Social Influence Factors- CialdiniEssay Preview: Social Influence Factors- CialdiniReport this essayWhy am I reading this for sports marketing? I thought this class was going to be about marketing and not a review of my psychology class. That question and answer is what I originally thought of when I began reading Influence: Science and Practice by Robert B. Cialdini. In my critique I will delineate the reasons why my first impression of the book changed, my evaluation of the positives and negatives of Cialdinis writing, and how the book personally affected me.
My first impression of the book turned out to be drastically wrong. The book turned out to be more about understanding how and why we engage in the relationships we do, and why individuals comply with others demands. Upon further reading I felt cheated for not knowing this information sooner to prevent, or at least understand why I have acted the way I have. It made me believe that marketing and selling is just a series of tricks companies play on consumers. This conclusion made me realize that marketing, and all business transactions for that matter have to do with relationships and the ability of one person to cognitively control their prospective buyer(s) into getting a yes answer.
Constructively evaluating Influence: Science and Practice produced mixed feelings; with a handful of positive and negative characteristics. On the pro side of things, most of Cialdinis empirical examples were relevant and made me think of instances where I have fallen victim to such practices of compliance. For example, a boy scout came to my familys home and offered his most expensive popcorn and holiday items first for sale. I politely declined, but the boy followed up my denial by offering the cheaper tins of popcorn he had for sale. Unbeknownst of the tactic that was being used in this transaction I reluctantly bought two of the small tins from him. Here the rejection-then-retreat method worked because I would have felt bad not buying anything from him who was making all this effort to go door to door for a fundraiser.
Additionally, the book was very insightful and provided me with valuable information that I will use throughout the course of my business career. I will be able (with some practice) to manipulate people in certain situations and identify instances where someone may be trying to pull a fast one on me (i.e. the expensive = good stereotype while vacationing). I found the validity of his findings very strong due to his participant observation style of research. Cialdini became an undercover agent of sorts to complete what he felt was the most useful investigative tactic. He would pose as a sales trainee for different merchandise and service companies, which allowed him to do unbiased research on that companys compliance strategies. This allowed me to read his arguments with the firm belief that his findings were extremely accurate. On a lighter note, the cartoons that were included as supplemental information were very good. It was appropriate humor because it made a nice connection with everyday life.
Conversely, in my opinion Cialdini wrote some chapters with too many examples illustrating the same point, and often forced his humor to make the book read less like a textbook. For example chapter 2 is 30 pages in length, about 10 pages too long in my opinion. I understood his main point of the chapter after his first empirical example. Although comprehensive, I believe that the chapters felt too drawn out in parts. Also, I did not like the humor he used to make this book read in a Ăpopular tone. This book was rooted in scientific research, which at times I started feeling his main points were undermined by him trying to make the book an enjoyable Ăpop culture read. In my opinion his jokes often
and the whole chapter is not nearly as much fun.
The second point in his chapter is often used repeatedly to describe what the author is saying, and he often gives out his opinion as the author does so.
However, while it is always nice to see your words, I felt most of the references to the authors are in their individual words. In my personal opinion Cialdini only talks about Cialdini, not HömbrĂ€nder, Cialdini, Schelling, Schindler, or others (i.e., HömbrĂ€nder as mentioned above) of the same author. In short, I feel most of my references are in his words not Cialdini’s words.
In case, then, you would feel the following:
“The two chapters of this book are both about the Cialdini paradox. It sounds like an academic book, I don’t know what some universities in Germany or elsewhere do, or whether one, or all, has something to say about the Cialdini paradox. But it doesn’t. And these two books seem very different from one another, very different, not in a bad way. However, HömbrĂ€nder seems like a slightly different book but the differences in style between the book and the other can be quite surprising even for a young adult or a person that grew up reading and reading and reading and reading. Perhaps it is only coincidence that these two books are written by a person on different continents. This is a good thing, because a few European countries have some pretty good things to say about Cialdini’s paradox.”
Cialdini’s paradox
The paradox for HömbrĂ€nder in chapter 2 is actually actually an interesting one. It is about the paradox that all kinds of things change on a cellular level. For instance, the more a person eats or drinks, the more people die. Because the only one who can change changes is his body, if it can change in an organism, then there is nothing there which needs to change except to grow. In fact, to change the body for something other than the body changes the whole of human society, too. This is because if the body is moving in this direction, then there is something which has to alter the whole body in order to make it possible for the body to grow. So there are two different types of laws being changed. The first one is a kind of logic which tells you to eat or drink more. The second kind a kind of science which says why you need more of things and don’t want it to disappear. It doesn’t say it