On Inferring One’s Beliefs From One’s Attempt and Consequences for Subsequent Compliance

“On Inferring One’s Beliefs From One’s Attempt and Consequences for Subsequent Compliance”

”On Inferring One’s Beliefs From One’s Attempt and Consequences for Subsequent Compliance” tries to highlight an important part of social influence, namely ”compliance gaining.” He presents the reader to a wide range of compliance studies and applies novel influence strategies, such as Foot-in-the-Door, to strengthen his position on the subject.

Inference Based on Observable Behavior

In response to the paper, Dolinski emphasizes on inference based on observable behavior. He claims that if no external factors are involved in convincing someone to do something, the reason must be internal. He holds self-perception responsible for one’s cooperation. An analogy of a man who likes eating brown bread is given. If his wife is asked whether her husband loves brown bread, she answers to the affirmative. Her response is inferred from the fact that she observes him eat brown bread very often. The man himself, if asked the same question, gives the same answer based on how he perceives himself. He observes that in many cases he takes the brown bread and therefore is bound to do it again. The phenomenon of self-perception comes into play in this scenario and is responsible for the man’s compliance to buy brown bread. (Dolinski, 2000).

The Foot-in-the-Door Technique

The Foot-in-the-Door technique explains the reason why an individual tends to obey a significant request after he or she has complied to an earlier one that was less difficult. It is premised on the general assumption that the probability of one giving in to a significant request (that is not so obvious to agree to) may be increased by inducing the person to accept to a first request that is not as complex as the second one. Even in a scenario where an individual fails to comply with the initial request because he or she is not in a position to fulfill it despite giving a verbal declaration of consent, he or she can still comply with the second and more complex one. This, however, is not attributed to the negative emotion of guilt or embarrassment for not complying with the first request. This technique asserts that mere declaration of consent to fulfill a request is responsible for future compliance. (Dolinski, 2000).

Misgivings about Dolinski’s Views

Much as I find Dolinski’s assertions to be convincing since they are based on scientific findings and experiments, I have some misgivings about his views. For instance, I do not concur with his opinions that merely because we cannot explain the causes of compliance we presume it to be self-perception at work. I tend to reason that sometimes circumstances compel a person to compromise to different requests. Some situations can force a person to give in, and this does not reflect his or her ideal choice. I, however, agree with him on his views that self-perception induces compliance since after one has been frustrated on the first occasion he or she will seek satisfaction on the second one. If he succeeds on the first attempt, he or she is likely to pursue the second request for further pride and joy. I also take issue with his narrow perception of ”social influence” which, according to him, refers to intentional acts. Am cognizant of the fact that social influence is a broad field which also includes unintentional acts that are actioned by receivers despite not being intended for them.

Theories of Personality

This article is essential in seeking to understand the theories of personality namely; psychoanalytic, humanistic, social cognitive and trait. All these are geared at canvassing the development of human character. Human nature is explained regarding a person’s qualities. In this article, one’s choices are attributed to his or her personality. After an individual gets used to doing something over and over again, he can be judged by it, and this can be used to define him or her and even predict his reaction to a similar situation. Even the mere declaration of willingness to undertake a particular action is an expression of behavior by which a person can be judged Dolinski underlines the usefulness of compliance in human personality development and prediction. (Haysom, Verweij & Zietsch 2015).

References

Dolinski, D. (2000). On inferring one’s beliefs from one’s attempt and consequences for subsequent compliance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(2), 260.

Haysom, H. J., Verweij, K. J., & Zietsch, B. P. (2015). Evolutionary models of human personality. Cengage Learning.