Three meta-analyses have been conducted on the foot-in-the-door literature and two on the door-in-the-face. This article presents a qualitative comparison and synthesis of those quantitative reviews. First, an overview of the findings is presented. Next, two recent attempts to develop a theoretical perspective that accounts for both request sequences are examined. Finally, attention is given to questions that are as yet unresolved.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1986). Review of developments in meta-analytic methods. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 388-399.
2.
Beaman, A. L. , Cole, C. M., Preston, M., Klentz, B., & Steblay, N. M. (1983). Fifteen years of foot-in-the-door research. Personality and Social Psychology BulUetin, 9, 181-196.
3.
Cann, A. , Sherman, S. J., & Elkes, R. (1975). Effects of initial request size and timing of a second request on compliance: The foot in the door and the door in the face. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 774-782.
4.
Cantrill,J. G. , & Seibold, D. R. (1986). The perceptual contrast explanation of sequential request strategy effectiveness. Human Communication Research, 13, 253-267.
5.
Cialdini, R. B. , Vincent, J. E., Lewis, S. K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., & Darby, B. L. (1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 206-215.
6.
Cohen, J. (1987). Statistical power analysis for t1e social sciences (rev. ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
Dejong, W. (1979). An examination of self-perception mediation in the foot-in-the-door effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2221-2239.
8.
Dillard,J. P. , Hunter,J. E., & Burgoon, M. (1984). Sequential request persuasive strategies: Meta-analysis of foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face. Human Communication Research, 10, 461-488.
9.
Eisenberg, N. , Cialdini, R. B., McCreath, H., & Shell, R. (1987). Consistency based compliance: When and why do children become vulnerable?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1174-1181.
10.
Fazio, R. H. (1986). Howdo attitudes guide behavior? In R M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (pp. 204-243). New York: Wiley.
11.
Fern, E. F. , Monroe, K. B., & Avila, R. A. (1986). Effectiveness of multiple request strategies: A synthesis of research results. Journal of Marketing Research, 23, 144-152.
12.
Freedman,J. L. , & Fraser, S. L. (1966). Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 195-202.
13.
Goldman, M. , McVeigh, J. F., & Richterkessing, J. L. (1984). Door-in-the-face procedure: Reciprocal concession, perceptual contrast, or worthy person. Journal of Social Psychology, 123, 245-251.
14.
Guzzo, R. A. , Jackson, S. E., & Katzell, R. A. (1987). Meta-analysis analysis. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 407-442). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
15.
Helson, H. (1964). Adaptation-level theory: An experimental and systematic approach to behavior. New York: Harper & Row.
16.
Krosnick,J. A. (1989). Attitude importance and attitude accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 297-308.
17.
Miller, R. L. , Seligman, C., Clark, N. T., & Bush, M. (1976). Perceptual contrast versus reciprocal concessions as mediators of induced compliance. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 8, 401-409.
18.
Patch, M. E. (1986). The role of source legitimacy in sequential request strategies of compliance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 199-205.
19.
Poole, M. S. , & Hunter, J. E. (1979). Change in hierarchically-organized attitudes. In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication yearbook 3 (pp. 157-176). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
20.
Powell, M. C. , & Fazio, R. H. (1984). Attitude accessibility as a function of repeated attitudinal expression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 139-148.
21.
Raden, D. (1985). Strength-related attitude dimensions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 312-330.
22.
Reingen, P. H. , & Kernan, J. B. (1977). Compliance with an interview request: A foot-in-the-door, self-perception interpretation. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 365-369.
23.
Rittle, R. H. (1981). Changes in helping behavior: Self-versus situational perceptions as mediators of the foot-in-the-door effect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 421-437.
24.
Schwartz, S. H. (1973). Normative explanations of helping behavior: A critique, proposal, and empirical testJournal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9, 349-364.
25.
Scott, C. (1977). Modifying socially conscious behavior: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Consumer Research, 4, 156-164.
26.
Sedlmeier, P. , & Gigerenzer, G. (1989). Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies?Psychological Bulletin, 105, 309-316.
27.
Shanab, M. E. , & lsonio, S. A. (1982). The effects of contrast upon compliance with socially undesirable requests in the foot-in-the-door paradigm. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 20, 180-182.
28.
Tybout, A. (1978). Relative effectiveness of three behavioral influence strategies as supplements to persuasion in a marketing context. Journal of Marketing Research, 15, 441-446.
29.
Tybout, A. , Sternthal, B., & Calder, B. J. (1983). Information availability as a determinant of multiple request effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, 20, 280-290.
30.
Vallacher, R. , & Wegner, D. M. (1985). A theory of action identification. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
Wanous, J. P. , Sullivan, S. E., & Malinek, J. (1989). The role of judgment calls in meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 259-264.
