A Test of the Automaticity Assumption of Compliance Tactics: Discouraging Undergraduate Binge Drinking by Appealing to Consistency and Reciprocity

Abstract

The mindfulness of compliance with requests making use of the commitment/consistency or the reciprocity principle was investigated. Participants (N = 129) received a foot-in-the-door (FITD) request (commitment/consistency application), a door-in-the-face (DITF) request (reciprocity application), or no request. Next, participants read either a weak or neutral message about the importance of moderate alcohol consumption then reported the likelihood of not drinking excessively for one week (target request). When accompanied by a weak message, the target request elicited less compliance if preceded by the DITF or FITD requests than by no initial request, suggesting compliance tactics sometimes increase thoughtfulness.

Keywords:

• Automaticity
• Binge Drinking
• Compliance

Notes

Note. Means are adjusted for the covariates (number of alcoholic beverages consumed per occasion and social desirability). Standard errors (in parentheses) and ns (in italics) appear below means. Cell means in the same column that do not share alphabetical superscripts differ at the p < 0.05 level, and cell means in the same row that do not share the same numerical superscripts differ at the p < 0.05 level, according to planned comparisons carried out to investigate the significant Strength × Appeal interaction.

Prior to including baseline drinking and social desirability as covariates in the analysis, we ensured that the assumption of independence of the covariate and treatment effect and the assumption of homogeneity of regression slopes had been met. To test the assumption of independence, two ANOVAs were conducted (one for each covariate) to test for differences in the covariate across experimental groups. All effects were nonsignificant, indicating the assumption had been met. To test the assumption of homogeneity of regression slopes, we conducted a custom model of our ANCOVA, which included the interactions between the covariates and the independent variables. This analysis also did not produce significant effects, indicating the assumption was met.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Amy E. Conner

Amy E. Conner (Ph.D., Kansas State University, 2005) is an Instructor in the Division of Continuing Education and Department of Psychological Sciences at Kansas State University.

Megan M. Miller

Megan M. Miller, (M.S., Kansas State University, 2009) is a Ph.D. student in psychology at Kansas State University.

Laura A. Brannon

Laura A. Brannon, (Ph.D., Ohio State University, 1993) is a Professor in the Department of Psychological Sciences at Kansas State University.