
How to Be Persuasive - mixmax
http://www.moskalyuk.com/blog/yes-50-scientifically-proven-ways-to-be-persuasive/1624
======
randomwalker
I'm glad someone wrote this up. When I was reading the book I started to do
exactly this, but then it was such an interesting read that I couldn't tear
myself away after each chapter to write the summary. The lessons have proven
very useful both in my start-up and in personal life.

The best thing IMO is that the authors are all about playing it completely
straight. You probably wouldn't guess that from the title of the book. But in
fact, each chapter ends with advice on how not to misuse the technique you
just learnt.

I highly recommend that you read the book rather than just skimming the
summary. The reason is that there are numerous case studies in the book (drawn
from actual scientific studies) of counterintuitive human behavior, which the
authors then explain. The examples will make the material stick in your head a
lot better.

------
ShabbyDoo
I'm reading this book now but prefer Caldini's _Influence_
([http://www.amazon.com/Influence-Psychology-Persuasion-
Busine...](http://www.amazon.com/Influence-Psychology-Persuasion-Business-
Essentials/dp/006124189X/)) because it takes a more systematic approach to
understanding what persuades others. For example, a chapter is dedicated to
"social proof" and relevant experiments showing its power and subtleties are
discussed.

~~~
xel02
I have influence and am considering this book. Is there any significant
difference in content?

~~~
ShabbyDoo
I'm only about 1/4 the way through. Some of the experiments cited seem to have
been conducted after the initial release of Influence. I think that "50 Ways"
is designed to be an easier read, but it doesn't give one the framework
obtained by Influence.

------
cubix
I recently saw no. 2 put into practice ("... the message mentioned that
majority of the guests who stayed in this specific room chose to be more
environmentally conscious and reused their towels") almost word for word. It
struck me as so obviously manipulative that I left my towels in a crumpled
heap on the floor, which I don't normally do, as a matter of principle.

~~~
randomwalker
I don't get why you think it's manipulative. The book has a prominent caution
not to use such a message unless it is true (see my other comment.) Assuming
the hotel wasn't lying, what exactly is the harm?

The thing you would realize if you read the book is that all of our normal
conversation is "manipulative," in that we are trying to elicit some desired
response from the other person. Otherwise we'd speak like a robot, with no
emotions or facial expressions, always make pure statements of fact and never
get anything accomplished.

~~~
cubix
First of all, their motive is primarily cost savings rather than
environmental, which is fine -- I want lower hotel costs too. If they asked me
to reuse the towel to reduce costs, I could respect that and would likely
comply. They are using the guilt many people harbour about the environment to
get what they want. Just be honest.

Secondly, the "majority of guests ..." is a blatant example of argumentum ad
populum, a logical fallacy. Appeal to me based on my self-interest, appeal to
me based on the environment -- I may or may not agree -- but simply stating
what other people are doing is not sufficient. I disagree with a lot of what
other people do. Also, devices like "in your specific room" are transparent
and annoying. If I checked-in to a particular room where, by sheer chance, the
last 200 people trashed it, would it be then OK to do the same? That's the
same argument they're using.

Oh, and one small thing, they're claiming to know why the previous guests
picked up their towels up, and therefore to be mind readers since there was no
survey. They can't say "well, that's the popular opinion" because they're
talking about that specific room.

~~~
gnaritas
> but simply stating what other people are doing is not sufficient

That depends entirely on the culture of the audience, it'd likely work pretty
well on Asians because of their more collective culture where everyone cares
very much what other people are doing.

You're likely an outlier, those things that annoy you might be very effective
on the general populace. Honesty is not always the most effective strategy.

~~~
cubix
The strategy may work, at least in the short term.

------
sofal
It strikes me that there could easily be a mismatch between the actual intent
of the person utilizing these tricks and the perceived intent. To the extent
that these two are the same, these are great methods to use. If they are
different, then these tricks will lead to greater disillusionment in the long
run, requiring even subtler approaches.

I can't stand to walk through a mall or browse the web without Adblock because
it's like swimming through a sea of lies. Somewhere out there are honest and
genuine marketers with a product that is deserving of everything they say
about it, but I can't hear them through the noise of all the other marketers
using the same exact tactics.

------
hendler
Scientifically proven; with no proofs.

"The authors take the position that persuasion is a science, not art, hence
with the right approach anybody can become the master in the skill of
persuasion."

My approach is a bit simpler than 50 tactics. My two favorite forms of
persuasion are to be honest, and be correct. Maybe it's obvious I'm not in
marketing.

The closest thing in the text to "be honest" was "Admitting you’re wrong makes
people more trustworthy."

I didn't read the article carefully - maybe the book is a good read.

~~~
mixmax
You're right about the proofs, there should have been sources included. The
book might be more thorough...

I think you're oversimplifying a field you're not familiar with though, it's
like a non-hacker saying that all you need to store data is to set up a
microsoft Access database, and you're good to go. It's correct, but misses a
lot of problems and subtleties.

~~~
ShabbyDoo
The book is well footnoted and uses as its examples the actual experiments
performed.

------
Hexstream
"Admitting you’re wrong makes people more _trustworthy_."

Wouldn't that make them more _trustful_?

~~~
chairface
It's awkward, but I believe they intend "you're" and "people" to refer to the
same entity(s).

But I see what you're saying.

------
coglethorpe
"Group A drank regular orange juice, group B drank _orange juice infused with
caffeine_."

Want this.

~~~
jerf
At the risk of killing you, <http://www.aonevitamins.com/caffeine.htm> , which
is simply the first hit for "caffiene powder". It's not exactly a tricky
recipe.

~~~
spydez
United Nuclear has it cheaper. <http://www.unitednuclear.com/chem.htm>

Just, yeah. Don't kill yourself. :P Lethal dose is somewhere between 10 and 20
grams. Rough, spydez-levels of caffeination call for ~1/2 teaspoon of pure
caffeine powder per gallon of water or juice or tea or what have you.

Enjoy.

Or, for extra credit, make a caffeinated heavy water ice cube.

------
aik
Anyone find any of these tactics to be unethical?

------
sutro
Summary: People are idiots.

