research-article

Persuading Teammates to Give: Systematic versus Heuristic Cues for Soliciting Loans

Authors:

Robert E. KrautAuthors Info & Claims

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 1, Issue CSCW

Article No.: 114, Pages 1 - 21

https://doi.org/10.1145/3134749

Published: 06 December 2017 Publication History

Abstract

Dual processing theories in psychology suggest that people process persuasive requests by assessing the quality of arguments (systematic processing) or by relying on heuristic rules (heuristic processing). However, the factors that act as systematic and heuristic processing cues and affect the success of persuasion have not been adequately described in social lending contexts. This research examines the effectiveness of systematic and heuristic cues in persuasive requests in Kiva lending teams intended to convince members to donate. An analysis of 88,596 requests exchanged in 1,610 teams shows that certain heuristic processing cues (e.g., liking between requesters and potential lenders, advocates low authority in their teams and the importance of the team to the lender) strongly predicted whether lenders would contribute to a loan request. In contrast, cues that required systematic processing are less influential. We also found that behavioral cues are more important than verbal ones. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our work.

References

[1]

Wei Ai, Roy Chen, Yan Chen, Qiaozhu Mei, and Webb Phillips. 2016. Recommending teams promotes prosocial lending in online microfinance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 113, 52 (2016), 14944--14948.

[2]

Tim Althoff, Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, and Dan Jurafsky. 2014. How to Ask for a Favor: A Case Study on the Success of Altruistic Requests Proceedings of ICWSM.

[3]

Charles S Areni and John R Sparks. 2005. Language power and persuasion. Psychology & Marketing Vol. 22, 6 (2005), 507--525.

[4]

Jack W Brehm. 1989. Psychological reactance: Theory and applications. NA-Advances in Consumer Research Volume 16 (1989).

[5]

Donn Byrne. 1997. An overview (and underview) of research and theory within the attraction paradigm. Journal of Social & Personal Relationships Vol. 14, 3 (1997), 417--431. English 0265--4075.

[6]

Simla Ceyhan, Xiaolin Shi, and Jure Leskovec. 2011. Dynamics of Bidding in a P2P Lending Service: Effects of Herding and Predicting Loan Success Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 547--556.

Digital Library

[7]

Shelly Chaiken. 1980. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 39, 5 (1980), 752.

[8]

Shelly Chaiken, Mark P Zanna, James M Olson, and C Peter Herman. 1987. The heuristic model of persuasion. In Social influence: the ontario symposium, Vol. Vol. 5. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 3--39.

[9]

Roy Chen, Yan Chen, Yang Liu, and Qiaozhu Mei. 2015. Does team competition increase pro-social lending? Evidence from online microfinance. Games and Economic Behavior (2015).

[10]

S Chen and Shelly Chaiken. 1999. The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. Guilford, New York, NY, 73--96.

[11]

Christy MK Cheung, Bo Sophia Xiao, and Ivy LB Liu. 2014. Do actions speak louder than voices? The signaling role of social information cues in influencing consumer purchase decisions. Decision Support Systems Vol. 65 (2014), 50--58.

Digital Library

[12]

Robert Cialdini. 2016. Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade. Simon and Schuster.

[13]

Robert B. Cialdini. 2009. Influence: Science and practice (bibinfoedition5th ed.). Allyn and Bacon, New York, NY, US. xv, 253 pages.

[14]

Robert B Cialdini and Nathalie Garde. 1987. Influence. Vol. Vol. 3. A. Michel.

[15]

Allan Cohen and David Bradford. 2007. Influence Without Authority 2Nd Ed.John Wiley & Sons.

[16]

Kay Deaux, Anne Reid, Kim Mizrahi, and Kathleen A Ethier. 1995. Parameters of social identity. Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 68, 2 (1995), 280.

[17]

Sanorita Dey, Brittany Duff, Karrie Karahalios, and Wai-Tat Fu. 2017. The Art and Science of Persuasion: Not All Crowdfunding Campaign Videos Are The Same Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 755--769.

Digital Library

[18]

Qianzhou Du, Weiguo Fan, Zhilei Qiao, Gang Wang, Xuan Zhang, and Mi Zhou. 2015. Money talks: A predictive model on crowdfunding success using project description Twenty-first Americas Conference on Information Systems.

[19]

Jefferson Duarte, Stephan Siegel, and Lance Young. 2012. Trust and credit: the role of appearance in peer-to-peer lending. Review of Financial Studies Vol. 25, 8 (2012), 2455--2484.

[20]

Naomi Ellemers, Russell Spears, and Bertjan Doosje. 2002. Self and social identity. Annual review of psychology Vol. 53, 1 (2002), 161--186.

[21]

Vincent Etter, Matthias Grossglauser, and Patrick Thiran. 2013. Launch Hard or Go Home!: Predicting the Success of Kickstarter Campaigns Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Online Social Networks (COSN '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 177--182.

Digital Library

[22]

Brian J Fogg. 2002. Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do. Ubiquity, Vol. 2002, December (2002), 5.

Digital Library

[23]

Robert H Gass and John S Seiter. 2015. Persuasion: Social influence and compliance gaining. Routledge.

[24]

Michael D Greenberg, Bryan Pardo, Karthic Hariharan, and Elizabeth Gerber. 2013. Crowdfunding support tools: predicting success & failure CHI'13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1815--1820.

Digital Library

[25]

Scott E Hartley. 2010. Kiva. org: Crowd-sourced microfinance and cooperation in group lending. (2010).

[26]

Michal Herzenstein, Scott Sonenshein, and Utpal M Dholakia. 2011. Tell me a good story and I may lend you money: The role of narratives in peer-to-peer lending decisions. Journal of Marketing Research Vol. 48, SPL (2011), S138--S149.

[27]

Christina Jenq, Jessica Pan, and Walter Theseira. 2015. Beauty, weight, and skin color in charitable giving. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization Vol. 119 (2015), 234--253.

[28]

Bibb Latane et almbox. 1981. The psychology of social impact. American psychologist Vol. 36, 4 (1981), 343--356.

[29]

Loraine Lau-Gesk and Joan Meyers-Levy. 2009. Emotional persuasion: When the valence versus the resource demands of emotions influence consumers' attitudes. Journal of Consumer Research Vol. 36, 4 (2009), 585--599.

[30]

Fiona Lettice, Palie Smart, Yehuda Baruch, and Mark Johnson. 2012. Navigating the impact-innovation double hurdle: The case of a climate change research fund. Research Policy, Vol. 41, 6 (2012), 1048--1057.

[31]

Bing Liu, Minqing Hu, and Junsheng Cheng. 2005. Opinion Observer: Analyzing and Comparing Opinions on the Web Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW '05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 342--351.

Digital Library

[32]

Yang Liu, Roy Chen, Yan Chen, Qiaozhu Mei, and Suzy Salib. 2012. "I Loan Because...": Understanding Motivations for Pro-social Lending Proceedings of the Fifth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (WSDM '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 503--512.

Digital Library

[33]

Michael Lynn. 1991. Scarcity effects on value: A quantitative review of the commodity theory literature. Psychology & Marketing Vol. 8, 1 (1991), 43--57.

[34]

Christopher D. Manning, Mihai Surdeanu, John Bauer, Jenny Finkel, Steven J. Bethard, and David McClosky. 2014. The Stanford CoreNLP Natural Language Processing Toolkit Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) System Demonstrations. 55--60.

[35]

ALEXANDRA MATEESCU. 2015. Peer-to-Peer Lending. Data & Society {online} (2015).

[36]

David W McMillan and David M Chavis. 1986. Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of community psychology Vol. 14, 1 (1986), 6--23.

[37]

Tomas Mikolov, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. 2013. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781 (2013).

[38]

Tanushree Mitra and Eric Gilbert. 2014. The language that gets people to give: Phrases that predict success on kickstarter Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing. ACM, 49--61.

Digital Library

[39]

Melina Moleskis and Miguel Ángel Canela. 2016. Crowdfunding Success: The Case Of Kiva. Org. (2016).

[40]

Ethan Mollick. 2014. The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of business venturing Vol. 29, 1 (2014), 1--16.

[41]

Michael Muller, Werner Geyer, Todd Soule, Steven Daniels, and Li-Te Cheng. 2013. Crowdfunding Inside the Enterprise: Employee-initiatives for Innovation and Collaboration. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 503--512.

Digital Library

[42]

Yoshikuni Ono and Masahiro Yamada. 2016. Do Voters Prefer Gender Stereotypic Candidates?: Evidence from a Conjoint Survey Experiment in Japan. (2016).

[43]

James W Pennebaker, Ryan L Boyd, Kayla Jordan, and Kate Blackburn. 2015. The development and psychometric properties of LIWC2015. Technical Report.

[44]

Richard Petty and John Cacioppo. 2012. Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer Science & Business Media.

[45]

Sung Youl Jun Praveen Aggarwal and Jong Ho Huh. 2011. Scarcity Messages: A Consumer Competition Perspective. Journal of Advertising Vol. 40, 3 (2011), 19--30.

[46]

Deborah A Prentice, Dale T Miller, and Jenifer R Lightdale. 1994. Asymmetries in attachments to groups and to their members: Distinguishing between common-identity and common-bond groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin Vol. 20, 5 (1994), 484--493.

[47]

Alan G Sanfey, James K Rilling, Jessica A Aronson, Leigh E Nystrom, and Jonathan D Cohen. 2003. The neural basis of economic decision-making in the ultimatum game. Science, Vol. 300, 5626 (2003), 1755--1758.

[48]

LJ Shrum, Min Liu, Mark Nespoli, and Tina M Lowrey. 2012. Persuasion in the Marketplace. The SAGE Handbook of Persuasion (2012), 314.

[49]

Paul J Silvia. 2005. Deflecting reactance: The role of similarity in increasing compliance and reducing resistance. Basic and Applied Social Psychology Vol. 27, 3 (2005), 277--284.

[50]

Alexander S Soldat and Robert C Sinclair. 2001. Colors, smiles, and frowns: External affective cues can directly affect responses to persuasive communications in a mood-like manner without affecting mood. Social Cognition, Vol. 19, 4 (2001), 469--490.

[51]

Henri Ed Tajfel. 1978. Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations.Academic Press.

[52]

Yla R Tausczik and James W Pennebaker. 2010. The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of language and social psychology Vol. 29, 1 (2010), 24--54.

[53]

Robert Tibshirani. 1996. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) (1996), 267--288.

[54]

Ilya Tirdatov. 2014. Web-based crowd funding: rhetoric of success. Technical Communication Vol. 61, 1 (2014), 3--24.

[55]

Valter Afonso Vieira. 2008. Consumer behavior and managerial decision making. Revista de Administracc ao Contemporânea, Vol. 12, 1 (2008), 253--255.

[56]

David Walker and Tony M Dubitsky. 1994. Why liking matters. Journal of advertising research Vol. 34, 3 (1994), 9--19.

[57]

Piotr Winkielman and John T Cacioppo. 2001. Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 81, 6 (2001), 989.

[58]

Anbang Xu, Xiao Yang, Huaming Rao, Wai-Tat Fu, Shih-Wen Huang, and Brian P. Bailey. 2014. Show Me the Money!: An Analysis of Project Updates During Crowdfunding Campaigns Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 591--600.

Digital Library

[59]

Gary Yukl and Cecilia M Falbe. 1990. Influence tactics and objectives in upward, downward, and lateral influence attempts. Journal of applied psychology Vol. 75, 2 (1990), 132.

Cited By

Zhou ZLiu YDing JJin DLi Y(2023)Hierarchical Knowledge Graph Learning Enabled Socioeconomic Indicator Prediction in Location-Based Social NetworkProceedings of the ACM Web Conference 202310.1145/3543507.3583239(122-132)Online publication date: 30-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3543507.3583239
Wambsganss TZierau NSöllner MKäser TKoedinger KLeimeister J(2022)Designing Conversational Evaluation ToolsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35556196:CSCW2(1-27)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555619
Gould SWiseman S(2022)Dealing with Digital Service ClosureProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35556176:CSCW2(1-25)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555617
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Persuading Teammates to Give: Systematic versus Heuristic Cues for Soliciting Loans
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Machine learning
    1. Learning paradigms
      1. Supervised learning
        Supervised learning by regression
2. Human-centered computing
  1. Collaborative and social computing
    1. Collaborative and social computing theory, concepts and paradigms
      1. Computer supported cooperative work
      2. Social media
    2. Empirical studies in collaborative and social computing

Recommendations

Social influence tactics in e-commerce onboarding: The role of social proof and reciprocity in affecting user registrations
Abstract
Given the increasing competition to attract new customers, e-commerce providers (i.e., e-tailers) are being urged to optimize their website onboarding journeys. Design mechanisms employing social influence tactics seem to be promising ...
Highlights
- We examine how two social influence tactics affect user registration during user onboarding in an e-commerce context
On the effects of misspellings on lender demand in peer-to-peer lending

I analyse borrower submitted free-form descriptions of anonymous peer-to-peer (P2P) loans from the US-based P2P lending website LendingClub.com and find that borrower misspellings predict lower funding rates, and longer times to fund. Prior empirical ...
Persuading the Driver: A Literature Review to Identify Blind Spots
CHI EA '19: Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

We present a review of persuasive systems in vehicles based on the Persuasion Interface Design in the Automotive context Framework (PIDAF). It integrates intents, cues, persuasive principles and design options for automotive persuasion. Our results show ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction Volume 1, Issue CSCW

November 2017

2095 pages

EISSN:2573-0142

DOI:10.1145/3171581

Editors:
Clifford Lampe
University of Michigan
,
Jeff Nichols
Google
,
Karrie Karahalios
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
,
Geraldine Fitzpatrick
Vienna University of Technology
,
Uichin Lee
KAIST
,
Andres Monroy-Hernandez
Snap Inc.
,
Wolfgang Stuerzlinger
Simon Fraser University

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2017 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 December 2017

Published in PACMHCI Volume 1, Issue CSCW

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Carnegie Mellon Presidential Fellowship
Google Faculty Research Award

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

22
Total Citations
View Citations
562
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)100
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

Reflects downloads up to 09 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Zhou ZLiu YDing JJin DLi Y(2023)Hierarchical Knowledge Graph Learning Enabled Socioeconomic Indicator Prediction in Location-Based Social NetworkProceedings of the ACM Web Conference 202310.1145/3543507.3583239(122-132)Online publication date: 30-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3543507.3583239
Wambsganss TZierau NSöllner MKäser TKoedinger KLeimeister J(2022)Designing Conversational Evaluation ToolsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35556196:CSCW2(1-27)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555619
Gould SWiseman S(2022)Dealing with Digital Service ClosureProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35556176:CSCW2(1-25)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555617
Flores-Saviaga CFeng SSavage S(2022)Datavoidant: An AI System for Addressing Political Data Voids on Social MediaProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35556166:CSCW2(1-29)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555616
Kapoor SSun MWang MJazwinska KWatkins E(2022)Weaving Privacy and PowerProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35555746:CSCW2(1-33)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555574
Shaikh OUng CYang DChacon F(2022)Six Feet Apart: Online Payments During the COVID-19 PandemicProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35552186:CSCW2(1-33)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555218
Maddali HIrlitti ALazar A(2022)Probing the Potential of Extended Reality to Connect Experts and Novices in the GardenProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35552116:CSCW2(1-30)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555211
Xia MZhu QWang XNie FQu HMa X(2022)Persua: A Visual Interactive System to Enhance the Persuasiveness of Arguments in Online DiscussionProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35552106:CSCW2(1-30)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555210
Kim JKraut RKarahalios K(2022)Designing a Medical Crowdfunding Website from Sense of Community TheoryProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35551816:CSCW2(1-25)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555181
Chaudhry SKulkarni C(2022)Robinhood’s Forest: A Persuasive Idle Game to Improve Investing BehaviorProceedings of the 27th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces10.1145/3490099.3511114(594-603)Online publication date: 22-Mar-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3490099.3511114
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents