June 19, 2024

Have you ever done something you didn’t want to do simply because someone else asked? Buying something after being persuaded by a pushy salesperson or trying a particular brand of soda after seeing a commercial endorsement featuring your favorite celebrity are two examples of what is known as compliance.

At a Glance

Compliance involves changing your behaviors because someone else asks or tells you to do so. This can be direct, like a friend asking you for a favor, or indirect, such as a business using advertising to convince you to buy their product.

Learning more about the psychology of compliance and exploring some examples can help you better understand how it can affect social behavior.

What Is Compliance?

In psychology, compliance refers to changing one’s behavior at the request or direction of another person.

Unlike obedience, in which the individual making the request for change is in a position of authority, compliance does not rely a power differential.

Compliance involves changing your behavior because someone asked you to do so. While you may have had the option to refuse the request, you chose to comply.

It is important to distinguish between compliance and acceptance. Compliance involves changing a behavior in public, but not necessarily in private. While you might modify your behavior, it does not mean that you necessarily agree with it.

There are many different situations where compliance comes into play. Some examples include:

  • Buying something because a salesperson makes a pitch and then asks you to make a purchase
  • Agreeing when a friend asks, “Can you do me a favor?”
  • Seeing an ad on a website, clicking it, and then making a purchase

Sometimes compliance can involve a direct request. Someone asks you specifically to do something, and you do it. In other cases, the request may be more subtle and even insidious.


Compliance is defined as changing behavior in response to a request. Such requestions can be direct, but they can also involve more indirect forms of social influence.

Examples of Compliance

It can be helpful to consider a few different examples of compliance to better understand how it works. Some examples of compliance include:

  • A child cleaning up their room because their parent asked them to
  • A student helping another student with their homework when asked
  • Buying an item because a salesperson encourages you to do so
  • Helping a friend because they ask you for a favor
  • Assisting someone because they have helped you in the past
  • Stopping at a stop sign because you know that failure to do so might result in a ticket
  • Wearing a mask and socially distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic
  • Following your doctor’s treatment recommendations for managing a health problem or mental illness, including attending therapy sessions and taking your medication

Techniques Used in Compliance

Compliance is a major topic of interest within the field of consumer psychology. This specialty area focuses on the psychology of consumer behavior, including how sellers can influence buyers and persuade them to purchase goods and services.

Marketers often rely on a number of different strategies to obtain compliance from consumers. The following are just a few common techniques they might use.

The “Door-in-the-Face” Technique

In this approach, marketers start by asking for a large commitment. When the other person refuses, they then make a smaller and more reasonable request.

For example, imagine that a business owner asks you to make a large investment in a new business opportunity. After you decline the request, the business owner asks if you could at least make a small product purchase to help them out.

After refusing the first offer, you might feel compelled to comply with their second appeal.

The “Foot-in-the-Door” Technique

In this approach, marketers start by asking for and obtaining a small commitment. Once you have complied with the first request, you are more likely to also comply with a second, larger request.

For example, your coworker asks if you fill in for them for a day. After you say yes, they then ask if you could just continue to fill in for the rest of the week.

The “That’s-Not-All” Technique

Often on a television infomercial, once a product has been pitched, the seller then adds an additional offer before the potential purchaser has made a decision.

“That’s not all,” the salesperson might suggest, “If you buy a set of widgets now, we’ll throw in an extra widget for free!” The goal is to make the offer as appealing as possible.

The “Lowball” Technique

This strategy involves getting a person to make a commitment and then raising the terms or stakes of that commitment.

For example, a salesperson might get you to agree to buy a particular cell phone plan at a low price before adding on a number of hidden fees that then make the plan much more costly.


This approach involves gaining approval from the target in order to gain compliance. Strategies such as flattering the target or presenting oneself in a way that appeals to the individual are often used in this approach.


People are more likely to comply if they feel that the other person has already done something for them. We have been socialized to believe that if people extend kindness to us, we should return the favor.

Researchers have found that the reciprocity effect is so strong that it can work even when the initial favor is uninvited or comes from someone we do not like.

Research on Compliance

There are a number of well-known studies that have explored issues related to compliance, conformity, and obedience.

The Asch Conformity Experiments

Psychologist Solomon Asch conducted a series of experiments to demonstrate how people conform in groups. Participants were shown three lines of different lengths, and then asked to select which line matched a fourth “standard” line.

When others in the group (who were planted) selected the wrong line, many participants would conform to group pressure and choose the wrong line length.

The Milgram Obedience Experiment

Stanley Milgram’s famous and controversial obedience experiments revealed how the power of authority could get people to obey. In these experiments, participants were directed by the experimenter to deliver electrical shocks to another person.

Even though the shocks were not real, the participants genuinely believed that they shocked the other person.

Milgram found that 65% of people would deliver the maximum, possibly fatal, electrical shocks on the orders of an authority figure.

The Stanford Prison Experiment

During the 1970s, psychologist Philip Zimbardo conducted an experiment in which participants played the roles of guards and prisoners in a mock prison set up in the basement of the psychology department at Stanford University.

Originally slated to last two weeks, the Stanford prison experiment had to be terminated after just six days after the guards began displaying abusive behavior and the prisoners became anxious and highly stressed. The experiment demonstrated how people would comply with the expectations that come from particular social roles.


Several well-known psychology experiments have explored some of the conditions in which compliance occurs. Such experiments include Asch’s line experiments, Milgram’s obedience experiments, and the Stanford prison experiment.

Key Factors Affecting Compliance

Several essential factors influence compliance. The presence of these factors makes it more likely that people will comply.

  • Affinity: People are more likely to comply when they believe they share something in common with the person making the request.
  • Group influence: Being in the immediate presence of a group makes compliance more likely.
  • Group size: The likelihood of compliance increases with the number of people present. If only one or two people are present, a person might buck the group opinion and refuse to comply.
  • Group affiliation: When group affiliation is important to people, they are more likely to comply with social pressure. For example, if a college student places great importance on belonging to a college fraternity, they are more likely to go along with the group’s requests even if it goes against their own beliefs or wishes.

What This Means For You

Compliance can play a role in many everyday actions that people take, from the purchases they make to the way they respond to others. Understanding how compliance works, and learning to recognize some common persuasive techniques that marketers use to obtain compliance, may help you make better decisions.

Verywell Mind uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read our editorial process to learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.
  1. APA Dictionary of Psychology. Compliance. American Psychological Association.

  2. Sowden S, Koletsi S, Lymberopoulos E, Militaru E, Catmur C, Bird G. Quantifying compliance and acceptance through public and private social conformity. Conscious Cogn. 2018;65:359-367. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2018.08.009

  3. Naghavi S, Mehrolhassani MH, Nakhaee N, Yazdi-Feyzabadi V. Effective factors in non-compliance with therapeutic orders of specialists in outpatient clinics in Iran: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):413. doi:10.1186/s12913-019-4229-4

  4. Guéguen N. Door-in-the-face technique and delay to fulfill the final request: An evaluation with a request to give blood. J Psychol. 2014;148(5):569-576. doi:10.1080/00223980.2013.817963

  5. Guéguen N, Silone F, David M. The effect of the two feet-in-the-door technique on tobacco deprivation. Psychol Health. 2016;31(6):768-775. doi:10.1080/08870446.2016.1154146

  6. Fennis BM, Janssen L. Mindlessness revisited: Sequential request techniques foster compliance by draining self-control resources. Curr Psychol. 2010;29(3):235–246. doi:10.1007/s12144-010-9082-x

  7. Guéguen N, Pascual A. Low-ball and compliance: Commitment even if the request is a deviant one. Social Influence. 2014;9(3):162-171. doi:10.1080/15534510.2013.798243

  8. Robertson JC. The effects of ingratiation and client incentive on auditor judgement. Behav Res Account. 2010;22(2):69-86. doi:10.2308/bria.2010.22.2.69

  9. Malmendier U, te Velde VL, Weber RA. Rethinking reciprocity. Ann Rev Econ. 2014;6:849-874. doi:10.1146/annurev-economics-080213-041312

  10. Asch SE. Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied. 1956;70(9):1-70. doi:10.1037/h0093718

  11. Russell NJ. Milgram’s obedience to authority experiments: Origins and early evolution. Br J Soc Psychol. 2011;50(1):140-162. doi:10.1348/014466610X492205

  12. Bartels J. Revisiting the Stanford prison experiment, again: Examining demand characteristics in the guard orientation. J Soc Psychol. 2019;159(6):780-790. doi:10.1080/00224545.2019.1596058

  13. Cullum J, O’Grady M, Armeli S, Tennen H. The role of context-specific norms and group size in alcohol consumption and compliance drinking during natural drinking events. Basic Appl Soc Psych. 2012;34(4):304-312. doi:10.1080/01973533.2012.693341

Additional Reading

  • Weiten W, Dunn DS, Hammer EY. Psychology Applied to Modern Life: Adjustment in the 21st Century. Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the “Everything Psychology Book.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *