Jay French's Reviews > Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade

While I was reading “Pre-Suasion” I took a look at some of the reviews on Goodreads. I saw a few that suggested the scientific studies this book is based on are questionable, and a few reviewers downgraded their reviews of the book because of that. I finished the book with that in mind. What I found was that most of the book, the first 2/3 or so, describe ways that, in effect, the state of mind of a person comes into play when they make a decision. You know, if it is sunny, you’d expect a person to make more positive decisions. How Cialdini writes this first 2/3 of the book is to describe a way of influencing people that he found from investigating a number of sales training programs and working with sales professionals. He describes these findings from experience, and then he gives some examples of the use of the concept in real life – a lot like my mention of how a sunny day can pre-dispose people to positive choices. Then, in many cases, he refers to the scientific literature. He doesn’t write this as if he is basing it on the science, he writes this as if basing it on personal observation and common experience, with the science as a final bit of proof of validity. Even if the science wasn’t included, this would be an interesting collection of methods of “pre-suasion” that, based on my experience, ring true to a great extent.

The last third, though is different. Cialdini updates his research from his earlier book “Influence”, and here, he leads with new scientific research. If this is the research that other reviewers are referencing, then this section is wounded, but I don’t think it is. Once again, it is quite interesting following Cialdini re-categorizing ways to influence. He ends with a discussion of the ethics of using these techniques to influence decisions. Here, he seems to be saying that the use of these techniques is unethical. Cialdini has completed a study regarding the outcomes of this “unethical” behavior – this chapter was just a way to document that, even though it seems to be at odds with the rest of the book. Why write a book suggesting ways to increase the chances of a specific outcome regarding human decision-making when you end up just saying it is wrong? Very odd. Especially to me – I read this book not just thinking about business decision-making and marketing and advertising, I also thought about how these concepts have been applied to politics and especially religion. If the concepts here are unethical, then most sermons I’ve heard are unethical. That last section just doesn’t sit right.

Overall, I did appreciate the ideas discussed in the book. I know enough to use some of these concepts, knowing that they have a possibility of helping make my case when I need someone to make a decision. But as importantly, this will help me recognize those situations when my own decision-making is being influenced.