Norms of Social Conduct and the Foot-in-the-Door

Using an account analysis (giving excuses or justifications for compliance or noncompliance) to indicate the operation of social norms, the foot-in-the-door (FITD) paradigm was investigated with 155 Ss randomly assigned to 4 conditions: small-request only, large-request only control, small-request followed by large request (FITD), and small-request followed by a large-request with an excuse provided. The small request was to wear a button with a slogan against littering; the large one was to post a sign that read the same. A 3-factor interaction between compliance, category of account, and group indicated that (1) Ss were more likely to comply and give justifications in small-request-only groups; (2) Ss were more likely not to comply and give excuses in the large-request-only group; (3) Ss in the FITD group indicated a bimodal pattern of accounting and compliance; and (4) compliance in the FITD group was reduced when an excuse for noncompliance was provided. It is concluded that norms of social conduct may govern how people respond to different-sized requests from strangers and that the small-request/large-request sequence may be normatively ambiguous.