with another participant, the “responder.” Each person would receive the specified sum if the responder accepted the split that was offered, but neither person would receive any money if the responder rejected the split.

Before making their offers, each proposer was shown a threat that supposedly came from the responder. In reality, the responder was played by the same female actor, who was instructed to create specific facial expressions in the video clips. One clip showed her making a neutral expression, while another showed her making an angry expression.

The clips were accompanied by a written demand for either an equal cut of 50% or a larger cut of 70%, (which would leave only 30% for the proposer).

After they saw the threat, the proposers were asked to state their offer.

The data revealed that the responder’s facial expression did have an impact on the amount offered by the proposer, but only when the responder demanded the larger share.

That is, proposers offered more money if the responder showed an angry expression compared to when they showed a neutral expression, but only when the responder demanded 70% of the take.

Facial expression had no influence on proposers’ offers when the responder demanded an equal share, presumably because the demand was already viewed as credible.

Interestingly, proposers offered greater amounts in response to angry facial expressions compared to neutral expressions even when they were told that they belonged to a “typical responder,” rather than their specific partner.

The researchers claim this works because genuine facial expressions of emotions are hard to fake. Since it’s difficult to fake your emotional expression, people unconsciously assign that more importance than what you’re actually saying. “We pay attention to what people ‘say’ with their faces more than what they say with words,” Reed says.

“The effectiveness of the threat depends on how credible it is,” he says. An angry expression makes a threat more credible because people intuitively think it’s genuine. Whoever you’re negotiating with is more likely to think you’ll follow through on taking your business elsewhere or walking away on a job offer if your words are delivered with the look you’d give a person with a cart full of groceries in the express checkout lane.