In an experiment conducted in natural settings (in a restaurant), we explore the uninvestigated link between mimicry, its impact on hospitality, and the time during which the mimicry takes place. Under particular experimental conditions, the waitress either did not verbally mimic the customer, mimicked the customer only at the initial stage of the interaction, only at the final stage of the interaction, or at both the initial and the final stage of the interaction. The tip left by the customer and its amount were the indicators of the hospitality experienced throughout the time spent in the restaurant. The outcome was that both indicators of noticeable hospitality were the highest where the verbal mimicry was applied twice.
Ashton-JamesC. E.ChartrandT. L. (2009). Social cues for creativity: The impact of behavioral mimicry on convergent and divergent thinking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1036-1040. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.030
2.
ChartrandT. L.BarghJ. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893-910. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.893
3.
CialdiniR. B.VincentJ. E.LewisS. K.CatalanJ.WheelerD.DarbyB. L. (1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 206-215.
4.
DillardJ. P.HunterJ. E.BurgoonM. (1984). Sequential request persuasive strategies: Meta-analysis of foot-in-the-door and door-in-the-face. Human Communication Research, 10, 461-488.
5.
DolinskiD. (2001). Emotional seesaw, compliance, and mindlessness. European Psychologist, 6, 194-203. doi:10.1027//1016-9040.6.3.194
6.
DolinskiD. (2016). Techniques of social influence: The psychology of gaining compliance. London, England: Routledge.
7.
DolinskiD.NawratR. (1998). Fear-then-relief procedure for producing compliance: Beware when the danger is over. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 27-50.
8.
DruryM. L.van SwolL. (2005, November). Are people who mimic others perceived as more friendly, likeable, persuasive, and knowledgeable?Presented at the National Communication Association Annual Conference, Boston, MA.
9.
FeeleyT. H.AnkerA. E.AloeA. (2012). The door-in-the-face persuasive message strategy: A meta-analysis of the first 35 years. Communication Monographs, 79, 316-343. doi:10.1080/03637751.2012.697631
10.
GuéguenN. (2009). Mimicry and seduction: An evaluation in a courtship context. Social Influence, 4, 249-255. doi:10.1080/15534510802628173
11.
GuéguenN. (2011). The mimicker is a mirror of myself: Impact of mimicking on self-consciousness and social anxiety. Social Behavior and Personality, 39, 725-728. doi:10.2224/sbp.2011.39.6.725
12.
GuéguenN.MartinA.MeineriS.SimonJ. (2013). Using mimicry to elicit answers to intimate questions in survey research. Field Methods, 25, 47-57. doi:10.1177/1525822X12449710
13.
InzlichtM.GutsellJ. N.LegaultL. (2012). Mimicry reduces racial prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 361-365. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.06.007
14.
JacobC.GuéguenN.MartinA.BoulbryG. (2011). Retail salespeople’s mimicry of customers: Effects on consumer behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 18, 381-388. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2010.11.006
15.
KnowlesE. S.RinerD. D. (2007). Omega approaches to persuasion: Overcoming resistance. In PratkanisA. R. (Ed.), The science of social influence: Advances and future progress (pp. 83-114). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
16.
KouzakovaM.KarremansJ. C.van BaarenR. B.van KnippenbergA. (2010). A stranger’s cold shoulder makes the heart grow fonder: Why not being mimicked by a stranger enhances longstanding relationship evaluations. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 87-93. doi:10.1177/1948550609355718
17.
KuleszaW.CislakA.VallacherR. R.NowakA.CzekielM.BedynskaS. (2015). The face of the chameleon: The experience of facial mimicry for the mimicker and the mimickee. The Journal of Social Psychology, 155, 590-604. doi:10.1080/00224545.2015.1032195
18.
KuleszaW.DolinskiD.HuismanA.MajewskiR. (2014). The echo effect: The power of verbal mimicry to influence prosocial behavior. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 182-201. doi:10.1177/0261927X13506906
LakensD.StelM. (2011). If they move in sync, they must feel in sync: Movement synchrony leads to attributions of rapport and entitativity. Social Cognition, 29(1), 1-14. doi:10.1521/soco.2011.29.1.1
21.
LeanderN. P.ChartrandT. L.WoodW. (2011). Mind your mannerisms: Behavioral mimicry elicits stereotype conformity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 195-201. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.09.002
22.
RedekerM.StelM.MastopJ. (2011). Does mimicking others change your self-view?The Journal of Social Psychology, 151, 387-390. doi:10.1080/00224545.2010.481691
23.
StelM.MastopJ.StrickM. (2011). The impact of mimicking on attitudes toward products presented in TV commercials. Social Influence, 6, 142-152. doi:10.1080/15534510.2011.580978
24.
StelM.van den BosK.SimS.RispensS. (2013). Mimicry and just world beliefs: Mimicking makes men view the world as more personally just. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52, 397-411. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02084.x
25.
SwaabR. I.MadduxW. W.SinaceurM. (2011). Early words that work: When and how virtual linguistic mimicry facilitates negotiation outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 616-621. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.01.005
26.
TannerR. J.FerraroR.ChartrandT. L.BettmanJ. R.van BaarenR. (2008). Of chameleons and consumption: The impact of mimicry on choice and preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 754-766. doi:10.1086/522322
27.
van BaarenR. B.HollandR. W.KawakamiK.van KnippenbergA. (2004). Mimicry and prosocial behavior. Psychological Science, 15, 71-74. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.01501012.x
28.
van BaarenR. B.HollandR. W.SteenaertB.van KnippenbergA. (2003). Mimicry for money: Behavioral consequences of imitation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 393-398. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00014-3
