The effect of requesting money with a few coins in one hand: the foot-in-the-hand technique

Abstract

Research has shown that individuals comply more readily to a monetary request made by a solicitor if the request disrupts the refusal script or if it is perceived as a legitimate request. We tested the effect of a new technique called the foot-in-the-hand technique (FITH), whereby solicitors requested money while holding a few coins in their hand. Findings show that the presence of money increased compliance with the request (Study 1), particularly when a reason for solicitation was added (Study 2). When the requesters stated that they were close to reaching the sum necessary to buy a particular product, more compliance was obtained (Study 3). A goal-oriented explanation was used to interpret the effect of the FITH technique.

Keywords:

• request
• compliance
• goal

For a long time, social psychologists have examined a number of procedures used for gaining compliance with various requests. In an exhaustive review of the literature on this topic, Pratkanis (2007) identified 107 social influence tactics. A large number of these techniques use sequential requests: the foot-in-the-door technique (Freedman & Fraser, 1966), the door-in-the-face technique (Cialdini et al., 1975), the low-ball tactic (Cialdini, Cacioppo, Bassett, & Miller, 1978), the lure (Joule, Gouilloux, & Weber, 1989), the 1-in-5 prize tactic (Horvitz & Pratkanis, 2002). Some of them use ingratiatory techniques such as flattery (Dunyon, Gossling, Willden, & Seiter, 2010), incidental similarity (Burger, Messian, Patel, del Prado, & Anderson, 2004) or mimicry (Van Baaren, Holland, Kawakami, & Van Knippenberg, 2004). Other techniques involve adding some words to increase the pressure to comply, such as the freedom-evoking technique (Guéguen et al., 2013), the foot-in-the-mouth (Howard, 1990), or the legitimizing paltry contribution technique (Cialdini & Schroeder, 1976). Yet others “pique” the curiosity by using an unusual request (Santos, Leve, & Pratkanis, 1994), or use the solicitor's nonverbal behaviors such as tactile contact (Kleinke, 1977) or gaze (Kleinke, 1980).

Our objective was to examine the effect of a possible new technique. A request for money was made by confederates showing (or not) one hand holding a few coins when formulating their request to passersby. This technique was called the foot-in-the-hand (FITH) technique. The purpose of the FITH is to induce the participants to think that the requester is near to reaching a goal to buy something. In a laboratory study, Jensen, King, and Carcioppolo (2013) have recently observed that participants who saw that a fundraising goal was drawing closer expressed greater willingness to donate. These authors called this new technique as the driving-toward-a-goal (DTAG) technique. Based on the same principle, Carpenter (2014) has recently explored the effect of another technique called the just-one-more (JOM) technique. In Carpenter's first study, requesters asked people to complete a survey. In one condition, they stated that at the end of the request they needed only one more person to comply to reach their goal. Carpenter reported that participants who heard the JOM message were more likely to comply with the request than those who did not. In a second study, the author reported that the effect of the JOM technique was mediated by the level of difficulty for the requester to achieve the targeted goal. A requester stated that she needed 5 people in her survey or 100. Findings showed that the JOM technique succeeded in increasing compliance with the request only when the size of the goal was high. Carpenter used a goal-gradient explanation to interpret the results reported. Telling someone that if this person helped the solicitor, the latter's survey would then be ended is probably what increased the pressure to comply in order to help the solicitor reach the goal.

Thus, solicitors showing coins in their hand while asking participants for money could exert the same goal effect on participants who could imagine that, if they complied, the solicitors would be closer to obtaining the amount necessary to buy something. A series of three experiments tested this assumption. It was hypothesized that when coins were shown in the solicitors' hand, the participants would conclude that the solicitors might be close to their objective; this, in turn, would lead them to comply more readily with the request for money.

Study 1

Method

Participants

The participants were 72 passersby walking alone in the street of a town situated on the south coast of Brittany, France. All appeared to be between 30 and 50 years of age. The participants were not aware that they were involved in a study. They were distributed in the two conditions according to a random distribution (N = 36 per group).

Procedure

A 19-year-old male undergraduate student in business management acted as the solicitor. He was unaware of the hypothesis, and the experiment was presented to him as a field exercise for selling. He was neatly dressed in a traditional way, like young people of his age range (jeans/sneakers/T-shirt). The experiment took place in a street, particularly during sunny winter days. The confederate was instructed to test one passerby in one condition and another one in the other condition, according to a prearranged order. He was instructed to approach the first adult walking alone. If the passerby was a child, a teenager, an elderly man/woman, or a group, the confederate approached the person accompanied them, namely a man or a woman approximately 30–50 years of age, who matched the expected profile. In the control condition, the confederate approached the participants by saying politely: “Excuse me Madam/Sir, I need another 50 cents to buy chocolates for Christmas; would you have some spare change, please?” In the experimental condition (FITH condition), the confederate asked the same request in the same tone, but held his right hand in front of his breast, and several low-value coins could be seen in the flat of his hand. The confederate then noted whether the participant agreed or not to his request. We decided to consider any donation as compliance.

Results and discussion

In the FITH condition, 69% of the participants complied with the request (25/36) in contrast to 34% in the control condition (12/36). A Chi-square test for independence revealed a significant difference (χ²(1, N = 72) = 9.40, p = .002, r = .34, OR = 4.54). The results obtained from our pilot study confirmed our hypothesis that holding a few coins in one hand while panhandling increased compliance with the request.

To start, the effectiveness of this new technique could be explained in several ways. First, the FITH technique may have induced a “social proof” effect (Cialdini, 2008; Cialdini, Reno, & Kallgren, 1990). According to this principle, individuals in some situations determine appropriate behavior for themselves by examining the behaviors of other people. Thus, in this study, when the participants saw the solicitor with a few coins in his hand, they may have got induced by other pedestrians who had previously donated money, which created a pressure to comply. Reingen (1982) reported that people's compliance can be increased if request is made telling people that eight of their neighbors had previously donated money compared with a direct request in the control condition.

Our results could also be explained by a goal-oriented process. In the FITH condition, the participants were induced thinking that the solicitor with a few coins in his hand was near to obtaining the money necessary to buy something. Thus, it could be hypothesized that if a reason for requesting money is added to the FITH technique, participants may believe that the solicitor is near to reaching his goal.

A second study was carried out to generalize the effect of the FITH technique using higher sample sizes. We also included a further condition whereby participants were told (or not) by the confederates why the latter were requesting money. We hypothesized that by showing money in their hands and asking participants for spare change to buy a product, the solicitors may implicitly suggest that they had nearly reached the necessary amount to buy the product. In contrast, when no reason condition for asking money was provided, the participants would deduce that solicitors only wanted to obtain some money and were ordinary panhandlers. Thus, the script of refusal could be more easily activated. Hence, one could assume that the FITH technique would be more effective if the solicitors had a reason to solicit money.

Study 2

Method

Participants

The participants were 400 passersby (200 women and 200 men) walking alone in the street of a town situated on the south coast of Brittany, France. All appeared to be between 30 and 50 years of age. Participants were not aware that they were involved in a study. They were distributed in the four experimental conditions according to a random distribution (N = 100 per group: 50 men and 50 women)

Procedure

Two 19-year-old female and two 19 to 20-year-old male undergraduate students in business management acted as solicitors. The confederates were unaware of the hypothesis. All were neatly dressed. The experiment was strictly the same as before except for the reason for asking money to the participant. In the reason condition, the confederate asked: Excuse me, Madam/Sir, I need another 50 cents to buy a sandwich; would you have some spare change, please? In the no reason condition, the confederate just asked: Excuse me, Madam/Sir, would you have some spare change, please? In half of the cases when formulating the request, the confederates showed or not showed several coins in the flat of their hand. The confederates were instructed to test two passersby (one male and one female) in one condition and then to proceed in the same way in the other condition according to a prearranged order. Again, any donation was coded as a compliant behavior.

Results and discussion

A preliminary analysis reported no interaction between the experimental condition and the confederate's or the participant's gender. Hence, the data were collapsed across participants' gender and confederates' gender. The percentage and number of participants who complied with the confederates' request are given in Table 1.

Table 1 Percentage of passersby who complied with the request according to experimental condition, participant gender, and confederate gender.

	No reason	Reason
FITH condition	27% (27/100)	62% (62/100)
Control condition	20% (20/100)	37% (27/100)

Chi-square independent test was used for data analysis. Across both reason conditions, more participants complied in the FITH condition (45%) than in the control condition (23.5%), χ² (1, N = 400) = 19.65, p < .001, r = .31, OR = 2.61. Table 1 gives the data that in the no reason condition, the compliance rate between the FITH and the control condition was not statistically significant χ² (1, N = 200) = 1.36, p = .243, r = .08, OR = 1.48 while it was statistically different in the reason condition, χ² (1, N = 200) = 24.8, p < .001, r = .33, OR = 4.41. A main effect of the reason associated with the request was reported, χ² (1, N = 400) = 19.65, p < .001, r = .31, OR = 2.61, revealing that, overall, more participants complied in the reason request condition (44.5%) than in the no reason request condition (23.5%). A significant difference between the two reason conditions was reported in the FITH condition, χ² (1, N = 200) = 24.8, p < .001, r = .33, OR = 4.41, while it was not significantly different in the control condition χ² (1, N = 200) = 1.36, p = .243, r = .08, OR = 1.48.

The effectiveness of the FITH technique was shown once more regarding compliance with a monetary request. With higher sample sizes than in Study 1, we found that participants complied more readily to the request made by solicitors who were showing a few coins in their hand when panhandling in the street. Our results also showed that the FITH technique remains effective with both male and female confederates and with male and female participants. More interestingly, the analysis of this study showed that the FITH technique increased donations only when a reason was associated with the request. This would suggest that the effect of this technique is probably not explained by a “social proof” effect (Cialdini, 2008; Cialdini et al., 1990). In this condition, the participants saw the coins in the confederates' hand and may have induced that some people had previously donated money. However, there was no significant increase in compliance in this condition, suggesting that the FITH is probably not explained by a social proof process.

It could be argued that adding a reason is an example of mindlessness in action (Langer, Blank, & Chanowitz, 1978). In a field setting, Langer et al. (1978) found that a noninformative reason (placebic information) for requesting help (i.e. Can you help me because I need some help) induced the same level of help as an informative reason (i.e. Can you help me because I am late). In this study, we did not examine placebic information, but it could be argued that the presence of coins in the solicitors' hand exerted the same effect. However, as we found no significant effect of the FITH reason condition, this mindlessness theory might not be useful to explain the FITH technique. Indeed, Langer et al. reported that the placebic condition increased compliance, compared with the control condition, when no information was present. This not the case in the no reason condition reported in this study.

Our results seem to be more compatible with a goal-oriented effect. By showing money in one hand and asking participants for spare change for a good reason (in this case, buying some food), the confederates could have implicitly suggested that they were close to the sum necessary to buy the product, thus increasing the pressure to comply. The objective of the third study was to explore more specifically the effect of this goal-oriented hypothesis that could explain the effect of the FITH. In this study, we decided to add in the request that the solicitor was close to obtaining the final sum necessary to buy a product. Carpenter (2014) reported with the JOM technique that confederates who stated at the end of the request that they needed just one more person to complete their survey obtained more compliance. These results suggested that when requesters informed participants that they were close to completing their task, this information created a pressure to comply. Thus, with the FITH technique, it could be hypothesized that if the solicitors explicitly stated that they were close to possessing the sum necessary and held a few coins in their hands, then the pressure to comply would increase. This hypothesis was tested in Study 3.

Study 3

Method

Participants

The participants were 200 passersby walking alone in the street of a town situated on the south coast of Brittany, France. All appeared to be between 30 and 50 years of age. Participants were not aware that they were involved in a study. They were distributed in the four experimental conditions according to a random distribution (N = 50 per group).

Procedure

Two 20-year-old male undergraduate students in business management acted as solicitors. The confederates were unaware of the hypothesis. As in the previous study, the participants were asked for money to buy a sandwich. In half of the cases, the confederates held a few coins in their hand when asking for money (FITH condition) while in the other cases, no coins were presented (control condition). In half of the cases, the confederate asked: Excuse me, Madam/Sir, I need money to buy a sandwich; would you have 50 cents, please?I need just 50 cents to have the exact sum to buy it (final sum mention condition) while in the other cases, the confederate asked: Excuse me, Madam/Sir, I need money to buy a sandwich; would you have 50 cents, please? (no final sum mention condition). As in the previous two studies, any donation was considered as compliance.

Results and discussion

The percentage and number of participants who complied with the confederates' request are given in Table 2.

Table 2 Percentage of passersby who complied with the request according to experimental condition.

	No final sum mention	Final sum mention
FITH condition	46% (23/50)	84% (42/50)
Control condition	28% (14/50)	38% (19/50)

Chi-square independent test was used for data analysis. Across both final sum conditions, we reported that statistically more participants complied in the FITH condition (65%) than in the control condition (35%), χ² (1, N = 200) = 20.49, p < .001, r = .31, OR = 3.77. Additional analyses showed a significant difference between the two final sum mention conditions when the confederates held a few coins in their hand (χ²(1, N = 100) = 15.87, p < .00, r = .37, OR = 6.18), whereas no difference was reported in the no FITH control condition (χ²(1, N = 100) = 1.13, p < .00, r = .11, OR = 1.58).

A main effect of the sum mention was reported χ² (1, N = 200) = 11.53, p < .001, r = .23, OR = 2.66 revealing that, overall, more participants complied in final sum mention condition (61.0%) than in the no reason request condition (37.0%). A significant difference between the two FITH condition was found in the final sum condition, χ² (1, N = 100) = 22.24, p < .001, r = .43, OR = 8.57, while it was nearly significantly different in the no final sum condition, χ²(1, N = 100) = 3.48, p = .06, r = .18, OR = 2.19.

Once more, the results reported in this study confirmed the effectiveness of the FITH to gain compliance with a request. We have also shown that the effectiveness of this technique increased when the confederates told the participants that they nearly had the sum necessary to buy the product for which they were requesting money. This finding supports the goal-oriented explanation and the assumption that the FITH probably led the participants to deduce that the confederates nearly had the sum necessary to buy the product; this, in turn, led them to comply more readily with the request.

General discussion

In three studies, we reported that the FITH technique appeared effective to increase compliance with a request for money. For solicitors, presenting a few coins in their hand when asking unknown passersby for money increased the probability of receiving money in return. The weighted mean correlation coefficient for the three studies appeared moderate (M = .31) but also more important than results found with other compliance techniques such as the foot-in-the-door technique (r ≈ .10: Beaman, Cole, Preston, Klentz, & Steblay, 1983; Burger, 1999; Dillard, Hunter, & Burgoon, 1984; Fern, Monroe, & Avila, 1986; Pascual & Guéguen, 2005), the door-in-the-face technique (r ≈ .13: Dillard et al., 1984; Feeley, Anker, & Aloe, 2012), the “but your are free of …” technique (r = .13: Carpenter, 2013), or the legitimization of paltry contribution technique (r = .11: Andrews, Carpenter, Shaw, & Boster, 2008).

In Study 2, we reported that the FITH technique increased compliance when a reason accompanied the request. Previous studies on other compliance-gaining techniques support this notion that a reason for requesting is an important factor (Burger, Hornisher, Martin, Newman, & Pringle, 2007). The same effect occurred with the FITH technique, which suggests that when a reason is associated with the FITH, the request could be perceived as more legitimate by the participants, which in turn leads them to accept to donate more readily. However, it could also be stated that the reason associated with the FITH led the participants to deduce that the solicitors did not want money per se only, but instead, needed money to buy something; hence, when seeing a few coins in the solicitors' hand, the participants could infer that the solicitors had nearly attained their goal. Thus, the pressure to donate probably increased.

Study 3 confirmed that when the requesters explicitly stated that they were close to the sum necessary to buy the product, the FITH technique increased compliance. When mentioning the final sum, some participants probably clearly obtained a confirmation that the requester was near to obtain the amount necessary to buy the sandwich and that's why they comply more often with the request. This finding suggests that a goal-oriented effect could explain the FITH technique. Hull (1932) stated that there is a tendency to approach a goal as soon as the proximity with the goal increases. Hull (1934) reported that rats in a maze ran faster as they approached their goal (a bowl with food). The same result of this goal-oriented effect has been reported with humans. Kivetz, Urminsky, and Zheng (2006), in a series of studies examining the effect of a goal on customer behavior, reported that customers in a real-café reward program purchased coffee more frequently the closer they were to earning a free coffee. The authors also reported that the illusion of progress toward a goal induced purchase acceleration. For example, customers who received a 12-stamp coffee card but with two preexisting bonus stamps completed the 10 required purchases faster than the customers who received a 10-stamp card without any bonus stamps. This goal-oriented effect has also been reported in a fundraising context. Jensen et al. (2013) used a series of videos of a similar fundraising situation and reported that participants who saw that a fundraising goal was drawing closer expressed more willingness to donate. Recently, Carpenter (2014) showed increased compliance with a request for a survey when adding at the end of the request that with just one more respondent, the interviewer could complete the survey.

Congruent with these studies examining the goal-oriented effect, it could be stated that the same mechanism could account for the effectiveness of the FITH technique. When showing a few coins in their hands, the confederates may have activated the same process. The participants who saw the coins in the confederates' hand may have deduced that the confederates had a goal or were near to reaching a goal, and the pressure to comply increased in this condition. Moreover, when adding that with a further 50cts coin, the solicitor could buy the product, the pressure to comply increased, which could explain why we reported more compliance in the FITH condition than in the FITH situation where the solicitors did not mention that they were close to the sum necessary to buy the product. Research on prosocial behavior has indicated that a feeling of responsibility to help is associated with greater helping behavior (Harris, 1972). Thus, perceiving that the confederates were near to reaching their goal probably increased the participants' own feeling of responsibility to donate because they were the last person who had the opportunity to enable the confederates to buy the product they needed.

In conclusion, the FITH appears as a new technique in the existing arsenal of compliance-gaining techniques (see Pratkanis, 2007, for review). In three studies, we have shown that when solicitors showed a few coins in one hand when asking unknown passersby for money, this increased compliance with the request. We also reported that when the solicitors stated that they were near to reaching their goal (in this case, buying a particular product), the effectiveness of the FITH increased. Such results suggest that there is a need to further examine the effect of a goal-oriented process in the area of prosocial behavior. Further research should probably examine the importance of the salience of the goal in the case of the FITH technique and how this goal salience can change people's perception of their responsibility and increase the pressure to donate. In future, it could also be worth examining other theoretical explanations of the FITH, such as the social proof explanation (Cialdini, 2008; Cialdini et al., 1990) and/or the legitimation of the request (Guéguen, 2011). It would also be worth evaluating whether the FITH technique remains effective with more self-interested and less prosocial requests.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.