Key ideas

Discussion on P2PU

Trying out two ways of encouraging users to contribute to a community: “foot-in-the-door” (FITD) and “low-ball” (LB). Low-ball elicited more work than foot-in-the-door. Worked as one-time intervention, not to create lasting increase in engagement

Developed by social psychology and marketing researchers, other techniques:

• door-in-the-face
  • Cialdini, R., et al. Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31, 2 (1975), 206.
• that’s-notall
  • Burger, J. Increasing compliance by improving the deal: The that’s-not-all technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51, 2 (1986), 277.
• bait-and-switch

Loosely-connected users work together to produce information and artifacts of value.

Most research has been conducted offline. Effect is often better in public settings with higher visibility, this might play out differently online, with more anonymity - are online social production communities public or private spaces (people work from their homes).

Also, e-mail is not as personal as face-to-face or phone, and e-mail overload may lead to people ignoring incoming messages.

Cyclopath, geographic wiki offering route-finding for cyclists in Minneapolis. Ask users to contribute tags to map.

Short e-mail with different text to three groups, FITD, LB, and control group.

• Response (yes or no, and number)
• Quantity of work (number of tag-applications, number of new tags)

Once a person performs a small request, he/she is more likely to perform a subsequent, larger demand.

Bem's self-perception theory: when a person is induced to comply with a smaller request, he/she is more likely to comply with a subsequent, larger request because of perceiving himself/herself as the type of person that does such tasks

Alternative: psychological reactance, conformity to existing social norms including reciprocity and cognitive dissonance

Freedman, J., and Fraser, S. Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4, 2 (1966), 195–202.

Once a person commits to a request, he/she is more likely to perform it at a later stage, even if its cost is increased.

commitment: people generally tend to stick to their commitments when acting in public view

Cialdini, R., et al. Low-ball procedure for producing compliance: Commitment then cost. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36, 5 (1978), 463–476.

LB significantly increased quantity of work subjects put in, FITD was not as successful.

When subsequently asked to do more work, FITD participants did less work than others.

Reciprocity, cyclopath did not return the favors asked.

Reactance to excessive requesting (either annoyance that they were being badgered, or feeling that they had already done their share)

Anchoring - this is the amount of work I should be doing (ie. minimal)