>If you read the entire paper, she basically obliterates the notion that humans behave rationally. Through a series of experiments, she proves that whenever a “because” is appended to a request...
The blog author does not understand the paper. The paper argues people comply because a reason is given. Not because they used the word "because". The paper does not "prove" that the word 'because' is any more special than providing a reason, or using a synonym in general, such as 'since'.
Also saying the paper "proves" something is a misunderstanding of these papers & science in general. The experiments only provide support for a hypothesis, they don't prove it.
"So why does this work? Professor Robert Cialdini (a giant in the field of persuasion) explains:
People simply like to have reasons for what they do.
Pretty obvious when you think about it. But the strange thing, as Ellen and I found out empirically, is that it hardly matters if the reason makes sense. "
Also when he does his experiment asking the girls number, he does not use the word 'because' instead he uses 'so'.
I take issue with the clickbait, and misunderstanding of the paper in general. The post is titled "One word can make you 50% more persuasive", and the author says that word is 'because' and it's proved by some paper.
The paper doesn't prove such a thing.
This post should be titled "Providing a reason can make you 50% more persuasive".
5 comments
[ 0.21 ms ] story [ 20.7 ms ] threadThe blog author does not understand the paper. The paper argues people comply because a reason is given. Not because they used the word "because". The paper does not "prove" that the word 'because' is any more special than providing a reason, or using a synonym in general, such as 'since'.
Also saying the paper "proves" something is a misunderstanding of these papers & science in general. The experiments only provide support for a hypothesis, they don't prove it.
"So why does this work? Professor Robert Cialdini (a giant in the field of persuasion) explains:
People simply like to have reasons for what they do. Pretty obvious when you think about it. But the strange thing, as Ellen and I found out empirically, is that it hardly matters if the reason makes sense. "
Also when he does his experiment asking the girls number, he does not use the word 'because' instead he uses 'so'.
The paper doesn't prove such a thing.
This post should be titled "Providing a reason can make you 50% more persuasive".