Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Effects of Personality on Cialdini's Persuasive Strategies

There are ongoing efforts by researchers to find effective ways to personalize persuasive applications for maximum impact on behavioral change. Recently, research has shown that personality traits can predict the responsiveness of individuals to persuasive strategies [1], [4]. While there have been few studies on the influence of the Big Five on Cialdini’s six principles of persuasion (e.g., [1] among the Turkish population), studies among individualist cultures are scarce. To bridge this gap, we conducted a study of 216 Canadians to uncover how the Big Five impacts Cialdini’s persuasion principles and compare our findings with those of Alkış and Temizel [1]. The prior study by these authors has some limitations, such as the use of convenience sample. Our study addresses this limitation by recruiting subjects beyond the four walls of the university.

52 Poster Abstracts Effects of Personality on Cialdini’s Persuasive Strategies Kiemute Oyibo1, Rita Orji2, & Julita Vassileva1 1 University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada 2 University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada ✉ {kiemute.oyibo, jiv}@cs.usask.ca, [email protected] Introduction There are ongoing efforts by researchers to find effective ways to personalize persuasive applications for maximum impact on behavioral change. Recently, research has shown that personality traits can predict the responsiveness of individuals to persuasive strategies [1], [4]. While there have been few studies on the influence of the Big Five on Cialdini’s six principles of persuasion (e.g., [1] among the Turkish population), studies among individualist cultures are scarce. To bridge this gap, we conducted a study of 216 Canadians to uncover how the Big Five impacts Cialdini’s persuasion principles and compare our findings with those of Alkış and Temizel [1]. The prior study by these authors has some limitations, such as the use of convenience sample. Our study addresses this limitation by recruiting subjects beyond the four walls of the university. Method We designed an online survey using existing scales on the Big Five personality traits [2] and Cialdini’s persuasion principles [3] and recruited subjects on the University of Saskatchewan website and Amazon Mechanical Turk. The former were given a chance to win a $50 CAD gift card, while the latter were paid $0.8 per participant. A total of 216 Canadians participated in the study: 31.5% (males), 65.3% (females) and 3.2% (unknown). Further, 32.9% were between 18-24 years old and 67.1% above 24. Lastly, 25.0%, 50.9% and 24.1% had high-school, university and other education respectively. Results We built a model of each persuasive strategy, with the personality traits as predictors [1], [4]. We assessed the inner models and took the recommended steps to ensure the reliability and validity of the constructs. We present our results as follows: 1. Authority: It is negatively influenced by Openness (β = -0.14, p < 0.05), but positively influenced by Agreeableness (β = 0.25, p < 0.01). 2. Commitment: It is positively influenced by Conscientiousness (β = 0.17, p < 0.05) and Agreeableness (β = 0.18, p < 0.05). 3. Consensus: It is negatively influenced by Openness (β = -0.18, p < 0.01), but positively influenced by Neuroticism (β = 0.27, p < 0.001). 4. Liking: It is negatively influenced by Openness (β = -0.17, p < 0.05) and Conscientiousness (β = -0.36, p < 0.001), but positively influenced by Agreeableness (β = 0.19, p < 0.05). 5. Reciprocity: It is positively influenced by Conscientiousness (β = 0.25, p < 0.001). 6. Scarcity: None of the personality traits has significant influence on Scarcity. Discussion and Conclusion Overall, our model shows that Agreeableness and Conscientiousness are the strongest predictors of Cialdini’s principles, as found by [1]. Agreeableness positively influences Authority (β = 0.25, p < 0.01), Commitment (β = 0.18, p < 0.05) and Liking (β = 0.19, p < 0.05), while Conscientiousness positively influences Commitment (β = 0.17, p < 0.05) and Reciprocity (β = 0.25, p < 0.001), but negatively influences Liking (β = -0.36, p < 0.001). While the Big Five predicts Authority, Commitment, Consensus, Liking and Reciprocity, it does not predict Scarcity, indicating it may be one of the hardest persuasive strategies to predict. Similarly, while Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Openness and Neuroticism predict the persuasive strategies, Extraversion does not. In sum, our findings replicate half of the findings by [1] and reveal that individuals who are 1) high in Conscientiousness are more responsive to Adjunct Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, April 3-6, 2017, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Copyright held by the authors. 53 Poster Abstracts Commitment and Reciprocity, but less responsive to Liking; 2) high in Agreeableness are more responsive to Authority, Commitment and Liking; 3) low in Openness are more responsive to Authority, Consensus and Liking; and 4) high in Neuroticism are more responsive to Consensus. References 1. Alkış, N., Temizel, T.T.: The impact of individual differences on influence strategies. Pers. Individ. Dif. 87, 147–152 (2015). 2. Gosling, S.D. et al.: A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. J. Res. Pers. 37, 6, 504–528 (2003). 3. Kaptein, M. et al.: Adaptive Persuasive Systems: A Study of Tailored Persuasive Text Messages to Reduce Snacking. ACM Trans. Interact. Intell. Syst. 2, 2, 1–25 (2012). 4. Orji, R. et al.: Towards Personality-driven Persuasive Health Games and Gamified Systems. Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. (2017). Adjunct Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, April 3-6, 2017, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Copyright held by the authors.