Social influence basics techniques: what to know and why

Suppose you have to change what somebody does, and you want to do it in a way you would be content to explain to them afterwards. That rules out most of what sells under the word "techniques". It leaves a short list that is stronger than it looks.

What to take away

• The honest techniques all share one property: they give the other person something they can inspect, and they lose nothing when inspected.
• The most effective of them are also the least glamorous: give the reason, show the real norm, make the step small and true, make refusal cheap.
• If a technique needs the other person not to notice it, it is not on this list, and it is not something you would want to be known for.

Seven that pass

1. Give the reason, and give it first. People comply with requests that carry a reason more readily than with bare requests, and the effect seems to hold even for modest reasons, though how much it holds is argued about. The honest version is that the reason is true and relevant. Stating it costs nothing and survives any scrutiny.

2. Show the real norm. If the people your listener identifies with actually do the thing, say so, say how you know, and let them weigh it. This is the legitimate form of normative influence. The illegitimate form is the same sentence with the count invented.

3. Declare the default. Defaults are powerful because inertia is; the design view of this is nudge theory, and the strength of default effects varies a great deal by setting. The technique is honest when you say it is a default, why you chose it, and how to change it. "We have set this to X because most people want X; here is the switch" survives disclosure completely.

4. Choose the frame, and show the other one. The same fact described as a gain or a loss lands differently; that is the framing effect, and it is not going away. What makes a frame honest is that you would be comfortable putting the alternative description next to it. "Nine in ten succeed; one in ten does not" is one frame with its twin attached, and it persuades on the merits.

5. Ask for a small step that is genuinely a step. Trying a sample, reading one page, attending one meeting. This is fine if the small thing is worth doing on its own and you would be content if they stopped there. It becomes the ladder described under commitment and consistency when the small step exists only to make the large one hard to refuse.

6. Make refusal cheap and mean it. Say that no is fine, and then behave as though it was. This is counterintuitive and it works, because a person who knows they can decline listens to the argument instead of guarding against the pressure. It also filters out agreement that was not real, which you did not want anyway.

7. Give the strongest objection yourself. Name the best reason not to do what you are proposing, before they find it. It costs you the objection, which they would have found anyway, and buys you the credibility that the rest of your case is not hiding anything.

What separates the two lists

Honest technique	Its counterfeit	The difference
Give the reason	Invent one	Whether it is true
Show the real norm	Stage one	Whether the count exists
Declare the default	Bury it	Whether they know it is there
Frame, and show the twin	Frame to hide the twin	Whether the other description is available
A small true step	A rung on a ladder	Whether you would be content if they stopped
Refusal is cheap	Refusal is punished later	What happens to the people who say no
Volunteer the objection	Suppress it	Whether you would be embarrassed if they found it

The right-hand column is the same technique with a fact removed. Every honest technique becomes its counterfeit by subtracting something the listener was entitled to, and the subtraction is exactly what would have to be concealed. That is why the counterfeits appear here only to be recognized: there is no way to teach them as methods without teaching the concealment, since the concealment is the only thing they add.

Two that people expect and will not find

Being liked. Warmth helps, and building it deliberately for the sake of the request is the tactic examined under the liking principle. It is not on the list because it is not a technique for a proposal; it is a technique for a person, and it moves the decision without touching the merits.

Doing a favor first. Same reason. A favor given in order to be repaid in agreement is covered under reciprocity, and the honest version of it, giving freely, is not a persuasion technique at all.

How to check yourself

Before using any of the seven, write one sentence explaining to the listener what you are doing and why. "I am telling you most of your neighbors do this because it is true and I think it is relevant." If the sentence is comfortable, use the technique. If you would rather not say the sentence, you have found the line, and it is worth asking why you wanted to cross it. The general principle behind this check is set out in social influence basics.

Common questions

Are honest techniques weaker than manipulative ones?

In a single encounter, sometimes. Over any relationship that lasts, no. Manipulation is spent the first time it is discovered, and it is always eventually discovered.

Is a default ever wrong?

Yes, when it serves the setter rather than the people it is set for, or when it is designed to be missed. A declared default with a visible switch is a service.

What if I have no good reason for my request?

Then you have discovered something about the request, and the honest move is to fix that first. A technique that carries a bad case to success has not helped anyone, including you.

Can I use a frame if the other frame makes my case look worse?

You can use it, and you should show the other one. If the case cannot survive its twin frame being visible, it was the frame doing the work.