How to persuade others

Robert Cialdini

Introduction and some context

The NPR program Freakonomics Radio Book Club broadcast an interview with social psychologist Robert Cialdini, professor emeritus of Psychology and Marketing at Arizona State University. Cialdini is a leading expert on persuasion science, i.e., what sensory inputs leads people to be susceptible to persuasion by others. He just published an updated and expanded 2021 edition of his 1984 classic book, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. The 50 minute Book Club interview is here. 

The influence of Cialdini's original 1984 book is evidenced by the fact that marketers and manipulators the world over have used his book as a source of manipulation inspiration. Cialdini got interested in persuasion science after he became self-aware that he was being manipulated and controlled by all sorts of influence peddlers. He was baffled about why he was such a sucker. In the new edition of his book, Cialdini acknowledges what he unleashed as weapons for bad guys, e.g., dictators. demagogues, liars, deceivers, emotional manipulators, etc. To acknowledge what his book unleashed on all of us, he tries to deal with innate human badness and evil by adding a new chapter to the old book that focuses on the ethics of improper or immoral persuasion. 

Obviously, pointing to ethics is not going to faze demagogues, dictators, deceivers, etc. in the slightest. American commerce and politics is far past the point of meaningful ethics in this regard. The only meaningful ethics left are the rule of law and caveat emptor. Unfortunately those lines of defense are crumbling in real time before our eyes. But, at least Cialdini gives ethics (morality) the good 'ole college try. He correctly points out that all or nearly all information can be used for good, bad, frivolous, crime, altruism, truth telling, oppression, bigotry, deceit and whatever else specific information can be used for. 

Note that specific information includes social behavior. Humans are social creatures and most of us act accordingly but unconsciously on social cues most of the time. 

Based on the interview, my read on Caialdini’s current mindset and new book is that he is an astute intellectual successor who builds on a combination of (i) the 1910s-1970s master propagandist Edward Bernays (Crystallizing Public Opinion, 1923) and his contemporary and successor propagandists, and (ii) sociologist Peter Berger (Invitation to Sociology, 1963) and his social science predecessors, cohort and successors, including prominent cognitive and social science researchers of the human mind and/or politics such as Daniel Khaneman (Thinking, Fast and Slow, 2011), Philip Tetlock, (Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction, 2015) Johnathan Haidt (The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion, 2012), Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels (Democracy for Realists: Why Elections do not Produce Responsive Governments, 2016) and others.

Some examples

To try to keep this fairly short (readable) but still meaningful, a couple of examples are probably best to use. According to Cialdini, the art of invoking a mostly mindless state of compliance and belief boils down to appeal to a few innate human biases, or “principles.” Marketers and political, religious, and economic propagandists routinely resort to these biases. Some readers here may recall the human bias list or codex I used to use to try to point out the messiness of how the unconscious human mind thinks.

 

For purposes of understanding influence or persuasion, ignore that list. Cialdini finds there are just seven unconscious biases or “levers of influence” that professional marketers, recruiters, propagandists and the like need to appeal to in their quest for money, power, recruits, deceit, sex and other fun goals. Without some explanation, these won't make much or any sense, but here's the list anyway: reciprocation, liking (~ the halo effect), social proof, authority, scarcity, commitment and consistency, and unity. Proper invocation of any of those seven tends to lead to a distinct, unconscious (automatic) “mindless compliance” in some or most people. People tend to just say “yes” without first thinking when any one of the seven levers of influence (psychological principles) are applied to them.

Reciprocity

Cialdini did three years of research by posing as a trainee in training programs in different industries. Within 6 months, he perceived all the levers of influence that professionals use in their training programs. He got these people to willingly tell him their secret techniques by applying the reciprocity lever. As one might imagine, professional politicians, trainers and recruiters usually don't want people to know how they get people to say yes. Marketers don’t want customers to know how they have been played into buying something they might not have bough if they weren’t manipulated. Demagogues, dictators and autocrats absolutely do not want people to know that they are being played and manipulated.

Reciprocity boils down to this: people instinctively want to give back what has been given to them in terms of behavior. Reciprocity is universal across cultures. What did Cialdini give the experts that, with 100% effectiveness, got the professional persuaders to spill their guts and knowingly tell their secrets of persuasion? He told them he was just a university professor doing research and not a real trainee. He said he came to the real experts to learn from them. Cialdini gave the professionals something, flattery in this case, and in return Cialdini freely got the information he wanted. 

Gifts from pharmaceutical company salespeople to prescribing doctors effectively induces the doctors to prescribe more of the company’s drugs. The gift can be a a free lunch to the doctor or their office staff. Research has also documented the same phenomenon with legislators. Gifts or donations to legislators induces them to give something back. A key point about reciprocity and the other six levers is that a small thing used as the lever tends to net a significantly larger return. 

Social proof

Here, social behavior is at play. If we perceive, correctly or not, that lots of other people more or less like us are doing something or believe something, the tendency is to do or believe the same. One study found the only thing that affected whether people would wear a mask in public during the COVID pandemic was whether most other people around them were wearing masks. Whether people believed the virus was a serious or not, or spread by air and masks reduce infection rate, did not matter. The only thing that mattered (made a statistically significant difference) was what other people were doing.

Research has now shown that in general, people who watch a presidential debate on TV are significantly swayed by audience applause. Whether a candidate the audience applauds is informed or not or is a crackpot or not doesn't matter. What matters is audience reaction. The human mind evolved to be responsive to the behavior of others and to fall in line with that behavior. 

Social proof is reflected in the presence of hired responders or “clacks” in theater, opera and other audiences. The responders enthusiastically act (laugh, cry, applaud, shout for an encore, etc.) to get the whole audience to respond similarly. Professional clacks are hired for their specific abilities, crying on cue or infectious laughing on cue, etc.

Social proof was a significant part of what got the German people to go along with the Nazis. We all know how that worked out. Social proof in places where people tend to refuse to get vaccinated, e.g., states that voted for T****, lead others in the state to not get vaccinated. 

Cialdini calls the social proof that the internet easily generates a “big, big problem.” Society has not caught up to the reality that they are being played in real life and in online life, in politics and most everything else. For example, the most persuasive number of stars in 5 star online produce or service reviews, e.g., Yelp, is 4.2 to 4.7. Five stars is too good for credibility. Smart businesses know how to get the average rating to the sweet spot.

Social proof for the public good sometimes backfires. Too many public service ads or news items that emphasize suicides or mass shootings tends to increase suicides and mass shootings. A notices at a national park entrance that people should not take artifacts because too many people are taking artifacts, leads some to want to take some artifacts before they are all gone. 

Question: Since social proof in pro-T**** states is a significant part of what leads people in those states to not wear a mask and not get vaccinated, is that mostly the fault of T**** and his anti-COVID propagandists, or mostly the fault of affected people because they are responsible for their own arguably stupid or bad behavior?

As monkeys see, I find that monkeys will do…

 

Strong personalities rule the world. What do I mean by “strong personalities”?  I mean “leader types” versus “follower types.”  Without follower types, leader types would be up the infamous creek without a paddle, and with no one to follow them. Leaders need willing followers to, for better or worse, get their positive/negative agendas passed. 

This phenomenon can be seen in all walks of life. From office politics to world stage politics, strong personalities set the tone for the rest of us. In every office I’ve ever worked in, and I’ve worked in many, I’ve seen it in action. If our office had a positive influential (strong personality) leader, things ran smoothly. If we had a negative influential (strong personality) leader, hardly anyone got along, and everyone pretty much hated their job. Just as the media can, I believe strong personalities can “make or break” any system, in that way.

Let’s look at the world stage now. Take the last five-ish (I’d call them hellish) years. What’s happened to the U.S. society with the strong negative influential leadership in Trump?  (When I say "negative," I believe I speak for the bulk of the world here, according to international polls.)  What’s happened is that we’ve devolved; taken those “two steps back” versus any single steps we’ve managed to take forward up until now. And why?  Because of a negative influential strong personality leader in one Donald J. Trump.  

Like the dysfunctional office, we are not happy campers.  Everyone is suspicious of everyone else.  No one wants to work together toward common goals. We all “want out” from the “opposing thumb” of the other.  But we can’t get out (of the world). It’s our permanent “office.”  

So where am I going with all this?  Well, I want to know what YOU think is the fix to our status quo:

First, do you think the status quo even needs fixing?  If yes, where do we find positive strong personalities to lead us out of the dysfunction?  

Do you see Biden, now, as the strong Yin to counter Trump's ongoing nasty Yang?  Or, has Biden no hope of undoing the influence of a heretofore strong negative personality leader?  

Has the cement now hardened and any “positive influence ship” has sailed, never to return back to port?  Where is our Roy Cohn Hundredth Monkey to save us?  If s/he exists, who is that influential positive leader?

Thanks for posting and recommending.

The Cost of the Reset

As I build and write code for little smart gadgets I wonder how much of this work will become swept up and destroyed along with all the rest of everything in the wake of what is coming.

My little Library of Alexandria, yours, your family's - they're about to burn.

We're staring down the business end of catastrophic social upheaval and the possible end of democracy in the United States as we know it. That doesn't come without cost.

All of the stupid, hidebound and relentlessly paternal white supremacy, pretending to be complacent when it is coddled, will destroy everything the minute it is threatened. 

And it is threatened. Demographics is a dragon no ideology can slay. 

And here we are, as awful and frustrating as it is inevitable, the backlash of white power against the threat of a multiracial dominant order is determined to destroy everything rather than cede any ground.

You. Me. And not just us, but anything we create. Because when they want to destroy what you represent, they won't just come for you, but they'll come for everything that in any way reflects you.

We're going to let it happen because we must. What we see as stupid and willful ignoring of an existential threat by the powers that be (such as the Biden admin and Merrick Garland in particular) is just them hopelessly following the math of it. We need the reset, as much as a volcano eventually needs the eruption. We can't contain it forever, and we're at the point now where the center doesn't hold. 

We all have a role to play. Theirs is to play the part of the Weimar Republican leaders, ours the German citizens some of whom can see what's coming, but are no better for it, and the opposition fascists to be played by the the GQP.

It's all going to burn. We're well past votes fixing anything.

An update: The fall of the rule of law

The Biden administration is making it clear that it will not take the rule of law seriously. It is now actively protecting the ex-president from prosecution for his crimes. The Washington Post writes:

For Donald Trump’s entire presidency, top congressional Democrats used every tool at their disposal to investigate the Washington hotel he leased from the federal government, issuing subpoenas, holding hearings and filing a lawsuit to try to bring the inner workings of Trump’s luxury property to light.

The efforts were framed as a defense of democracy itself. Rep. Peter A. DeFazio (D-Ore.) said the Trump administration’s refusal to provide documents “was not just disconcerting but an affront to the democratic institutions that the United States has been founded upon.” Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) said the lawsuit, filed in federal court, was “in pursuit of justice to make sure our committee can fulfill its duty to the American people.”

None of it worked — a testament to Trump’s willingness to fight at every turn. But now, with the Biden administration in place, Democrats’ efforts to unearth and make public the information haven’t gone much better.

Biden’s team has steadfastly defended some of the protections the Trump administration put in place to conceal Trump’s financial interests. The Justice Department under Biden is appealing a lower court judgment in favor of the congressional Democrats in their suit, another move by the agency to defend Trump-era legal positions. Biden’s General Services Administration, which holds the lease for the Trump International hotel, has provided only a portion of the documents Congress is seeking and asked that none of them be disclosed publicly.  

White House spokesman Andrew Bates declined to comment.

Since there is no explanation from Biden or the Department of Justice, one can assume that they are corrupted or subverted and maybe somehow coerced into protecting the crook. We are on the verge of the fall of democracy and the rule of law, and neither Biden nor the DoJ is willing to stand in their defense. The fascist GOP has no interest in the rule of law except to apply it to attack their political opposition. Biden and the DoJ are actively betraying us by cementing corruption and criminality as politically acceptable precedents. From here on out, a president really is above the law. A pox on Biden and the DoJ.

Afghanistan update: American incompetence, cruelty and arrogance is on display

Shoaib Walizada, who interpreted for the U.S. Army for four years, was among those turned down. “I get phone calls from the Taliban saying, ‘We will kill you’ — they know who I am and that I worked for the Americans,” he said.

Once the US is gone, there is going to be a bloodbath.  The New York Times writes:

KABUL, Afghanistan — It was an offhand comment, blurted out in frustration. It may have destroyed Shoaib Walizada’s chances of earning a cherished visa to the United States.

Mr. Walizada, who interpreted for the U.S. Army for four years until 2013, said that he had complained one day, using profanity, that his assigned combat vest was too small. When the episode came to light later that year, Mr. Walizada’s preliminary approval for a visa was revoked for “unprofessional conduct.”

Mr. Walizada, 31, is among thousands of Afghans once employed by the U.S. government, many as interpreters, whose applications for a Special Immigrant Visa, or S.I.V., through a State Department program, have been denied.

“I get phone calls from the Taliban saying, ‘We will kill you’ — they know who I am and that I worked for the Americans,” Mr. Walizada said. He has delayed marriage because he does not want to put a wife at risk, he said, and he has moved from house to house for safety.

The slightest blemish during years of otherwise stellar service can torpedo a visa application and negate glowing letters of recommendation from American commanders. In the last three months of 2020 alone, State Department statistics show, 1,646 Afghans were denied one of the special visas, which are issued to applicants satisfying demanding requirements and rigorous background checks even though interpreters would already have passed security screenings.  

Among reasons cited for denial were the failure to prove the required length of service, insufficient documentation, failure to establish “faithful and valuable service” and “derogatory information.” (emphasis added)

About 18,000 Afghans have applied for the visa they need to get out of the country. They now live in fear of being hunted down and slaughtered by the Taliban. Meanwhile, the US blithers, dithers, fumbles, stumbles and bumbles around at its arrogant, incompetent leisure. The now-inevitable tragedy just comes closer and closer.

A rot of arrogance, incompetence and mean spiritedness infests US military and State Department mindsets and operations. Apparently, fixing this is beyond the capacity of Biden and his administration. The US is projected to be fully withdrawn by mid-July. 

The fascist GOP has no interest in fixing things like this. Their priority is breaking things and establishing a fascist state, not fixing what is broken. The moral rot and the evil in American policy and operations is clear to see for anyone with the moral courage to actually look. So, a bloodbath it will be. 

Radical right accelerationist ideology: hell-bent on taking democracy down and replacing it with utopia

Prepping for doomsday, which is right now, not next week, month or year 

In my humble opinion, the election of the last president, a fascist, crook, traitor and liar, and his 1/6 coup attempt finally and fully opened Pandora’s box. The evil it and the complicit fascist GOP (FGOP) unleashed is still gushing out. The Democratic Party remains paralyzed, clueless and stymied by staunch FGOP, non-compromise opposition to any Democratic defense of democracy or the rule of law. The New York Times writes:

For QAnon it is “The Storm,” when mass violence will topple the elite cabal of pedophiles who they imagine to be running the government. White-power groups in the United States have long promised a catastrophic race war. And in Germany and Austria, neo-Nazis herald an imagined putsch on “Day X” — when the democratic order collapses and they take over.

All are examples of “accelerationist” ideologies, which promise a moment when the institutions of government, society and the economy will be wiped out in a wave of catastrophic violence, clearing the way for a utopia that will supposedly follow.

Accelerationism has long been a feature of white-power groups and other far-right militias. But now, experts say, accelerationist thinking is proliferating in ways that could threaten not just public safety, but the stability of democracy itself.

“In many ways we can see how Jan. 6 was a kind of loosely formed coalition around this idea of accelerationism,” said Cynthia Miller-Idriss, the director of the Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab at American University, said of the attack on the U.S. Capitol Building last January.  

Mainstream leaders, she believes, are failing to heed the risk that coalition could pose. “My fear is that we are, as a country, starting to treat that like a one-time fluke rather than as a potential turning point.”

“I have thought a lot about the parallels with the Weimar Republic,” the fragile period of democracy in Germany whose collapse allowed the Nazis to take power, she said. It was marked by a series of attacks, failed coups and other efforts to undermine democracy. And even though actions like Hitler’s beer-hall putsch failed, German democracy was ultimately not strong enough to withstand the chaos.
“For me, the parallel is that I think a lot of people want to see Jan. 6 as the end of something,” she said. “I think we have to consider the possibility that this was the beginning of something.” 

Neo-Nazi groups and other extremists have long spoken of Day X — a moment of crisis, both feared and longed for, when Germany’s social order would collapse, requiring committed far-right extremists, in their telling, to save the nation.

The NYT goes on to write that preparing for Day X and precipitating it is increasingly blurred. One expert on violence, democracy and civil society in Germany points out that accelerationism sanctifies violence. The radical right’s mythic days of reckoning are a call to action and an excuse for terrorism.
The expert asserts that “When Day X doesn’t come and people get frustrated, they might start plotting terrorist attacks, something to trigger Day X or just to act.”

Kathleen Belew, a University of Chicago historian and one of the foremost experts on the white-power movement in the United States asserts that one must understand that this kind of apocalyptic fantasy for believers is that a violent overthrow of democracy like Day X is not the thing what begins the apocalypse. It is what ends the apocalypse. Most of these radical right crackpots hate democracy and pluralism, and for some, maybe even secularism.

Belew comments that “all of this activism is already in a state of encounter with the end of the world.” The fear and hate-driven radicals point to immigration, intermarriage and falling birthrates as leading to a time when countries like the United States will no longer be majority white. She asserts that “for people in this ideology, that’s already the end of the world. That sense of emergency is really important to understand, because I think without that, the degree of — both the degree of fear and the degree of violence don’t make a lot of sense.”

The NYT goes on:

The bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995, which killed 168 people, including 19 children, was carried out by far-right militants who took inspiration from “The Turner Diaries,” a 1978 novel that depicts a violent revolution in the United States, followed by a mass genocide of nonwhite people. And in 2015, a white supremacist gunman cited the desire to start a “race war” as his reason for killing nine Black people in the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, S.C. (emphasis added)

Americans who still believe in democracy and the rule of law, need to understand this threat. There are tens of millions of Americans and Europeans who believe the radical right and fascist lies and share the fears of White Supremacists, racists and bigots throughout the world. It's not clear to me how far this toxic rot and fear has settled into democratic societies and governments in Canada, Australia and elsewhere. 

I blame the ex-president and the FGOP for a significant slice of the blame for this toxic moral rot and bigotry-racism, maybe ~35% worldwide and ~80% in the US. The US has fallen as a moral force in defense of democracy, the rule of law and truth. Biden has yet to be able to restore US influence and restraint on radical right extremism. Maybe he won't be able to do that in his four years in office, given the all-out FGOP opposition and dissent in his own party he has to try to deal with.

Or is that assessment of culpability by the US federal government, and toxic two-party politics, over the top hyperbole, unjustifiable and/or not supported by facts and/or sound reasoning?