Weapons of Influence, Part I
In Susan Weinschenk’s (2009) book ”Neuro Web Design” she writes about how websites influence people’s choices unconsciously. Weinschenk shows how influence and persuasion is wired into our brains. This essentially explains why we find attractive people or dangerous car chases persuasive without even being aware of that. Many of the examples used center around the known principles from Cialdini’s (2007) seminal book “Influence”. The best is of course to read both Weinschenk’s and Cialdini’s books, however, if you have little time available, here is a summary of some of the main principles of persuasion:
–>
1. Active participation creates involvement. All social network sites require active participation by its members and they are also the fastest growing websites. I have no 
idea what the next big thing in technology is going to be, but the safest bet is on technology that is used to communicate and be social. There is nothing people enjoy more than uploading personal photos, sharing videos, expressing their opinions, etc. Someone once said a bit humorously: “Anyone who denies that they enjoy talking about themselves is either lying or lacking in self-understanding”. I would not agree with the statement literally, but I agree that we love to share our selves with others.
2. Low-ball tactics. If you would like people to share some information so you can learn more about the users of your shareware application, you may find it difficult to ask people to submit information online. But, the chances are that if you start by requesting a small donation to keep continuing to make the application, and then request for information, more people will be willing to share information. Being asked to share information when you have declined to donate money may seem like a minor thing to do. However, make sure the initial request seems reasonable and somewhat in proportion to your second request (the target). It would not be a good idea to begin by requesting a donation of €50 and then asking for information.
3. Foot-in-the-door tactic. This is more or less the opposite of low-ball tactics. You begin by making small requests and then increase the scope of your requests. A funny example of the principle in practice was illustrated on a Norwegian television show where an interviewer knocked on people’s doors and simply asked them about how they were living, next he asked for permission to come in and see how they were living, and so it went that he even got to look into people’s bedside drawer a place you would normally not let many people in.
4. Social validation. Learning to know what others think is important. 
Sometimes we are introduced to products or services we do not know much about. How to decide if this is interesting or good for you? Well, have a look at what others have done or think about it. iTunes’ Genius function is a good example of social proof. Genius recommends music albums and songs based on what music you have on your iPod or iPhone. And you can also see what other people that listen to the same music as you have bought. You can give ratings, write reviews, and read what others think. This can be quite effective, especially when an album or song is just a mouse click away.
5. Reciprocity. Giving someone a preview, demo or sample of your product will make that person feel indebted to you, and no one likes to feel indebted. How do most people resolve this uncomfortable situation? By giving back (or reciprocating). Notice that there is an asymmetrical power relation here too. The person who first performs a service also has the power to decide when he or she wants something in return (“I gave you a demo which ends right here. Now, if you want more, you will have to pay”).
6. Rewards. Rewarding people’s behaviour reinforces that particular behaviour. Simple learning principles like this can be very effective. However, they should be used with caution. For example, rewarding people on a variable-ratio schedule makes the rewards seem scarce and unpredictable, and ask anyone with a gambling or gaming problem and they will tell you that a game with a variable-ratio schedule is more addictive than any other game. Rewards can also switch the motivation for using a technology from intrinsically to extrinsically driven and we know that people often lose interest in what they were doing when this happens. Not sure how this motivational change can affect business? Here is a little thought experiment: When you start paying a child that enjoys making puzzles a small amount of money (e.g. €1) for each puzzle they complete for a short period of time. And then you withdraw the reward (money). If you compare the number of completed puzzles, do you think the child would complete more or fewer puzzles after the inducements compared to before?
We have covered six of the principles here and now. There are more, so stay tuned!
References
Cialdini, R. B. (2007). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. HarperCollins: New York.
Weinschenk, S. M. (2009). Neuro web design: What makes them click? New Riders: Berkeley, CA.
See also