Discuss the use of two compliance techniques.

The command term “discuss” requires candidates to offer a considered review of two compliance techniques. Although the response must address two techniques the discussion does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.

Compliance techniques that are addressed may include, but are not limited to:
• reciprocity (Lynne & McCall,1998; Tiger & Fox, 1989)
• foot-in-the-door (Petrova, 2007; Sherman, 1980; Freedman & Fraser, 1966)
• door-in-the-face (Gueguen & Meineri, 2011; Cialdini, 1975)
• low-balling (Burger & Cornelius, 2003; Palak, 1980).

Discussion may include, but is not limited to:
• efficacy of the technique
• levels of compliance affected by factors such as liking, authority, etc
• the role of cognitive dissonance
• the need for social acceptance
• the role of goal gradients
• methodological and ethical considerations
• cultural and gender considerations
• contrary findings or explanations.

If a candidate discusses more than two compliance techniques, credit should be given only to the first two compliance techniques.

If a candidate discusses only one compliance technique, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension, up to a maximum of [4] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C, organization.