A model of compliance‐gaining message selection

References

• Boster , F.J. and Stiff , J.B. 1984 . Compliance‐gaining message selection behavior . Human Communication Research , 10 : 539 – 556 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boster , F.J. , Stiff , J.B. and Reynolds , R.A. 1985 . Do persons respond differently to inductively‐derived and deductively‐derived lists of compliance gaining message strategies? A reply to Wiseman and Schenck‐Hamlin . Western Journal of Speech Communication , 49 : 177 – 187 .
   Google Scholar
• Clark , R.A. 1979 . The impact of self interest and desire for liking on the selection of communicative strategies . Communication Monographs , 46 : 257 – 273 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cody , M.J. and McLaughlin , M.L. 1980 . Perceptions of compliance‐gaining situations: A dimensional analysis . Communication Monographs , 47 : 132 – 148 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cody , M.J. , McLaughlin , M.L. and Jordan , W. 1980 . A multidimensional scaling of three sets of compliance‐gaining strategies . Communication Quarterly , 28 : 34 – 46 .
   Google Scholar
• Davis , D.L. 1984 . Compliance gaining message construction as a function of perceived target of the compliance gaining attempt , Urbana : Department of Speech Communication, University of Illinois . Unpublished manuscript
   Google Scholar
• Dillard , J.P. and Burgoon , M. 1985 . Situational influences on the selection of compliance‐gaining messages: Two tests of the predictive utility of the Cody‐McLaughlin typology . Communication Monographs , 52 : 289 – 304 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillard , J.P. , Hunter , J.E. , Burgoon , M. , Boster , F.J. and Stiff , J.B. . An empirical test of the empathy model of compliance gaining message selection . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association . Honolulu, HI. May ,
   Google Scholar
• Falbo , T. 1977 . Multidimensional scaling of power strategies . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 35 : 537 – 547 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzpatrick , M.A. and Winke , J. 1979 . You always hurt the one you love: Strategies and tactics in interpersonal conflict . Communication Quarterly , 27 : 3 – 11 .
   Google Scholar
• French , J.R.P. Jr. and Raven , B. 1960 . “ The bases of social power ” . In Group dynamics , 2nd ed. , Edited by: Cartwright , D. and Zander , A. 607 – 623 . New York : Harper & Row .
   Google Scholar
• Gunman , L. 1955 . A generalized simplex for factor analysis . Psychometrika , 20 : 173 – 192 .
   Google Scholar
• Hulin , C.L. , Drasgow , F. and Parsons , C.K. 1983 . Item response theory , Homewood, IL : Dow Jones‐Irwin .
   Google Scholar
• Hunter , J.E. and Boster , F.J. . An empathy model of compliance‐gaining message strategy selection . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association . Minneapolis, MN. November ,
   Google Scholar
• Hunter , J.E. and Boster , F.J. . Situational differences in the selection of compliance‐gaining messages . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association . San Antonio, TX. November ,
   Google Scholar
• Infante , D.A. , Trebing , J.D. , Shepherd , P.E. and Seeds , D.E. 1984 . The relationship of argumentativeness to verbal aggression . The Southern Speech Communication Journal , 50 : 67 – 77 .
   Google Scholar
• Jackson , S. and Backus , D. 1982 . Are compliance‐gaining strategies dependent on situational variables? . The Central States Speech Journal , 33 : 469 – 479 .
   Google Scholar
• Kaminski , E.P. , McDermott , S.T. and Boster , F.J. . The use of compliance‐gaining strategies as a function of Machiavellianism and situation . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Central States Speech Association . Southfield, MI.
   Google Scholar
• Lustig , M.W. and King , S.W. 1980 . The effect of communication apprehension and situation on communication strategy choices . Human Communication Research , 7 : 74 – 82 .
   Google Scholar
• Marwell , G. and Schmitt , D.R. 1967 . Dimensions of compliance‐gaining behavior: An empirical analysis . Sociometry , 30 : 350 – 364 .
   Google Scholar
• McLaughlin , M.L. , Cody , M.J. and Robey , C.S. 1980 . Situational influences on the selection of strategies to resist compliance‐gaining attempts . Human Communication Research , 7 : 14 – 36 .
   Google Scholar
• Miller , G. , Boster , F. , Roloff , M. and Seibold , D. 1977 . Compliance‐gaining message strategies: A typology and some findings concerning effects of situational differences . Communication Monographs , 44 : 37 – 51 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roloff , M. and Barnicott , E.F. Jr. 1978 . “ The situational use of pro‐ and anti‐social compliance‐gaining strategies by high and low Machiavellians ” . In Communication yearbook , Edited by: Ruben , B.D. Vol. 2 , 193 – 205 . New Brunswick, NJ : Transaction Books .
   Google Scholar
• Roloff , M. and Barnicott , E.F. Jr. 1979 . The influence of dogmatism on the situational use of pro‐ and anti‐social compliance‐gaining strategies . The Southern Speech Communication Journal , 45 : 37 – 54 .
   Google Scholar
• Schenck‐Hamlin , W.J. , Wiseman , R.L. and Georgacarakos , G.N. 1982 . A model of properties of compliance‐gaining strategies . Communication Quarterly , 30 : 92 – 100 .
   Google Scholar
• Sillars , A.L. 1980 . The stranger and the spouse as target persons for compliance‐gaining strategies: A subjective expected utility model . Human Communication Research , 6 : 265 – 279 .
   Google Scholar
• Spearman , C. 1927 . The abilities of man , New York : Macmillan .
   Google Scholar
• Williams , D.L. and Boster , F.J. . The effects of beneficial situational characteristics, negativism, and dogmatism on compliance‐gaining message selection . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association . Minneapolis, MN. May ,
   Google Scholar
• Wiseman , R.L. and Schenck‐Hamlin , W. 1981 . A multidimensional scaling validation of an inductively‐derived set of compliance‐gaining strategies . Communication Monographs , 48 : 251 – 270 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John E. Hunter is Professor of Psychology, Michigan State University, and Franklin J. Boster is Associate Professor of Communication at the same institution.
   Google Scholar