Robert B. Cialdini

The standard text on persuasion has a new chapter on affinity. That makes sense with marketing's sharper focus on purpose, but marketing psychology guru Cialdini doesn't provide much encouragement. Tribalism and shared grievances are motivators; people think in terms of race instead of the human race. As with any other form of influence, this makes us easy to con, but the author believes that forewarned is forearmed. Cialdini would love journalists and designers to refocus attention on our show more need for connections across groups. "Am I being naive here?" he concludes. "Maybe. But maybe not." I'm with you, man. show less

Robert Cialdini, Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade: Cialdini’s Influence is one of the best books on how to get people to buy things (and do things, but often operationalized in buying things) there is. Here, Cialdini more explicitly targets the persuaders, versus the persuaded, and argues that there are key moves made before any request that influence its chances of success. One might wonder about his touting of the utility of expertise, given the current show more nightmare of “screw the experts” we’re living in, but otherwise it’s a really powerful read. Indeed, it provides reinforcement for some other lessons from the 2016 election: there is strong evidence that people do agree that whatever the media focuses on is really important (but her emails!), related to the larger phenomenon that what is prominent is seen as important and causal. Thus, for example, the practice of embedding journalists with troops in the war on Iraq led to many more stories, proportionally, about the troops’ lives and tactics, and fewer about the overall nature of the war, with similar consequences for American opinion.

Unsurprisingly, lots of persuasion is about similarity, and we are really vulnerable to similarities that are irrelevant, like salespeople with similar names to ours, or ethnic backgrounds. Women are twice as likely to friend a man who contacts them on Facebook if he claims to have the same birthday, and people prefer foods with names that share letters of the alphabet with their own names. If you saw all those Coke bottles with names, they produced the first increase in US Coke sales in a decade. The best factoid here: In 2004, Rolling Stone listed the greatest 500 songs of the rock era, and the two highest ranked were Dylan’s “Like a Rolling Stone” and the Rolling Stones’ “(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction,” and of ten similar lists, none of them picked either as the top choices.

Persuasion is also about fluency—the ease with which we understand something influences its believability. That’s why rhymes are more persuasive. More than getting targets to like you, selling requires targets to believe you like them, and similarities and compliments produce these beliefs—targets believe that if you like them, you will steer them well. Social proof, where we follow others and also improve our behavior if shown that others around us are behaving well, is not just about our belief in the wisdom of crowds; it shows that improvement is feasible for people like us.

How do we come to see others as within the circle of “us”? Cialdini tells the story of the Japanese civil servant Chiune Sugihara, who wrote visas for hundreds of Jews even as it destroyed his career, and suggests that the foundation of his acts was at least in part his childhood in Korea, where his family operated an inn: he routinely saw others within his home, expanding his sense of family. Likewise, he argues, the Jewish refugees in Japan saved themselves when a Nazi representative in Tokyo suggested brutal repression by a rabbi’s response to an official’s questions, Why do our allies the Nazis hate you so much and why should we side with you? The rabbi’s response, he reports, was “Because we are Asian, like you.” This triggered the officials’ understandings of white racism against the Japanese and led them to reject the Nazi entreaties. If he’s right, the circle of “us” is not irredeemably closed, with the right techniques.

Less politically charged: if you want to use sex to sell, sex is associated with individuality/standing out because it triggers mental patterns about showing off/being chosen. Distinctiveness-based appeals should therefore be associated with non-frightening stimuli; in general, “don’t be left out” ads work better if people are frightened, so show those social proof ads with horror movies and sex/“show your distinctiveness” ads with romantic movies. To persuade someone, first intrigue them with a mystery: pose the mystery, deepen the mystery, consider and offer evidence against alternative explanations, then give them clues about the proper explanation and resolve the mystery. So, for example, tobacco consumption rose after TV ads for tobacco were banned. Why? The fairness doctrine: anti-smoking ads had been running as often as tobacco ads, and they were persuasive; removing persuasive counter-arguments was more helpful for tobacco sales than keeping the ads.

Cialdini also argues against abusing these techniques out of enlightened self-interest, though he recognizes that short-termism among business leaders makes this a hard sell. He argues that businesses that cheat their clients end up experiencing employee underperformance (from demoralization), excessive turnover, and employee malfeasance (since if cheating is ok, it’s fine to cheat the boss), with some very suggestive study results supporting that, as well as intuition. I guess we’ll have a chance to look at all of that in the White House these next four years. PS: Among other studies, he cites evidence that income inequality leads lower-income people to put less trust in others, since they didn’t believe others would be fair—and this meant that “[s]tudents in schools in geographic regions characterized by large income inequality are more likely to visit online sites that provide them ways to cheat,” apparently because they have lower trust in others and think everyone’s doing it. show less

Interesting anecdotes about influence and preemptive persuasion. I've read a few books like this recently, and I confess I hit my limit with this one. This isn't a practical guide to anything, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but does mean that you have to have a pretty dedicated cerebral interest to stay engaged. It was a slow read for me.

This review is based on the Blinkist version of the book...thus a summary and my review needs to be qualified as such. Presumably the original full text has much more details and research.....but it also takes much longer to read. If I like the Blinkist version, I might seek out and read the full book. Meantime here are a few nuggets that particularly struck me:
The ability of marketers to influence your mood for their own benefit is known as pre-suasion–but this technique can be used by show more just about anyone.....The positive test strategy, which is designed to take advantage of our natural tendency to focus on what is present, rather than what is missing......To phrase it another way: We look for hits, not misses. So, if someone asks “Are you unhappy?” it prompts us to search for the presence of unhappiness, not the lack of unhappiness.
Cult recruiters aren’t the only ones who exploit this human tendency; telemarketers, pollsters and salespeople also take advantage of it. Such seemingly simple questions are also known as single-chute questions, which can manipulate us into confirming the very thing they are trying to prove.
A 1993 study shows this principle.....One group was asked whether they were unhappy with their social lives; the other was asked whether they were happy with their social lives. Remarkably, members of the first group proved to be 375 percent more likely to report unhappiness than those in the second group.......when a question like this is asked, it’s to influence how someone pictures himself before asking him to make a decision. This is why they’re called “pre-suasive” questions.
Before the pitch, some test subjects were asked if they saw themselves as adventurous people who like to try new things–and 75.7 percent of them tried the drink and gave their email. Those who weren’t asked this pre-suasive lead-in question were much less likely to go along with the marketers. A mere 33 percent tried the drink and gave their email.
We give relevance to the things that catch our attention–a tendency that also means your response will differ depending on what’s going on around you when you’re asked......for example, someone mentions the myriad dangers in the world before asking you to make an important decision, he might be trying to talk you into (or out of) something......and someone selling intruder alarms will probably start their pitch with crime statistics.
So keep this in mind the next time an extremist group, or, for that matter, anything else, is suddenly getting a lot of attention in the media; there’s a good chance it won’t seem nearly as important next month......“Nothing in life is as important as you think it is while you are thinking about it.”-Daniel Kahneman, 2002 Nobel Prize recipient in Economic Sciences.
Classical economics tells us that the primary motivation for human behaviour is financial self-interest..But are human beings really that simple? Chances are, there are less obvious factors we must consider when we look at our behavior and motivations. [This section of the book doesn’t really seem to deliver what the chapter heading says......there is really no evidence here for motivations other than money....though I’m sure that many people would value their principles more highly than money]. But our sense of moral and social obligation can easily be overshadowed by money, since, unlike hard cold cash, these feelings aren’t tangible.
A successful pre-suader is keenly aware of each word she uses and the mental associations those words will trigger in her interlocutor.......A recent study led by psycholinguist Gün Semin concludes that the primary purpose of speech is to direct the attention of listeners to certain aspects of reality. Once this has been done, these new aspects connect with the things the listener already associates with this bit of reality, and this combination of associations and new information dictate the listener’s ultimate reaction.
In one test involving aggressive words, those who’d been exposed to the aggressive words decided upon levels [of punishment] that were 48-percent higher than the other group. In short, mere exposure to certain words affected people’s decisions.
Our environment, or external geography, is likely to prompt associations in our mind, which means it can also be used to pre-suade yourself or your employees.......a pleasant, open environment is in and of itself an incentive to good work. [Sea views vs brick wall]. But along with our external geography, there’s also internal geography that can be used to influence performance. Our internal geography includes our attitude, expectations, prejudices and memories, all of which consist of both happy and sad components. And just as we can direct our own attention to, say, a happy or sad memory, we can direct the attention of others toward or away from them as well......Several happiness studies have shown that we feel better when we focus on what we possess rather than on what we lack.....There are many ways in which to manipulate the environment and a person’s thoughts in order to get a desired result, but you need to start before you ask the big question. So make sure your audience is receptive by choosing a suitable location and setting the stage so that their attention is directed to exactly what you want them to see and think about.
The key message in this book: Pre-suasion is the art of priming someone to do something by executing certain directive actions, or uttering certain directive sentences, before the actual moment when that person has to make a decision. This is pre-suasion: setting the stage and putting the pieces into place, thus getting people to say, or do, what you want.
Actionable advice: Invite consumers to give advice instead of an opinion. Many companies try to bond with their customers by asking for their opinion. But this is an introspective act, one that ultimately directs their attention toward their own needs. So, instead, ask them for their advice, which prompts them to put themselves in your shoes, creating a more genuine bond.
My take on this book. Initially I thought it was a bit trite and obvious but the more I got into it the more I appreciated with subtlety of the arguments and how useful they could be in persuading others. A really useful message about happiness being related to focusing on what we have rather than what we lack. Four Stars from me. show less