Date : 29 June, 2012 Student ID : : Persuasive Communication : Graduate School of Communication : S.J.H.M. van den Putte

Transcription

1 The Effect of the Foot-in-the-Door and the Door-in-the-Face Technique on Purchase Intention and Attitude in a Commercial Setting and the Moderating Effect of Persuasion Knowledge Assignment :Master s Thesis Name : Rik Baas Date : 29 June, 2012 Student ID : Master s programme : Communication Science Track : Persuasive Communication Department : Graduate School of Communication Supervisor : S.J.H.M. van den Putte

2 Table of Contents ABSTRACT 3 INTRODUCTION 4 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 5 THEORETICAL BASIS FOOT-IN-THE-DOOR 5 THEORETICAL BASIS DOOR-IN-THE-FACE 6 META ANALYSES OF FITD AND DITF 7 APPROACHES OF FITD AND DITF STUDIES 7 PERSUASION KNOWLEDGE 9 METHODS 12 DESIGN AND RESPONDENTS 12 PROCEDURE 13 STIMULUS MATERIAL 13 MEASURES 14 RESULTS 17 MANIPULATION CHECK 17 CONTROL VARIABLES 17 TEST OF MAIN DITF HYPOTHESES: 18 RESULTS OF FITD 21 CONCLUSION & DISCUSSION 22 REFERENCES 26 APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE 30 2

3 Abstract The effects of the foot-in-the-door (FITD) and the door-in-the-face (DITF) technique are examined in a commercial setting using advertisements. This research studies the effects of these techniques on purchase intention, attitude toward the advertisement (A ad ) and attitude toward the brand (A b ) with persuasion knowledge as a moderator. This study experiments with measures for both advertisement specific and general persuasion knowledge to check for any moderating effects. Results show that the DITF technique was effective in raising purchase intention while A ad and A b was similar in all conditions. Manipulation of FITD in this setting was unsuccessful. Furthermore the measures used for persuasion knowledge did not moderate the effect of the DITF technique on purchase intention or A ad, and slightly moderated the effect on A b, but in a different direction than expected. The measures of both advertisement specific and general persuasion knowledge showed little reliability or consistency, which portrayed the often implicated difficulty of operationalizing persuasion knowledge in advertising research. 3

4 Introduction To increase the successfulness of a persuasion attempt, multiple techniques can be used to enhance the likelihood that individuals comply with a request. Some of these techniques are described as compliance without pressure techniques (Pascual & Guéguen, 2005), because these can trigger automatic responses in human behaviour. By using these influence strategies, individuals can be stimulated psychologically to respond positive to a request (Cialdini & Sagarin, 2005). The foot-in-the-door (FITD) and door-in-the-face (DITF) technique have been studied the most among these strategies. By using these strategies, studies have shown that compliance with a request can be increased by either confronting an individual with a smaller request (FITD) or a bigger request (DITF) before the intended request is made. Researchers have found strong evidence that these principles of compliance are successful in multiple persuasion attempts (Dillard et al., 1984). Both techniques are studied extensively, showing the functional effect of influencing people subconsciously (Rodafinos et al., 2005). To date, researchers on the principles of compliance have mainly tested the effects of FITD and DITF for charitable behaviour in a face-to-face research setting. Besides, studies have generally focussed on the behavioural aspect by analyzing whether people comply or not, without involving people s attitude or intention. Furthermore, few respondents characteristics where involved that might explain the variability in the effectiveness of the compliance principles. In this research FITD and DITF strategies will be examined in a commercial setting, to analyze the effect on people s purchase intention and attitude. Next to that, the moderating effect of persuasion knowledge will be tested to see how this affects the response on FITD and DITF strategies. Since the appearance of Friestad and Wright s study (1994) about the persuasion knowledge model, researchers have tried to find ways to involve persuasion knowledge in advertising research. Recently, understanding people s persuasion knowledge has become a hot topic in advertising research (Pelsmacker & Neijens, 2012). In my study, measures for advertisement specific and general persuasion knowledge are used to analyse how this important respondents characteristic might explain variability in audience responses. Marketers and advertisers are familiar with the FITD and DITF strategies and apply the principles in interpersonal communication with the intention to increase sales. (Mowen & Cialdini, 1980). Yet, the knowledge about how and why their clients or consumers react on 4

5 these strategies is incomplete. In this study, an experiment is conducted, employing advertising, to examine what effects can be expected by using FITD and DITF for commercial purposes. Theoretical background Theoretical basis foot-in-the-door The foot-in-the door (FITD) technique was first studied by Freedman and Fraser (1966). In two experiments they showed that people who agreed to a small request were more likely to comply with a subsequent larger request. People were asked to participate in a small survey about household products. Results showed that the people who were asked this small favour first, were two times more likely to participate in an extensive two hours research program than the people who were directly asked this large favour. FITD is an interpersonal influence technique that has shown to be effective in several persuasion attempts. If an individual or organization needs compliance for a request, it appears that the compliance for their target request will be bigger when a small favour is asked in advance. The theoretical basis for the FITD technique rests primarily on selfperception theory (Bem 1967). According to this theory individuals form an image about their personality by assessing their own attitudes and beliefs. In other words, people think about how they perceive themselves. In the FITD strategy a small request on a topic can infer a change in self-perception around that topic (Snyder & Cunningham, 1975). The person that complies with the small request can interpret this behaviour as a sign of engagement with the topic and will be more likely to comply with a larger request on the same topic. People tend to stay consistent with their previous behaviour (Cialdini, 2007). Someone s self-image can thus be manipulated by inferring a small commitment. FITD has been applied in multiple fields of research. The technique was used to increase the compliance to become a blood donor (Hayes et al., 1984), to donate to charity organizations (Wang et al., 1989) or cultural organisations (Brownstein & Katzev, 1985) or to increase the helpfulness of students (Harrari et al. 1980). Furthermore, Dolin and Booth- Butterfield (1995) proved that the FITD technique was useful for a cancer prevention program, as they showed that more women underwent a gynaecological examination when they were first asked to perform self-examination. Thus, in multiple research fields the FITD strategy has been tested as an influence technique that could increase compliance. 5

6 Theoretical basis door-in-the-face In contrast to the FITD, in the door-in-the-face (DITF) strategy first an extreme large request is made that is likely to be rejected, followed by a less costly and more realistic target request (Rodafinos et al., 2005). Cialdini (1975) was the first to study the DITF technique and is acknowledged as the pioneer of this social influence strategy (Lecat et al., 2009). In three different experiments Cialdini found that more people complied with a request when they first rejected a larger request. Two main theoretical explanations for DITF can be found in the literature: the concept of reciprocation and the perceptual contrast hypothesis. According to the reciprocity principle an individual tends to give back to people who did a favour for him (Lecat et al., 2009). The favour in the DITF strategy is the concession made by the requester toward the person addressed. In one of the most influential books about influence strategies, Cialdini (2007, 37) explains that whenever a requester makes concessions, the receiver of the request feels the automatic obligation to make concessions of his own. For example, Cialdini and Green (1992) ran three experiments in which they showed that participants reported a greater amount of change to a communicator when they felt that the communicator made concessions. They describe the reciprocity principle as a normative action of social desirability. O Keefe and Figgé (1997) take this idea one step further as they state that the increased compliance of the DITF strategy is due to a sense of guilt. According to them, guilt is created when the first request is refused and can be reduced by complying with the second request. Thus, the feeling to reciprocate to the requester is offered as an important interpersonal factor in explaining DITF effectiveness. The perceptual contrast hypothesis states that the initial large request in the DITF technique becomes an anchoring point (Lecat et al, 2009) that influences the perception of the second more moderate request. Miller et al. (1976) used a DITF approach to test whether people would be more willing to participate in a two hours voluntary program when they were first asked to participate in a two years voluntary project. They found that respondents in the DITF condition were twice as likely to participate in the program compared to the people that were asked to participate in the two hours program only. Next to this evidence for the DITF, they found that respondents were most likely to comply when they were briefed about the easiness of the program relative to the two years project. Based on these findings they concluded that the contrast between the extreme request and the target request causes people to perceive the target request as easier, resulting in more compliance. However, based on this evidence it is questionable if people comply more due to their own perception of contrast between the requests, or only when they are explicitly told about the contrast. In another 6

7 DITF study (Cantrill and Seibold 1986), that found a main DITF effect, no correlation was found between perception of effort and the effectiveness of the technique. Although the perceptual contrast hypothesis is not yet supported with strong evidence, it remains an important factor to consider when studying the effects of DITF strategies, as the large request can change the perception of the succeeding moderate request. As opposed to the concept of reciprocity, the perceptual contrast hypothesis might explain how intrapersonal factors instead of interpersonal factors cause people to have greater compliance in DITF conditions. The evidence for the effectiveness of DITF is strong. O Keefe and Hale (2001) did a meta-analysis of 87 DITF studies and reported a mean odds ratio of 1.46 in favour of the DITF condition above control conditions. Thus it appears that the rejection of an extreme request can work as a trigger to comply with a smaller request on the same subject. Both reciprocity and the contrast principle can play a role in explaining the increased compliance with DITF. Meta analyses of FITD and DITF FITD and DITF are often studied together as they are diametrically opposed (Pascual & Guéguen, 2005): the initial request is either smaller or bigger than the target request. Some meta-analyses have been conducted to compare the two techniques and to examine how much compliance could be reached by each of them. Dillard et al. (1984) found that there was a small but significant effect for both FITD and DITF with a slightly better compliance rate for FITD. In a recent meta-analysis, 22 studies were observed that studied both techniques in the same research (Pascual & Guéguen, 2005). Results showed that compliance rates differed a lot over studies, but on average FITD increased compliance by 22 per cent and DITF by 15 per cent. However, these results have to be interpreted with care as some studies were included that had extremely high compliance rates. But overall there is support for the effectiveness of both techniques. Approaches of FITD and DITF studies FITD and DITF strategies are studied extensively. It is noticeable that the majority of the studies use similar approaches. First, most often compliance techniques are studied in a charitable setting, rather than a commercial setting. There are only a few exceptions. An early attempt to study the DITF technique in a commercial setting did not show significance (Tybout, 1978), but Ebster and Neumayr (2008) successfully showed that at least three times more cheese could be sold when an extreme offer was rejected in advance. To date, this is the 7

8 only study that showed positive implications for advertisers and marketers to use the DITF technique, whereas to our knowledge no research can be found on using the FITD technique for the purpose of sales. This is remarkable as in practice advertisers and marketers apply both FITD and DITF (Mowen & Cialdini, 1980). The current study will research how both compliance techniques can function in commercial settings in order to affect sales. Secondly, studies on FITD and DITF have used similar research settings: requests to respondents are mainly made face-to-face or through phone calls. Because the compliance techniques are considered as interpersonal influence strategies (Cialdini, 2007), this seems a logical research setting. However, Guéguen (2002) showed in an experiment that the FITD strategy also brought more compliance without the (physical) closeness of a communicator. He found that more students answered online questionnaires if they were first sent an , in which a question was posed that was relatively easy to answer. The was only signed by the university department name and questionnaires were filled in anonymously. These results indicate that intrapersonal factors also play a role in the effectiveness of FITD. In my research it will be tested if using the FITD and DITF technique can also be effective with limited interpersonal influences using computer-mediated communication. The third remarkable aspect of the literature on these influence techniques is that, to our knowledge, all studies focussing on FITD or DITF have used compliance rates as their independent variable. In other words, researchers have measured behaviour and reported it with a dichotomous variable: people either comply or not. It would be interesting to examine determinants of compliance behaviour. For example, purchase intention is frequently used in advertising research, as it has a high predictive value for buying behaviour (Jamieson & Bass, 1989). To extend the research on FITD and DITF techniques, I study the effectiveness of FITD and DITF in a commercial setting, employing advertising and testing intention as the dependent variable. Most studies found that asking either a small request (FITD) or a large request (DITF) prior to a target request leads to more compliance than asking the target request only. Therefore my first hypothesis is: H1: Respondents that are exposed to an initial small request (FITD) or an initial large request (DITF) will have a higher purchase intention for the target request compared to the respondents that only see the target request. 8

9 Besides intention, respondents are often asked about other behavioural determinants to assess the effectiveness of commercial campaigns, such as attitude toward the advertisement (A ad ) and attitude toward the brand (A b ). To date, Cialdini et al. (1992) were the only researchers who included respondents attitude in a study on the FITD and DITF technique. They showed that both people s attitude toward the topic and the communicator was influential in creating compliance. Although they showed that attitude is an important predictor for compliance, it was not tested if people in a control condition had a different attitude toward the target request compared to respondents exposed to DITF and FITD. In other words, they showed the effect of attitude on compliance, but they did not study the effect of compliance principles on attitude. It would be really interesting to see how FITD and DITF strategies influence attitudes toward an advertisement or brand. Because no studies have researched the effect of compliance principles on attitude, it is unsure if attitude will be affected by the techniques. Yet, DITF and FITD strategies are known to influence people subconsciously (Ebster & Neumayr, 2008; Rodafinos, 2005). Because of this subconscious influencing, people may not be able to report exactly why they complied or not, as they are not aware of the automaticity activated in their brain. Although the expectation is that both FITD and DITF can increase purchase intention, there is no reason to believe that respondents confronted with either a FITD or DITF strategy, report higher attitude toward the target advertisement or brand compared to people in the control condition who only saw the target advertisement. My second hypothesis is: H2: There will be no significant difference in A ad and A b between respondents in the FITD, the DITF condition and the control condition. Persuasion knowledge To explain the variability of FITD and DITF studies, researchers have identified some factors that influence the effectiveness of both compliance techniques. At first it is important to note that the compliance rate depends heavily on the type of request and the perceived effort of complying with this request (Fern et al., 1986). Other factors that have shown to influence the effectiveness of the techniques depend on the setting of the requests. Studies have shown that FITD and DITF are more successful when both requests are made by the same person (Dillard, 1984), if the requests are made with the physical presence of the requester (O Keefe & Hale, 2001) and if there is limited delay between the requests (Cann et al., 1975). These factors do explain some mixed findings, as different kinds of requests will bring different 9

10 rates of compliance. However, so far researchers have neglected to study how respondents characteristics may influence the outcome of the FITD and DITF technique. Both FITD and DITF strategies are influence techniques that are meant to trigger automatic and unconscious responses. Yet, people might be familiar with these influence techniques, which will have an effect on whether they comply or not. In other words, people s personal knowledge about persuasion might affect the effectiveness of FITD and DITF techniques. Campbell and Kirmani (2000) argue that when people are suspicious of the persuasive intent or selling intent of an agent, they will be less likely to respond in favour of the agent. In this research it will be tested how persuasion knowledge moderates the effectiveness of FITD and DITF strategies. Friestad and Wright (1994) developed the persuasion knowledge model (PKM). In this model they explain how people s knowledge about the goals of marketers influences their reaction on a persuasion attempt. They define persuasion knowledge as a set of interrelated beliefs about psychological responses and the appropriateness of persuasion tactics (Friestad & Wright, 1994, 6). According to Friestad and Wright people learn about the tactics used by marketers and the psychology behind these tactics over time. This persuasion knowledge evolves by the cumulative confrontations of an individual with persuasion attempts and it evolves historically, as certain tactics become collectively recognized. Since the appearance of their study, researchers have frequently quoted the PKM to theorize about how persuasion knowledge might explain the variability in audience responses. In advertising research in general, there is yet a strong tendency to overweigh the role of the persuasion agent, while the role of the persuasion target is often neglected (Friestad & Wright, 1999). A sound integration of persuasion knowledge studies and the research on advertising effects is still lacking (Tutaj & Van Reijmersdal, 2012). This is mainly because persuasion knowledge has not yet been effectively operationalized in order to assess everyday knowledge about persuasion tactics. Those experiments that tested persuasion knowledge mainly had children as respondents to test their cognitive capacity to recognize the aim of advertisement (Wright et al., 2005). This operationalization of persuasion knowledge is too basic to use for adults, as most adults will understand that advertisers have a selling and persuasive intent. For adults very few experiments are conducted that aim to measure respondents persuasion knowledge. Some experiments have been conducted that measured persuasion knowledge by explicitly asking adult respondents whether they felt persuaded and whether the appeal was meant to change their behaviour (Campbell & Kirmani, 2000; Lorenzon & Russel 2012; 10

11 Williams et al., 2004). This might however be too simple as it is questionable whether respondents can verbally report if they are somehow influenced in their behaviour due to the persuasion attempt. Knowledge about persuasion is also considerably implicit (Wright et al., 2005). In other words, people s behaviour can be influenced while they are not conscious of the persuasion attempt. The implicitness of persuasion knowledge makes it difficult to assess this knowledge by using direct questions. The best operationalization of persuasion knowledge so far comes from Tutaj and Van Reijmersdal (2012). Based on different conceptualizations from studies that researched advertising literacy, they argue that persuasion knowledge consists of three elements: recognition of advertising, understanding of persuasive and selling intent, and advertisement scepticism. Yet, Tutaj and van Reijmersdal only measured these elements on an advertisement specific level. Apparently, general persuasion knowledge has not yet been taken into account in advertising research. In my research both advertisement specific and general persuasion knowledge is tested. The study of Tutaj and Van Reijmersdal (2012) serves as the basis for the operationalization of persuasion knowledge. Their measures are tested for advertisement specific persuasion knowledge and modified to create a possible measure for general persuasion knowledge. By measuring persuasion knowledge in general it might be possible to assess a person s knowledge in a more implicit way as no direct questions are asked about the experimental stimuli. Understanding of persuasive intent and scepticism will be measured on the basis of the FITD and DITF stimuli and also for advertising in general. To measure people s more explicit recognition of persuasion in general, an additional measure is included that aims to test people s self-reported persuasion knowledge. This measure is added to see if any association exists between the persuasion knowledge that people report and the more implicit measures of general persuasion knowledge. When people better understand persuasive intentions and are more sceptical (both advertisement specific and in general), they will probably not respond in favour of a request that uses techniques such as FITD and DITF. Therefore, my third hypothesis is: H3: Specific/General persuasion knowledge will moderate the effect of compliance principles on purchase intention, such that respondents in the FITD and DITF condition will have lower purchase intention than respondents in the control condition when persuasion knowledge is high compared to when persuasion knowledge is low. 11

12 In the second hypothesis it is stated that there will be no difference on A ad and A b between conditions. However, as Campbell and Kirmani (2000) mentioned, people will be less likely to respond in favour of the agent when they are suspicious of persuasive intent. Therefore it might be expected that respondents with high persuasion knowledge will have a lower A ad and A b in the FITD and DITF conditions compared to the control condition. My fourth hypothesis is: H4: Specific/General Persuasion knowledge will moderate the effect of compliance principles on A ad and A b, such that respondents in the FITD and DITF condition will have lower A ad and A b than respondents in the control condition when persuasion knowledge is high compared to when persuasion knowledge is low. My research also asks respondents explicitly to rate their own persuasion knowledge. It would be interesting to assess whether this self-reported knowledge correlates with the more implicit measures of understanding persuasive intent and scepticism. Wright et al. (2005) mentioned that people might not be able to accurately indicate their persuasion knowledge. However, in other studies (Campbell & Kirmani, 2000; Lorenzon & Russel 2012) it is assumed that persuasion knowledge can be assessed by explicitly asking the respondents how they are influenced. Following these last studies my fifth hypothesis is: H5: Respondents self-reported persuasion knowledge will be positively correlated with general scepticism and general understanding of persuasive intent, such that respondents with high self-reported persuasion knowledge will have higher general scepticism and higher general understanding of persuasive intent. Methods Design and Respondents A three (FITD condition, DITF condition, control condition) factorial between-subjects design was used to analyse the effect of FITD and DITF on purchase intention, A ad and A b. A total of 172 participants between the age of 19 and 63 (M = 33.26, SD = 13.62) completed the questionnaire. There were 92 (53,5%) women and 80 men (46,5%). FITD had 56 (32,5%) respondents, DITF 59 (34,3%) and the control condition had 57 (33.2%). All respondents were from the personal network of the researcher and were selected and personally invited 12

13 through Facebook and . A limited snowball sampling technique was applied by asking some people to share the link with their friends. It was intended to reach people between the age of 18 and 65. No further sampling criteria were used. Procedure Following the link provided in the Facebook message or , people were linked to the online questionnaire program Qualtrics. The questionnaire was in the Dutch language. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions (FITD, DITF, control). They were instructed to watch the advertisement(s) and answer the questions based on their own opinion. Respondents in the FITD condition first saw an advertisement of a bicycle worth 69 euro and respondents in the DITF condition first saw an advertisement of a bicycle worth 899 euro. After that, respondents in both conditions were shown an advertisement of a bicycle worth 159 euro. Respondents in the control conditions were only exposed to the 159 euro advertisement (target advertisement) without seeing any other advertisement in advance. After being exposed to the advertisement(s), respondents were asked to indicate their purchase intention for the bikes portrayed. After that, all participants were asked for their attitude toward the advertisement with the 159 euro bike and for their attitude toward the brand Minerva. Following these questions they were asked questions to assess their understanding of persuasion, scepticism and to find out how they felt advertising influenced them. Furthermore participants involvement with the product category (bicycles) was asked and finally people indicated their age and gender. Respondents were thanked for their participation and the Qualtrics software automatically processed the answers. Stimulus material As stimulus material, I aimed to find a product category that would be relevant to most respondents and was not a product that is bought frequently. In small focus groups, possible product categories were discussed and the bicycle appeared to be the best product to meet these criteria in the Netherlands. Minerva, a small Belgian bicycle brand not sold in the Netherlands, was chosen as the brand in the advertisements. A brand unknown in the Netherlands was chosen to limit brand preference due to respondents experiences with the particular brand. To test which purchase price for a bicycle would generate easy compliance (FITD stimulus) or rejection (DITF stimulus), ten people (mainly students) where asked face-to-face to report at what price they would accept a bike offer and at what price they would most likely 13

14 reject a bike offer, if they are looking to buy a bicycle. Based on this small pre-test, a price of 69 euro was used for the FITD advertisement and a price of 899 euro was used for the DITF condition. For the target advertisement, shown in all conditions, a price of 159 euro was chosen based on the average price of several existing bicycle advertisements for a city bicycle. All three advertisements were created in the same advertising format with Minerva as the brand, but with different types of bicycles. The ads were black and white and all showed both a men s bike and a women s bike. In the FITD advertisement a simple bike worth 69 euro, with the text inexpensive, simple, solid was shown. The DITF advertisement portrayed a sportive bike with 18 gears, lightweight frame, integrated LED light and an additional padlock worth 899 euro. The text lightweight, durable, sportive was shown on the advertisement. The target advertisement, used in all conditions, showed a solid city-bike complete with bike lights and additional padlock worth 159 euro with the text robust, solid, inexpensive. See appendix A for images of the three advertisements. Measures Purchase intention For each bicycle, purchase intention was measured with three items (MacKenzie et al., 1986). Respondents were asked to which extend they agreed with the following three statements: if you want to buy a bicycle I: would plan to buy/ am prepared to buy/ am likely to buy this bike (1 = totally disagree, 7 = totally agree). The three items all loaded on the same factor (EV = 2.57, R 2 =.85) and were averaged to construct one measure for purchase intention ( =.92, M = 3.41, SD = 1.68). Attitude toward the advertisement A ad was asked only for the target advertisement picturing the bike worth 159 euro. Respondents were asked to give their overall opinion on the advertisement. Four items using a semantic differential scale with bipolar word pairs, applied by Mitchell and Olson (1981) were chosen for this study. On a seven-point scale participants could indicate whether they perceived the advertisement as either good/ bad, dislike very much/ like very much, annoying/ not annoying, and uninteresting/ interesting. The first item (good/bad) was reverse coded in order to assess overall A ad (1= very negative A ad, 7 = very positive A ad ). All items loaded on 14

15 one factor (EV = 2.12, R 2 =.53) and were averaged to create one item for A ad ( =.69, M = 4,17, SD =.98). Attitude toward the brand To measure A b, the same questions were asked as for A ad but now related to the brand. Participants were asked if they found the brand good/ bad, dislike very much/ like very much, annoying/ not annoying, and uninteresting/ interesting. After reverse coding the first item, again all items loaded on the same factor (EV = 2.16, R 2 =.54). The average of the four items were merged in one item for A b ( =.69, M = 4.18, SD =.85). Persuasion knowledge As indicated by Tutaj and Van Reijmersdal (2012), persuasion knowledge consists of understanding persuasive intent and scepticism. My research also adds self-reported recognition of persuasion as a measure for general persuasion knowledge. Understanding persuasive intent of advertisement In order to assess to what extent people understood the specific persuasive intent of the advertisment(s), four questions were asked (Van Reijmersdal et al., 2010). Respondents could indicate, based on a five-point scale, whether they agreed on the following statements: the advertisements by Minerva have the intention to inform, to entertain, to influence and to sell (1 = not at all, 5 = totally). According to Van Reijmersdal et al, the primary intention of advertisers is to influence consuming behaviour and to sell. Therefore the items inform and entertain were reverse coded. In this way, respondents scoring low on these items and scoring high on the items influence and sell had a high understanding of persuasion. Factor analysis showed that the items loaded on two factors, but both factors were not reliable: inform and entertain ( =.28), influence and sell ( =.36). Therefore, the measures for understanding specific persuasive intent were excluded from further analysis. The same statements where shown to respondents but for advertising in general: ( Advertisements in general have the intention to: ). Again, no single measure could be created for understanding persuasive intent as no reliability was found for the items combined ( =.25). Although two combined items (influence and sell) had sufficient reliability ( =.69, M = 4.55, SD =.60) the variability within this measure was too limited (almost everybody scored higher than 4) to use the items as indicators for understanding general 15

16 persuasion knowledge. Therefore, also the measures for understanding general persuasion knowledge had to be excluded. Specific scepticism - Respondents scepticism about the advertisement in this experiment was measured with nine items previously used by Obermiller and Spangenberg (1998). On a seven-point scale participants had to indicate to what extent they agreed with the statements that the advertisement(s) in the experiment were: honest, unreliable, convincing, implausible, informative, sincere, misleading, obtrusive, reliable (1 = totally disagree, 7 = totally agree). The positive items (honest, convincing, informative, sincere and reliable) were reverse coded to create nine items for scepticism. Items were averaged to create one measure for specific scepticism ( =.79, M = 3.32, SD =.75). General scepticism - The same questions were asked for scepticism about advertising in general and again positive items were reversed. All nine items were averaged to create a measure for general scepticism toward advertisement ( =.73, M = 4.16, SD =.68) Self-reported recognition of persuasion As an addition to the existing measures for persuasion knowledge, respondents were asked to indicate their own recognition of persuasion in general by three statements: I think about how advertisements try to persuade me/ I think about the consequences of advertisements/ I easily recognize different techniques of persuasion. On a five-point scale they could point out how these statements fit their personality (1 = does not fit me, 7 = fits me). Items all loaded on the same factor (EV = 2.28, R 2 =.76) and scores were averaged to create one measure for selfreported persuasion knowledge ( =.84, M = 3.02, SD = 1.18). Involvement Involvement with the bicycle as product category was assessed with the involvement scale from Zaichkowsky (1985). The scale was adjusted to measure involvement with ten sevenpoint bipolar questions: For me, the product category Bicycle is Important / unimportant, boring/ interesting, relevant/irrelevant, exciting/ unexciting, means nothing to me/ means a lot to me, fascinating/ ordinary, appealing/ unappealing, worthless/ valuable, unnecessary/ necessary, and concerns me/ does not concern me. Six items were reverse coded (important, relevant, exciting, fascinating, appealing, concerns me) to create items for measuring 16

17 involvement (1 = very low involvement, 7 = very high involvement). The items were averaged to create one construct of involvement ( =.92, M = 4.04, SD = 1.23). Results Manipulation check The stimuli were designed such that respondents in the DITF condition (n = 59) would have a low purchase intention for the expensive bicycle (899 euro), at least significantly lower in comparison with the target bicycle (159 euro). In the FITD condition (n = 56) respondents should have a significantly higher intention to buy the cheap bicycle compared to the target bicycle. One-way within subjects ANOVA was used to compare the purchase intentions for the different advertisements. There was a significant effect of the advertisements on purchase intention in the DITF condition, Wilks Lambda = 0.55, F (1, 58) = 47.91, p < 0,001. People had significantly lower intention to buy the expensive bicycle (M = 2.03, SD = 1.22,) in comparison with the target bicycle (M = 3.87, SD = 1.81). No significance of type of advertisement on purchase intention was found for the FITD condition, Wilks Lambda = 0.99, F (1, 55) = 0.27, p = Against expectations people indicated that they did not have a higher intention to buy the cheap bicycle (M = 3.14, SD = 1.55) compared to the target bicycle (M = 3.19, SD = 1.79). The manipulation of the DITF condition was successful, but the manipulation of the FITD condition did not result in the desired effect. People s buying intention toward the cheap bicycle on average was too low and should have been significantly higher than the purchase intention for the target bicycle. Unfortunately, this means that the manipulation for the FITD did not work as intended. Therefore, the hypotheses will be tested only for DITF. Nevertheless, the FITD results will be discussed to see if any meaningful results can be derived from this data. However, no sound conclusions can be drawn on the whole condition. Control variables Correlation analysis between the variables was performed to check to what extent involvement with bicycles and age explained variance in purchase intention, A ad and A b. As can be seen in Table 1, people with high involvement had a more positive A ad and A b. The variability in purchase intention for the target bicycle is not explained by involvement, but there is a significant negative correlation between age and purchase intention for the target bicycle. It seems that when people get older, they have less intention to buy this bicycle. So 17

18 involvement has to be controlled for when analysing A ad and A b and age has to be controlled for when analysing purchase intention. Table 1 Correlations between control variables and dependent variables Measure Purchase intention A ad A b Involvement * 0.270* Age * Note. *p <0.001 Test of main DITF hypotheses: Purchase intention My first hypothesis stated that respondents that were exposed to an initial large request (DITF) would have a higher purchase intention for the target request compared to the respondents that only saw the target request. A one-way between subjects ANOVA was performed in order to find differences in purchase intention with age as a control variable. Results, as shown in Table 2, demonstrate that purchase intention for the target request was significantly higher in the DITF condition (M = 3.87, SD = 1.81) compared to the control condition (M = 3.19, SD = 1.59). My first hypothesis can thus be confirmed for the DITF condition. Attitude toward the advertisement and the brand According to my second hypothesis, A ad and A b would not differ significantly between conditions. A one-way between subjects ANOVA was performed with involvement as a control variable. As can be seen in table 1, there is almost no difference between the conditions for both A ad and A b. Therefore, the second hypothesis can be confirmed for the DITF principle. Table 2 Mean (and standard deviation) between conditions n = 172 Control (n = 57) DITF (n = 59) FITD (n = 56) Purchase intention 3.19 a 3.87 b 3.14 a (1.59) (1.81) (1.55) A ad 4.20 a 4.21 a 4.11 a (1.02) (0.99) (0.95) A b 4.24 a 4.10 a 4.21 a (0.98) (0.79) (0.76) Note ab Means in the same row with a different superscript differ significantly. F p

19 Persuasion knowledge and purchase intention The third hypothesis stated that persuasion knowledge would moderate the effect of compliance principles on purchase intention, such that respondents in the FITD and DITF condition would have lower purchase intention than respondents in the control condition when persuasion knowledge is high compared to when persuasion knowledge is low. Separate between subjects ANOVA s were performed to analyze the possible moderation effect of specific scepticism, general scepticism and self-reported persuasion knowledge. Again, age was added as a control variable. As can be seen in Table 3, no interaction effect was found between any of the three persuasion knowledge variables and condition. Therefore, my third hypothesis has to be rejected. The only measure of persuasion knowledge that had a significant main effect on purchase intention was specific scepticism. Correlation analysis shows that these two variables are negatively correlated (r = -0.28), p < 0.001), such that the higher the specific scepticism, the lower the purchase intention. Table 3 Analysis of Variance for purchase intention df F p Specific Scepticism condition (0 = control, 1 = DITF) specific scepticism condition x specific scepticism General Scepticism condition (0 = control, 1 = DITF) general scepticism condition x general scepticism Self-Reported Persuasion knowledge (self PK) condition (0 = control, 1 = DITF) self PK condition x self PK Persuasion knowledge and attitude In the fourth hypothesis it was expected that persuasion knowledge would moderate the effect of compliance principles on A ad and A b, such that respondents in the FITD and DITF condition would have lower A ad and A b than respondents in the control condition when persuasion knowledge is high compared to when persuasion knowledge is low. Again, multiple between subjects ANOVA s were performed to analyze the possible moderation effect of specific scepticism, general scepticism and self-reported persuasion knowledge. 19

20 Involvement was added as a control variable. As can be seen in table 4, there was only an interaction effect of condition and specific scepticism on brand attitude. Table 4 Analysis of Variance A ad df F p Specific Scepticism condition (0 = control, 1 = DITF) specific scepticism condition x specific scepticism General Scepticism condition (0 = control, 1 = DITF) general scepticism condition x general scepticism (Self PK) condition (0 = control, 1 = DITF) self PK condition x self PK Analysis of Variance A b Specific Scepticism condition (0 = control, 1 = DITF) specific scepticism condition x specific scepticism General Scepticism condition (0 = control, 1 = DITF) general scepticism Condition x general scepticism Self PK condition (0 = control, 1 = DITF) self PK condition x self PK Simple slopes for the association between condition and A b were tested for low (-1 SD below the mean) and high (+1 SD above the mean) levels of specific scepticism. As can be seen in Figure 1, respondents with low levels of specific scepticism had a more positive A b in the control condition compared to the DITF condition and respondents with high levels of specific scepticism had a more positive A b in the DITF condition compared to the control condition. The unstandardized simple slope for respondents 1 SD below the mean of specific scepticism was -0.39, t (113) = -1.89, p = 0.014, and the unstandardized simple slope for respondents 1 SD above the mean of specific scepticism was 0.32, t (113) = 1.55, p = These results were contrary to my expectations, so the fourth hypothesis had to be rejected. 20

21 Figure 1 Measures of persuasion knowledge The fifth hypothesis stated that there would be a positive correlation between self-reported persuasion knowledge and general persuasion knowledge (understanding/ scepticism). Since the scale of general understanding knowledge did not prove reliable, correlation analysis was only performed to test the relation between self-reported persuasion knowledge and general scepticism. Results show that a weak positive correlation was found between the two variables (r =.15, p = 0.045). Although the effect is weak, the fifth hypothesis can be partially confirmed. Results of FITD Manipulation of the FITD did not work as planned, because on average the purchase intention for the target bicycle (169 euro) was higher than for the cheap bicycle (69 euro) instead of the other way around. However, a closer look at the data reveals that people who had a high purchase intention for the cheap bike (n = 21, purchase intention > 4) also had a relatively high purchase intention for the target bike (M = 3.98, SD = 1.47). Although this cannot be compared to the other conditions, the intention of this group is higher than the average of the control condition (M = 3.19) and even higher than the average of the DITF condition (M = 3.87). However, no statistical significance can be estimated for this difference, as this group does not represent the whole FITD condition. 21

22 Another remarkable aspect of the FITD data was the fact that people aged 30 years and younger (n = 34, M = 3.61, SD = 1.65) were more likely to buy the cheap bike compared to people aged older than 30 (n = 22, M = 2.12, SD = 1.64), t = 3.30, p = In spite of this, there was no significant difference on the purchase intention of the target bike between the younger respondents (M = 3.21, SD = 1.43) and the older respondents (M = 3.05, SD = 1.75), t = 0.38, p = To check if any hypothesized effects for the FITD could be found for young respondents, the effects of the compliance principles were measured, excluding every respondent older than 30. As no significance was found for the FITD condition for any of the hypotheses, no further results are reported. Consequently, all hypotheses for the FITD condition have to be rejected. Conclusion & Discussion The aim of this study was to analyze how FITD and DITF techniques influence people s purchase intention, A ad and A b in a commercial setting. Persuasion knowledge was studied as a moderator in this process. In line with my first hypothesis, results show that the DITF technique was effective in raising purchase intention. Furthermore it was found that there was no difference in attitude toward the advertisement or the brand between the DITF and the control condition. These findings support the second hypothesis. The third hypothesis stated that respondents in the DITF condition would have lower purchase intention than the respondents in the control condition when persuasion knowledge was high compared to when persuasion knowledge was low. Against expectations no significant interaction between the conditions and any of the persuasion knowledge variables was found. The expectation of the fourth hypothesis was that people in the DITF condition would have lower A ad and A b than the people in the control condition when persuasion knowledge was high compared to when persuasion knowledge was low. Only one of the persuasion knowledge variables, specific scepticism, was moderating the effect of compliance principles on A b. However, contrary to the expectations, people that were more sceptical on the advertisements scored higher on A b in the DITF condition compared to the control condition. Finally, the fifth hypothesis stated that self-reported persuasion knowledge was related to the general measures of scepticism and understanding. This hypothesis was partially supported as a weak association was found between self-reported persuasion knowledge and general scepticism. In line with the many studies that have shown DITF effectiveness (O Keefe & Hale, 2001), my study demonstrates that making an initial request, which is likely to be rejected, 22

23 before making the target request is effective in raising compliance. Yet, attitude toward the advertisement and the brand did not differ between the conditions. It seems that people can be influenced by a DITF strategy to have a higher purchase intention without being affected in their attitude. These results are in contrast with earlier findings from Cialdini et al. (1992) who showed that attitude predicted compliance. The fact that attitude was not affected in this study might indicate that the DITF technique can subconsciously increase purchase intention, as Rodafinos (2005) already mentioned. Furthermore, this study shows that the DITF technique can be effective for commercial purposes. This is in line with earlier research from Ebster and Neumayr (2008). In addition, the findings of this study show that no interpersonal contact is necessary to increase compliance by a DITF strategy. This was already shown before (Guéguen, 2002), but to date, this is the first study that proves that the DITF technique can be effective by the employment of advertisements. The results implicate that intrapersonal factors play an important role in determining the effectiveness of DITF. This is in line with the perceptual contrast hypothesis, which was discarded in earlier research (Lecat et al., 2009). The findings indicate that the reciprocity principle should not necessarily be considered as the most influential theoretical construct in DITF strategies. In this research it was also assessed how persuasion knowledge could influence people s reaction on DITF strategies, because it was expected that people who were suspicious of the persuasive intentions of the advertiser, would respond more negative toward the request. The fact that this was not the case might be explained by different factors. First, it could be that the compliance principles were not recognized as such, irrespective of the level of persuasion knowledge. My results showed that people with high persuasion knowledge had a higher A b in the DITF condition than in the control condition. This finding suggests that people with high persuasion knowledge may not have been aware of the influence strategy. However, because the measure for understanding the persuasive intent of the advertisements was not reliable, there was no possibility to check if people understood to what extent they were influenced. Second, it could be that the measures that were shaped to measure people s persuasion knowledge were not good indicators for people s actual knowledge about persuasion. This research used scepticism and understanding of persuasive intent to assess persuasion knowledge on an advertisement specific level and a general level. In addition an extra item was added to assess self-reported persuasion knowledge. Results showed that the scales that were supposed to measure respondents understanding of persuasive intent, were far from 23