<p>I've found <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10810730701615198">an article by O'Keefe and Jensen (2007) that seems somewhat relevant</a>. It's a meta-analysis that finds, according to their abstract (p. 623):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>"...in disease prevention messages, gain-framed appeals, which
  emphasize the advantages of compliance with the communicator’s
  recommendation, are statistically significantly more persuasive than
  loss-framed appeals, which emphasize the disadvantages of
  noncompliance."</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The difference appears quite small, however; maybe not what you were looking for.</p>

<p>Reference:</p>

<p>O'Keefe, D. J., &amp; Jensen, J. D. The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. <em>Journal of Health Communication</em>, <em>12</em>, 623-644.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-02-06T22:43:59.190Z
Unfortunately, I don't believe that's the one. That seems to be more on the topic of expounding on benefits of compliance vs. the negatives of non-compliance, whereas the one I have in mind has more to do with a correlation between early commitment and follow-through.
Samuel Hulick
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-02-06T22:34:31.960Z
2012-02-06T22:34:31.960Z
Andy DeSoto
<p>The study you are looking for is</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Leventhal, H., Singer, R., &amp; Jones, S. (1965). Effects of fear and
  specificity of recommendation upon attitudes and behavior. <em>Journal of
  Personality and Social Psychology</em>, <em>2</em>(1), pp. 20-29. doi:
  10.1037/h0022089</p>
</blockquote>

<p>The study is mostly how you remember (though it was tetanus instead of the flu). Critically, the manipulation was intended to increase the the availability of receiving a tetanus shot by having rehearsed the steps needed to get one. Students were given a map of the campus with the health center circled, and were asked to review their schedule and find a time they might be able to go--however, they did <em>not</em> make an appointment. Thus, the commitment was only to themselves.</p>

<p>There are, of course, a wide variety of ways to increase consumer <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compliance_%28psychology%29" rel="noreferrer">compliance</a>, including  the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_in_the_door" rel="noreferrer">foot-in-the-door</a> strategy, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door_in_the_face" rel="noreferrer">door-in-the-face</a> strategy, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_effect" rel="noreferrer">framing effects</a> to name a few.</p>

<p>There is a wide body of literature in social psychology on the idea of influence. I highly recommend two books on the topic, both of which are leisure reads:</p>

<p>1) <a href="http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/014311526X" rel="noreferrer">Nudge</a> by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein (which mentions the Leventhal study!)</p>

<p>2) <a href="http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0205609996" rel="noreferrer">Influence: Science and Practice</a> by Robert Cialdini. There is a chapter specifically on Commitment (ch 3) which also talks about the <a href="http://www.mendeley.com/research/compliance-without-pressure-the-footinthedoor-technique/" rel="noreferrer">classic foot-in-the-door paper</a> (below), more in line with the commitment strategy you suggest.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Freedman, J.L., &amp; Fraser, S.C. (1966). Compliance without pressure:
  The foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social
  Psychology, 4, 195-202.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-06-06T19:47:16.820Z
FYI I tried to fix your broken link. Please improve my edit if I didn't link to the proper place. Thanks!
Josh
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-02-10T02:07:35.003Z
2012-06-06T19:46:54.840Z
2012-06-06T19:46:54.840Z
Jeff
<p>I'm faced with a UX problem of looking for ways to position a website to increase attendance at future "real world" events, and I'm remembering a study once conducted along these lines (details a bit hazy):</p>

<p><em>University students were given a presentation on the benefit of receiving flu shots and instructed on where to go to get them. One session's group received no further materials, while the other's group were given a map and asked to pick a time to report. The attendance rate in the latter group was substantially higher than the former.</em></p>

<p>I can't seem to find mentions of it online anywhere, though, and if anyone could point me towards more information on this or any other related study it would be highly appreciated.</p>

<terminology><reference-request><social-psychology><commitment>
Study on commitment and follow-through
Samuel Hulick
# Study on commitment and follow-through

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-02-06)

I'm faced with a UX problem of looking for ways to position a website to increase attendance at future "real world" events, and I'm remembering a study once conducted along these lines (details a bit hazy):

*University students were given a presentation on the benefit of receiving flu shots and instructed on where to go to get them. One session's group received no further materials, while the other's group were given a map and asked to pick a time to report. The attendance rate in the latter group was substantially higher than the former.*

I can't seem to find mentions of it online anywhere, though, and if anyone could point me towards more information on this or any other related study it would be highly appreciated.

**Tags:** terminology, reference-request, social-psychology, commitment


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2012-02-10. Score: 10 | Accepted answer

The study you are looking for is

> Leventhal, H., Singer, R., & Jones, S. (1965). Effects of fear and
> specificity of recommendation upon attitudes and behavior. *Journal of
> Personality and Social Psychology*, *2*(1), pp. 20-29. doi:
> 10.1037/h0022089

The study is mostly how you remember (though it was tetanus instead of the flu). Critically, the manipulation was intended to increase the the availability of receiving a tetanus shot by having rehearsed the steps needed to get one. Students were given a map of the campus with the health center circled, and were asked to review their schedule and find a time they might be able to go--however, they did *not* make an appointment. Thus, the commitment was only to themselves.

There are, of course, a wide variety of ways to increase consumer [compliance](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compliance_%28psychology%29), including the [foot-in-the-door](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_in_the_door) strategy, [door-in-the-face](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door_in_the_face) strategy, and [framing effects](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_effect) to name a few.

There is a wide body of literature in social psychology on the idea of influence. I highly recommend two books on the topic, both of which are leisure reads:

1) [Nudge](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/014311526X) by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein (which mentions the Leventhal study!)

2) [Influence: Science and Practice](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0205609996) by Robert Cialdini. There is a chapter specifically on Commitment (ch 3) which also talks about the [classic foot-in-the-door paper](http://www.mendeley.com/research/compliance-without-pressure-the-footinthedoor-technique/) (below), more in line with the commitment strategy you suggest.

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

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: FYI I tried to fix your broken link. Please improve my edit if I didn't link to the proper place. Thanks!  

---

### Answer by username_1 on 2012-02-06. Score: 7

I've found [an article by O'Keefe and Jensen (2007) that seems somewhat relevant](http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10810730701615198). It's a meta-analysis that finds, according to their abstract (p. 623):

> "...in disease prevention messages, gain-framed appeals, which
> emphasize the advantages of compliance with the communicator’s
> recommendation, are statistically significantly more persuasive than
> loss-framed appeals, which emphasize the disadvantages of
> noncompliance."

The difference appears quite small, however; maybe not what you were looking for.

Reference:

O'Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. *Journal of Health Communication*, *12*, 623-644.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Unfortunately, I don't believe that's the one. That seems to be more on the topic of expounding on benefits of compliance vs. the negatives of non-compliance, whereas the one I have in mind has more to do with a correlation between early commitment and follow-through.  

---

