Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 49–55

The use of interpersonal touch in securing compliance

  • Frank N. WillisJr.
  • Helen K. Hamm
Article

Abstract

Direct gaze and a personal approach distance have been shown to increase compliance in a face to face situation. In the present study touch was varied along with gender and difficulty of request to assess the effects upon rate of compliance. The results indicated that touch was important in securing compliance, moreso if the request was more difficult, and most important in securing same gender compliance.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aguilera, D. C. Relationships between physical contact and verbal interaction in nurses and and patients.Journal of Psychiatric Nursing 1967,5 5–21.Google Scholar
  2. Baron, R. A. Behavioral effects of interpersonal attraction: Compliance with requests from liked and disliked others.Psychonomic Science 1971,25 325–326.Google Scholar
  3. Bickman, L. Sex and helping behavior.Journal of Social Psychology 1974,93 43–53.Google Scholar
  4. Ellsworth, P. C., & Langer, E. J. Staring and approach: An interpretation of the stare as a nonspecific activator.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1976,33 117–122.Google Scholar
  5. Emswiller, T., Deaux, K., & Willits, J. E. Similarity, sex, and requests for small favors.Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1971,1 284–291.Google Scholar
  6. Ernest, R. C., & Cooper, R. E. “Hey mister, do you have any change?”: Two real world studies of proxemic effects on compliance with a mundane request.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1974,1 158–159.Google Scholar
  7. Fisher, J. D., Rytting, M., & Heslin, R. Hands touching hands: Affective and evaluative effects of an interpersonal touch.Sociometry 1976,39 416–421.Google Scholar
  8. Geis, F., & Viskne, V. Touching: Physical contact and the level of arousal.Proceedings of the annual convention of the American Psychological Association 1972,7 179–180.Google Scholar
  9. Henley, N. M. Status and sex: Some touching observations.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 1973,2 91–93.Google Scholar
  10. Jourard, S. M. An exploratory study of body accessibility.British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 1966,5 221–231.Google Scholar
  11. Jourard, S. M., & Rubin, J. Physical contact and self-disclosure.Journal of Humanistic Psychology 1968,7 38–48.Google Scholar
  12. Kleinke, C. R. Compliance to requests made by gazing and touching experimenters in field settings.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1977,13 218–223.Google Scholar
  13. Konecni, V. J., Libuser, L., Morton, H., & Ebbesin, E. B. Effects of violation of personal space on escape and helping responses.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1975,11 288–299.Google Scholar
  14. Pattison, J. E. Effects of touch on self-exploration and the therapeutic relationship.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1973,40 170–175.Google Scholar
  15. Raiche, B. M. The effects of touch on counselor portrayal of empathy and regard, and the promotion of self-disclosure, as measured by video-tape simulation.Dissertation Abstracts International 1977,38 (4-A), 1902–1903.Google Scholar
  16. Regan, J. W., & Brehm, J. W. Compliance in buying as a function of inducements that threaten freedom. In L. Bickman and T. Henchy (Eds.)Beyond the laboratory: Field research in Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972, 269–274.Google Scholar
  17. Silverthorne, C., Noreen, C., Hunt, T., & Rota, L. The effects of tactile stimulation on visual experience.Journal of Social Psychology 1972,88 153–154.Google Scholar
  18. Walsh, E. J. Petition signing in town and on campus.Journal of Social Psychology 1977,102 323–324.Google Scholar
  19. Williams, S. J., & Willis, F. N. Interpersonal touch among preschool children at play.The Psychological Record 1978,28 501–508.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank N. WillisJr.
    • 1
  • Helen K. Hamm
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MissouriKansas City

Personalised recommendations