Can you say anything more substantive than that? It’s plausible given the studies mentioned in Cialdini, an example of which follows:
Freedman and Fraser didn’t stop there. They tried a slightly different procedure on another sample of homeowners. These people first received a request to sign a petition that favored “keeping California beautiful.” Of course, nearly everyone signed since state beauty, like efficiency in government or sound prenatal care, is one of those issues no one opposes. After waiting about two weeks, Freedman and Eraser sent a new “volunteer worker” to these same homes to ask the residents to allow the big DRIVE CAREFULLY sign to be erected on their lawns. In some ways, the response of these homeowners was the most astounding of any in the study.
Approximately half of these people consented to the installation of the DRIVE CAREFULLY billboard, even though the small commitment they had made weeks earlier was not to driver safety but to an entirely different public-service topic, state beautification.
-- Robert Caildini, Influence: Science and Practice
I wasn’t agreeing or disagreeing with the substance of the linked abstract—I only meant to say that it probably didn’t belong in this thread because it looked more like a link to research than what usually goes in the ‘Rationality Quotes’ thread.
We have ‘open threads’ in the discussion section from time to time. This would fit there. (Start a new one according to the template if there isn’t a recent one open.)
Not sure if this counts as a quote...
I am fairly sure it does not.
Can you say anything more substantive than that? It’s plausible given the studies mentioned in Cialdini, an example of which follows:
-- Robert Caildini, Influence: Science and Practice
I wasn’t agreeing or disagreeing with the substance of the linked abstract—I only meant to say that it probably didn’t belong in this thread because it looked more like a link to research than what usually goes in the ‘Rationality Quotes’ thread.
I am fairly sure that’s a terrible counter-argument.
We have ‘open threads’ in the discussion section from time to time. This would fit there. (Start a new one according to the template if there isn’t a recent one open.)