The Effect of Fleeting Attraction on Compliance to Requests

By J. Burger, S. Soroka, Katrina Gonzago, Emily Murphy, Emily Somervell. 2001

113 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/23b890afbff0ad2f032bc97639fbd845ecab3f8d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

1. Vladas Griskevicius
2. Scott S. Wiltermuth
3. Noah J. Goldstein
4. Jennifer J. Argo
5. Didem Kurt
6. J. Inman
7. Eric T. Bradlow
8. Martin Adam

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Vladas Griskevicius
2. Jennifer J. Argo
3. Noah J. Goldstein
4. Scott S. Wiltermuth
5. Robert B. Cialdini
6. Eric T. Bradlow
7. Blakeley B. McShane
8. Didem Kurt

Citations in the corpus

• The Persuasive Role of Incidental Similarity on Attitudes and Purchase Intentions in a Sales Context (2010, unknown): “Given that attractive sources are more persuasive, the attraction elicited by the feeling of connectedness should result in greater persuasiveness (Burger et al. 2001; McGuire 1978).”
• Visual Influence and Social Groups (2012, background): “Similar others are viewed as more diagnostic about what one should do in a given situation, and consequently people conform more to similar than to dissimilar others (Burger et al. 2001).”
• AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance (2020, background): “In fact, simply being exposed to a person for a brief period without any interaction significantly increases compliance with the person ’ s request, which is even stronger when the request is made face-to-face and unexpectedly (Burger et al. 2001).”
• Synchrony and destructive obedience (2012, background): “Research has also established that people are more likely to comply with requests from those to whom they feel socially connected (Burger, Soroka, Gonzago, Murphy, & Sommervell, 2001 ; Dolinski, Nawrat, & Rudak, 2001 ; Emswiller, Deaux, & Willits, 1971 ; Williamson & Clark, 1992 ).”
• The Influence of Friends on Consumer Spending: The Role of Agency–Communion Orientation and Self-Monitoring (2011, methodology): “While the confederate cannot be considered a friend per se, previous research (e.g., Burger et al. 2001; Dolinski et al. 2001) has shown that short conversations with strangers lead people to treat them as if they were friends.”
• Invoking Social Norms (2007, background): “For example, sharing the same birthday, fingerprint type, or physical space with another person has been found to induce surprisingly powerful feelings of affiliation between individuals (Burger et al. 2004, 2001).”