Exploring the Efficacy of Compliments as a Tactic for Securing Compliance
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Two studies were conducted to test the efficacy of compliments as a compliance tactic and to explore whether liking could account for their effectiveness. Both studies provided evidence that compliments increased compliance relative to a control condition. Although receiving a compliment did tend to increase liking of the requestor, this increased liking was not responsible for enhanced levels of compliance. This research provides some of the first direct evidence of the effectiveness of compliments as a means of securing compliance and provides data challenging the mechanism most commonly assumed to be responsible for its effects. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Our sponsor was Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Grants 410-2004-1255, 410-2007-1844. Notes 1Initially we planned to test individual differences in reciprocity as a potential moderator of the compliment effect. Participants were thus those who had scored in the upper or lower thirds on the Personal Norm of Reciprocity Scale (PNRS; Perugini, Gallucci, Presaghi, & Ercolani, Citation2003). Because the PNRS did not result in any theoretically meaningful effects, it was dropped from the analysis. Results were similar regardless of whether the PNRS was included. 2The authors will provide the full confederate script upon request. 3The five other adjectives were intelligent, competent, ambitious, sincere, and honest. 4Two female undergraduates took turns playing the role of the confederate. Chi-square tests confirmed that confederate was unconfounded with compliment condition, χ2(1) = 1.65, p = .20. 5To explore the idea that liking interacted with the compliment manipulation, a logistic regression was conducted including a centerd liking measure as an independent variable. Results revealed that liking did not interact with the compliment condition. 6Our original intent was to include males in this experiment. However, post-experimental interviews with initial male participants who went through the experimental procedure indicated that they did not find the computer-mediated conversation to be plausible and thus reported high levels of suspicion regarding the authenticity of the interaction. 7Initially we planned to test an experimental manipulation of the salience of the reciprocity norm as a potential moderator of the compliment effect. Thus a priming manipulation was included prior to the experiment wherein participants responded to items from the PNRS (Perugini et al., Citation2003) or responded to neutral questions. This manipulation proved unsuccessful and was thus dropped from analysis. Results were similar regardless of whether reciprocity was included.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle