DITF Implications

Cialdini & Ascani, 1976

One of the most significant implications of this study was the ineffectiveness of minimal-then-critical request (foot-in-the-door). This was contrary to the existing literature on the FITD technique The experimenters hypothesize that this may have been due to the operationalization of the technique. large The DITF technique was supported by this experiment. Those who received the large request were found to verbally agree to perform that request, verbally comply to the request without outside influence, and to committ themselves more often to future favors.

Even-Chen, Yinon, & Bizman:Study 1, 1978

This study shows that DITF effects are limited to situations in which the size of the initial request is extremely large. Although, the request should not be unreasonably extreme.

Even-Chen, Yinon, & Bizman:Study 2, 1978

This study shows that DITF effects are limited to situations in which the size of the initial request is extremely large. Although, the request should not be unreasonably extreme.

Foss & Dempsey: Study 3, 1979

The implications of this study are that once again, researchers have found that FITD and DITF techniques are not successful in the solicitation of blood donors.

Goldman & Creason, 1981

The results supported the hypothesis that an extremely hard request, followed by a hard request, followed by the target request would further enhance compliance over previous "one-face" studies. According to the statistics in this article, the "two-face" procedure increased compliance compared to the "one-face" procedure by 63 percent. This suggests an increasing linear relationship. Does compliance go up as the number of request go up? Or at what point will compliance level off or even sharply decline. This study suggested that in further studies it would be interesting to find out at what point compliance begins to decline. A second prediction of the study was that greater compliance to a request would be gained if the subject could decide the level of compliance he/she wished to give. This prediction received slight support. As one might expect, the greatest amount of effectiveness seems to be in the "two-face" procedure on this hypothesis.

Miller et al, 1976

The results suggest that the large-then-small request strategy is effective in producing compliance. Furthermore, the results support the view that it is the gaining component, and not the yielding component, that is the critical manipulation in eliciting compliance. According to the data, the gaining-only manipulation produced significantly more compliance than the control, while the yielding-only manipulation did not.

Even with the use of the telephone, which is often considered a difficult medium in which to obtain compliance, the technique resulted in dramatic acquiescence.

It should be noted that the results were probably as high as they were because the compliance with requests was socially desirable.

Mowen & Cialdini, Study I, 1980

The findings here suggest that effectiveness of the door-in-the-face technique may be affected by the context in which it is used. Further study may also suggest that if more is learned about the inclusion and exclusion of certain elements that add or detract from the success of the use of this technique could lead to more successful use of door-in-the-face strategies in the future.

Mowen & Cialdini, Study II, 1980

The research suggests that it is important to make concessions unambiguous. By making the second request part of the original, large request, the researcher can increase the target's perception of a concession. This invokes the norm that concessions should be reiprocated. This should suggest to business people that content and nature or the large request should be carefully considered. Why is the "face" technique more difficult to apply to a business context than to a charity context? In a charity context it appears unnecessary to make the second request a part of the first request. The authors believe that if it is recognized that the request comes from a business organization, defensive mechanisms are engaged. Targets become skeptical and suspicious of the motivations of the requester. It therefore becomes more difficult to create the impression that the second request (target request) is legitimate. The authors furter suggest that future research should replicate the findings across business contexts. The "face" procedure should be tried in other request contexts.

Reingen, 1978

These results are of value for anyone wishing to elicit compliance with a request to donate money. The experimental conditions produced greater donation totals than the control--a result that fund raisers, in particular, should find important.

It is of importance to note that these results existed in a prosocial environment, which begs the question of whether or not the techniques would be similarly effective in a strictly commercial setting.

Reingen & Kernan

The results of the research indicate that in a marketing setting the concessions made in the large initial request model do not increase compliance. This may be because concession making by a commercial source is perceived by the target as being driven by selfish motives. This results in a reduced need to reciprocate.

Schwarzwald, Raz, & Zvibel, 1979


The current research confirmed prior studies that established a need for a noticeable gap between the initial and subsequent request for the technique to be effective. It was also shown that when initial request were exaggerated in relation to reasonable standards subjects complied less frequently with the second request. Another implication is that initially large requests not only increased the compliance to contribute the sum of money asked for in the second request, but also for subjects to voluntarily offer smaller amounts if the requested amount was too large.

Shanab & Isonio, 1979

The results of the study indicate that delay makes it difficult for subjects to view the two requests as interrelated. This implies that the subjects in this study were unable to either contrast the two request or to perceive any yielding on the part of the experimenter. The researchers also implied that self-perception may have been an obstacle in complying with the second request. Subjects may have perceived themselves as noncompliant by rejecting the first request and therefore rejected the second request.

Shanab & O'Neill, 1979

The study indicated that the social desirability of request does not make a difference with subjects' likelihood to comply. It was also indicated that when an initial request was worse (socially) than the second request, the second condition was probably perceived as less aversive. If there had been no initial request of shocking human subjects, then shocking rats may have been perceived as more offensive.

Return to Dimensions Page

For information or feedback: sbb@badgerden.com
Created February 27, 1996; Last updated February 27, 1996