PDF Summary:Pre-Suasion, by Robert Cialdini

Experts in the art of persuasion, whether orators, salespersons, or politicians, often focus on fine-tuning their arguments. But, according to psychologist Robert Cialdini, this approach fails to consider another key component of persuasion—what happens before we begin conveying our argument. In his 2016 book, Pre-Suasion, Cialdini argues that to make our audience receptive to our message, we must optimize the moments before persuasion.

In this guide, we’ll discuss Cialdini’s insight that people are susceptible to influence the moment before they make a decision, and we’ll examine how words, images, and environments can influence people in that moment. Next, we’ll discuss ways to “pre-suade” your audience by aligning with people’s preferences for consistency, likable communicators, authority figures, and people who share their identity. Finally, we’ll consider how to anchor the behavioral changes that result from pre-suasion by getting your audience to make a commitment. Throughout the guide, we’ll discuss pushback against Cialdini’s arguments and explore supplemental advice from other authors on how to influence people.

(continued)...

(Shortform note: Another way to enable women to succeed in math—not just on tests, but in college and beyond—is to introduce them to female role models who have thrived at math. Meeting such role models undermines stereotypical beliefs and causes more female students to believe they can succeed at math in the first place.)

Regarding work performance, Cialdini discusses the anecdotal experience of a manager at a consulting firm who realized that consultants’ performance creating employee incentive plans increased significantly when they worked in central offices with glass windows. According to Cialdini, this was because the consultants created better incentive plans when they were surrounded by (and thus constantly aware of) the employees for whom they were creating the plans.

(Shortform note: Although working out of a central office with glass windows isn’t an option for everyone, experts note that there’s a wide array of strategies that anyone can use to create a more effective work environment that “pre-suades” you and your colleagues to perform well. For example, a workplace with significant natural light can increase your energy levels and productivity, while reducing clutter at your desk can minimize distractions and therefore make you more efficient.)

Pre-Suade by Aligning With People’s Preferences

Although we’ve discussed Cialdini’s instruments for steering people’s attention in the moment before deciding, we haven’t yet discussed how to use these instruments. In this section, we’ll consider ways you can direct your audience’s attention by aligning with their preferences—three of which (desire for consistency, deference toward authority, and desire for likability) are originally from Cialdini’s previous book, Influence, and one of which (the importance of unity) is new to Pre-Suasion.

(Shortform note: In addition to consistency, authority, and likability, Cialdini highlights three further principles in both Pre-Suasion and Influence: reciprocity, social proof, and scarcity. Reciprocity refers to the notion that we often feel obligated to repay those who have helped us. Social proof refers to the idea that we’re more likely to agree with something if it seems like everyone else agrees with it. Finally, scarcity refers to the fact that we’re more attracted to items that seem to have limited availability. Cialdini contends that by leveraging these additional principles, we can more effectively pre-suade and persuade our audience to act as we desire.)

Preference #1: Consistency

Cialdini first explains that people are naturally inclined to think and act in a way that’s consistent with their pre-existing beliefs and actions. Accordingly, reminding people of this desire for consistency can be a powerful tool for successful pre-suasion.

(Shortform note: In academic works published elsewhere, Cialdini explains that consistency exists on a spectrum, such that some individuals are more concerned with internal consistency than others. Thus, although he writes as if we all desire internal consistency in Pre-Suasion, it’s more accurate to say that we all desire it to varying degrees.)

To demonstrate this desire for consistency, Cialdini points to a study examining how best to increase the participation rate of those who signed up for a blood drive. The researchers found that during a reminder call the day before the blood drive, eliciting verbal confirmation from participants made it significantly more likely that they would show up the next day—the participation rate increased from 70% to 82%.

For this reason, effective pre-suasion often involves making our desire for internal consistency more salient. For example, vegetarianism advocates from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) might appeal to the fact that most individuals think it would be wrong to consume their household pets, even though they regularly consume other animals. In so doing, PETA would try to convince people to become vegetarians by appealing to their desire for internal consistency.

(Shortform note: In Influence, Cialdini goes into further detail about why we crave internal consistency. He writes that consistency allows us to make quick judgments without assessing each situation individually, meaning that it frees us from the burden of deliberating about every single decision. For example, if you’ve signed up for the annual blood drive each of the past five years, the desire for consistency will cause you to automatically do so in the future, rather than deciding whether to participate every single year.)

Preference #2: Authority

Cialdini admits that shifting people’s focus toward their internal desire for consistency isn’t enough if you—the pre-suader—don’t come across as authoritative. According to Cialdini, people naturally defer to those whom they perceive as authoritative, meaning that effective pre-suaders should attempt to underscore their own credibility.

(Shortform note: Although it’s natural to defer to authority, this deference can become a fallacy—namely, the “appeal to authority” fallacy—when we argue that something must be correct merely because an authority figure says so. For this reason, it’s best to take statements from authority figures as strong evidence, but not conclusive proof, that a statement is true.)

To illustrate the tendency to defer to authority, Cialdini discusses an experiment in which individuals were asked to answer complex questions about economics while undergoing a brain scan. He notes that when the participants were initially evaluating these questions, their brain activity surged in the area responsible for high-level problem-solving. However, when these participants heard proposed answers from professional economists, their brain activity crashed as they mindlessly deferred to the expert.

How Much Power Do Authority Figures Really Have Over Us?

The well-known “Milgram Shock experiment,” run by psychologist Stanley Milgram, further illustrates the extent to which individuals defer to authority. Rather than measuring how this deference shows up in the brain, he measured its impact on behavior.

Milgram told participants that they’d serve the role of a “teacher” whose job was to administer electric shocks to a “student” (who was actually an actor pretending to be shocked) whenever the student answered a question incorrectly. After each shock, the experimenter (who was the authority figure) told the participants to increase the voltage by 15 volts.

Milgram reports that 65% of participants ultimately increased the voltage all the way to the maximum level of 450 volts—a level that would have posed serious threats to the learner’s safety—just because the authority figure told them to do so.

Cialdini concludes that making our own authority salient can be a winning strategy for pre-suasion. To do so, he recommends that you establish your credibility by admitting a shortcoming early in conversation, since people perceive those who are candid about their weaknesses as more credible. For instance, if you’re a politician on the campaign trail, confessing to previous mistakes—say, support for an unsuccessful bill in years past—could actually make you seem more authoritative in the eyes of your constituents.

(Shortform note: Psychologists have found that in addition to making you more credible, a display of weakness can also make you more likable. For example, in one study, participants watched a recording of an individual taking a verbal quiz and answering 92% of the questions correctly. However, half of the participants watched a version in which the individual spilled coffee on himself at the end of the quiz, while the other half watched a video without the spilled coffee. The study found that participants who watched him spill coffee on himself rated him as considerably more likable afterwards, compared to those who didn’t watch him spill coffee on himself.)

Preference #3: Likability

While people place great weight on the views of authoritative experts, they’re less likely to do so if the experts are unlikable. Conversely, Cialdini writes that people are inclined to agree with those whom they find likable, which suggests that drawing attention to your likable traits is an excellent pre-suasive strategy. He recommends two strategies for making yourself more likable: Highlight similarities with your audience and give your audience compliments.

(Shortform note: Much as Cialdini discusses likability in Pre-Suasion, Dale Carnegie discusses a set of likability principles in How to Win Friends and Influence People. However, his recommendations go beyond Cialdini’s advice. For example, he offers straightforward tips like saying the name of the person whom you’re talking to because it makes them feel important and smiling frequently to show that you like them.)

Strategy #1: Highlight Similarities

Cialdini points out that people are predisposed to like those who are similar to them. He relates that there are many examples of this phenomenon: Babies, for instance, are more likely to smile at adults who mimic the babies’ facial expressions.

(Shortform note: According to one study, 3-month-old babies not only prefer adults who mimic their own facial expressions, but they also prefer to look at the faces of men who share their caregivers’ ethnicity. The study exposed a group of 3-month-old white babies to pictures of white, Middle Eastern, African, and Asian men. Ultimately, the study found that the white babies spent a significantly longer amount of time staring at the pictures of white men than men of other ethnicities, suggesting a preference for white men’s faces.)

In the context of pre-suasion, then, Cialdini implies that we should draw attention to features that we share with our audience. For example, imagine that you’re a door-to-door salesman in Boston, where the majority of your potential customers are fans of the New England Patriots. To effectively pre-suade—and thereby increase your sales—you could choose to wear a Patriots hat that highlights your similarities with your audience.

(Shortform note: In situations where you don’t have much in common with your audience, Carnegie’s advice in How to Win Friends and Influence People may be useful. Carnegie recommends that you focus on your audience’s interests, even if you don’t share them. For example, even if you don’t know anything about Bitcoin, if you’re talking to someone who’s obsessed with it, it could be wise to ask questions to show them that you care about their interests.)

Strategy #2: Give Compliments

In addition to underscoring similarities with your audience, Cialdini also recommends that you give genuine compliments to win people’s affection. To show as much, Cialdini points to a study in which students received fliers from a clothing store that praised them for being “fashionable and stylish.” In response to the fliers, these students reported significantly more positive attitudes toward the store and a higher likelihood of shopping there.

Paying people compliments can make you seem more likable, thus making you more effective at pre-suasion. For example, imagine that you’re a teacher seeking high performance scores from your students to bolster your case for receiving a raise. Just before distributing the questionnaires, you could remind your students that they’ve been a joy to have in class to steer them toward more favorable reviews.

(Shortform note: Although compliments can be an effective tool for winning people’s affection, experts warn that you have to be careful not to overdo it. After all, we often become less affectionate when we believe that someone’s compliments are driven by ulterior motives, since that makes us doubt their sincerity. For example, if the fliers from the above study instead told students they were “the most fashionable person we know,” the students might have found the messaging off-putting and been less likely to shop at the store.)

Preference #4: Connectedness

Although consistency, authority, and likability are all potent desires, Cialdini clarifies that one more desire is even more powerful: connectedness (which he calls “unity”). According to Cialdini, individuals are especially susceptible to influence from people with whom they feel connected. Further, he explains that this connection takes two forms: connection through identity and connection through activity.

Form #1: Connection Through Identity

Cialdini contends that people feel deeply connected with fellow members of a shared identity group, or “in-group,” such as their family, country, or religion. He relates that this unity has an evolutionary origin: Because humans are programmed by natural selection to pass down their genetic material, they automatically favor those who share this genetic material—that is, their families. In fact, Cialdini notes that neuroscientists have even found that people tend to project their own personality traits onto other in-group members, suggesting that they consider those who share their identities as extensions of themselves.

(Shortform note: According to experts, the evolutionary roots of our sense of shared identity with our family also gave rise to tribalism, an unflinching loyalty toward our in-group that causes hostility toward perceived members of the out-group. They contend that this tribalism is especially prominent in politics, where conservatives and progressives don’t merely disagree with one another, but often disdain one another to the point of hostility.)

Given the importance of shared identity, Cialdini suggests that we should direct our audience’s attention toward any mutual aspects of identity to pre-suade them. For example, an Italian politician giving a speech on the eve of election day could begin the speech with, “As your fellow Italian,” to underscore the identity that they share with voters. Alternatively, a corporate executive could use language likening the company to a family to foster a sense of unity among employees.

(Shortform note: One institution well-known for cultivating a shared identity is the US military, whose members often report a deeply ingrained interconnectedness with one another. This sense of interconnectedness is crucial in wartime, when the ability to function as a coherent unit is essential to creating effective units. Leaders interested in using Cialdini’s principle of connectedness for pre-suasion could begin by studying how the US military builds such a strong sense of shared identity.)

Form #2: Connection Through Activity

What if you want to pre-suade someone but you don’t share an identity with them? Cialdini suggests that we can manufacture a sense of unity through collective action, citing an array of studies to show as much.

For instance, in one study, researchers separated participants into two teams—one that walked in lockstep and one that walked out of sync—before having the teams play a game in which they chose between maximizing self-interest versus maximizing collective success. These researchers found that participants whose teams walked in lockstep were significantly more selfless (and thus more connected) during the subsequent game, whereas participants whose teams walked out of sync played more selfishly.

(Shortform note: In addition to making individuals more selfless, marching in lockstep also increases confidence. In one study, men were asked either to walk alone, at their own pace, or synchronously with a partner. Afterward, the participants were shown a picture of a criminal and asked to assess the criminal’s physical stature. These researchers found that individuals who marched in lockstep evaluated the criminals as significantly smaller and weaker, suggesting that marching synchronously had increased their confidence.)

Of course, Cialdini doesn’t recommend asking people to march in lockstep with you to win them over. But he does note that, in the workplace, you can implement unifying activities by designing projects that require collaboration between team members. He explains that because employees feel a sense of ownership over projects they partake in, allowing employees to jointly participate in projects can instill a sense of mutual ownership and connection. Thus, creating collaborative projects could make employees more influenceable, as we’re more susceptible to influence from those with whom we feel connected.

(Shortform note: Many companies foster a sense of unity by offering equity compensation to their employees, which typically involves compensating them with shares of company stock in addition to their base salary. According to experts, equity compensation can make employees feel more connected to their company’s mission, which fosters a sense of belonging at the company.)

The Enduring Impact of Pre-Suasion

Cialdini acknowledges that, although the pre-suasive techniques he’s outlined might lead to short-term behavioral changes, they’re often insufficient to effect long-term change. Consequently, in this section, we’ll explain how to entrench the changes brought about through pre-suasion by eliciting concrete commitments from your audience.

The Importance of Eliciting Commitment

Cialdini explains that to generate long-term shifts in behavior, you should elicit a concrete commitment from your audience. To illustrate the impact of such commitments, Cialdini points to several studies showing that small commitments can cement behavioral changes.

For instance, in one study of medical clinics, experts sought to determine how to increase the percentage of patients who show up for scheduled follow-up appointments. They found that the most successful approach involved asking patients to write down the details of these follow-up appointments themselves, rather than having the receptionist do so. Cialdini explains that in so doing, the patients were making a small commitment that made them 18% more likely to attend their follow-up appointments.

(Shortform note: Another medical clinic found an innovative way to minimize no-shows by placing frequent no-showers on scheduling probation. During this probationary period, the patients were still able to schedule appointments, but doctors would only see them during breaks from other patients rather than at fixed times. For example, if the patients on probation scheduled an appointment at 2 p.m. and arrived for their appointment, they would enter a queue behind the other patients scheduled at 2:00 and be seen as soon as the doctors had an opening. The clinic found that this practice reduced no-shows, which suggests that you can also change behavior by enforcing commitment via consequences for broken commitments.)

Cialdini relates that in addition to shifting behaviors, commitments can also shift long-term beliefs. For example, in one experiment, researchers exposed participants to a happy story. They then asked one group of participants to rate a painting and another group to observe the painting. Five days later, only those who’d rated the painting reported preferring it to other paintings, suggesting that the commitment of rating the painting positively made their positive opinion of it more entrenched.

(Shortform note: The 17th-century French philosopher Blaise Pascal recognized long ago that commitments can shape our beliefs. Pascal argued that religious belief is rational in a practical sense because it has the highest expected utility (in other words, if God does turn out to exist, the cost of not believing could be spending an eternity in Hell instead of Heaven. But if God doesn’t exist, the cost of believing isn’t anywhere near so high). Pascal recognized that many people feel they can’t believe in a deity, even if they wanted to. To such individuals, he advised making concrete commitments—such as attending mass, taking communion, and praying—because he recognized that such commitments can induce changes in belief.)

Cialdini suggests that following a successful instance of pre-suasion, you should elicit some form of commitment to maximize the chance of effecting lasting change. For example, local politicians at a rally might elicit verbal commitments from their constituents that they’ll vote for them in the next election, unlike the majority of voters who never vote in local elections. Likewise, bosses could ask their employees via email for a commitment to finish a project by a certain deadline. In either case, securing a commitment is the crucial step after you’ve finished the pre-suasive process.

(Shortform note: One research study found that an especially effective form of commitment is a public pledge that declares one’s intentions. Among participants who were asked to donate a book to schools in South Africa, those who made a public pledge to donate were significantly more likely to do so than peers who didn’t make a pledge or made one in private.)