Psychological Reports, 2003, 92, 62-64. @Psychological Reports 2003


ANOTHER EVALUATION OF TOUCH AND HELPING BEHAVIOR
NICOLAS GUEGUEN AND JACQUES FISCHER-LOKOU
Universite de Bretagne-Sud

[A] Summary.-Although positive effect of touch on compliance has been widely reported, new evaluation was made with an unusual request. 80 male bus drivers were solicited by a male or a female confederate to take the bus despite having too little money for the fare. Bus drivers were briefly touched by the confederate during solicitation. Analysis showed that bus drivers who were touched accepted the request more favorably but only when made by a female.


1. The main idea of this paragraph is:


a. This study shows a positive effect of touch on compliance.
b. This study found that 80 male bus drivers were solicited by a male or a female confederate to take the bus despite having insufficient funds to pay for the bus ride.
c. This study shows that bus drivers were briefly touched by the confederate during solicitation.
d. This study shows that touching behavior can lead to the granting of unusual requests.


2. What is the research question being investigated in this article according to the abstract (summary)


a. Can one solicit bus drivers with male and female confederates?
b. Can touch lead to the granting of an unusual request?
c. Can one ride the bus despite not having the required fare?
d. Do male and female confederates have the same effect on bus drivers?


3. Directions: Complete the tables on Authority and Timeliness.


AUTHORITY By researching the author's qualifications on the Internet, I discovered that:


a. Gueguen and Fischer-Lokou are both professors at Universite de Bretagne-Sud.
b. Gueguen has a doctorate in social psychology from the University of Rennes, has authored books on consumer behavior and statistics, and has numerous publications on the effect of touching behavior on compliance. Fischer-Lokou also has a doctorate and has contributed many articles in the field of social psychology, often as co-author with Guenguen.
c. Psychological Reports is a peer-reviewed journal.
d. All of the above are true.


TIMELINESS
This article is:
a. Not current enough to be relevant to research on this topic.
b. Too old for current treatment of subject, but still useful as background piece.
c. The findings reported in this article are current enough to generalize to present-day phenomena.
d. None of the above


[B] A multitude of research had demonstrated that touch was positively associated with helping. People receiving a request for a dime accepted the request more favorably when slightly touched on the forearm during the solicitation (Kleinke, 1977). When touched by a confederate, passersby in a street agreed more favorably to look after a large and very excited dog for 10 minutes because the confederate wanted to go into a pharmacy where animals were prohibited (Gueguen & Fischer-Lokou, 2002). The probability of agreeing to participate in a street survey increased when the solicitor made a brief tactile contact with the subject when presenting the request (Paulsell & Goldman, 1984; Hornik, 1987; Gueguen, 2002). A simple touch of a client by a waiter or a waitress in a restaurant increased the amount of the tip (Lynn, Le, & Sherwyn, 1998). During a demonstration of products in a store, willingness to taste the products increased, when the client was touched during the request. Tactile contact also was associated with an increase in selling rate of the product (Smith, Gier, & Willis, 1982; Hornik, 1992). In the same way, Kaufman and Mahoney (1999) showed that, when touched by a waitress, patrons of a public tavern consumed more alcohol than patrons who were not touched.


4. The main idea of this paragraph is:


a. A multitude of research had demonstrated that touch was positively associated with helping.
b. People receiving a request for a dime accepted the request more favorably when slightly touched on the forearm during the solicitation
c. The probability of agreeing to participate in a street survey increased when the solicitor made a brief tactile contact with the subject when presenting the request
d. During a demonstration of products in a store, willingness to taste the products increased, when the client was touched during the request.


5. Directions: Complete the table by deciding whether or not the behavior provides valid evidence that touching behavior has an effect on compliance.




Behavior Strong or Weak?
1. A person would be more willing to give another person a dime if slightly touched on the forearm by the requester than if not touched by the requester.
2. A person would be more willing to take care of a stranger's excited dog for the time required to enter a pharmacy to pick up a prescription if touched by the stranger than if not touched.
3. A person would be more willing to participate in answering a street survey if touched by the person making the request.
4. A patron would be more generous toward a waiter/waitress if the waiter/waitress touched the patron than if not touched.
5. A patron would be more likely to buy more alcoholic drinks from the tavern if the waiter/waitress touched the patron.
6. Persons would be more willing to try a demonstration product if touched by the person demonstrating the product than if not touched.
7. A bus driver would be more willing to allow a person to ride the bus if touched by the person than if not touched by the person.



6. How representative is the bus driver situation to the entire population of situations that might be used to investigate the effect of touching behavior on requests?


a. This situation provides a "critical test" for the effects of touch on the granting of requests.
b. Finding that the effect holds would add just another piece of evidence.
c. The findings from this situation would not provide evidence about the effects of touch on the granting of requests.
d. None of the above


7. Can you generate other situations that would lead you to believe that touching behavior leads to the granting of requests?



[C] In all of the experiments presented above, subjects were solicited to donate their time or their money. Then it would be interesting to test if touch increases the probability of donating something which is not personal. So, the effect of touch was tested in a professional context wherein subjects were asked to donate money of their employer.


8. The main idea of this paragraph is:


a. In all of the previous experiments, subjects were solicited to donate their time or their money.
b. This experiment was conducted to test if touch increases the probability of donating something which is not personal.
c. The effect of touch was tested in a professional context wherein subjects were asked to donate money of their employer.


9. Is this experiment really a "valid" test of the effect of touch on giving something that is not personal?


a. Yes, the bus drivers are conscious of the fact that they are giving up money from someone else's pocket.
b. This situation is just as good as any other for testing the hypothesis that touch has an effect on the granting of request even when what is given up is not personal.
c. This is not a representative situation of giving from someone else's money because the bus drivers may not perceive the situation is one where they are using someone else's money.
d. None of the above.


10. Do you think the results of touching a bus driver would be the same for both male and female bus drivers? Or do you thinks there would be differences?



11. Can you think of other experimental situation(s) where one can investigate the effect of touching behavior on the granting of something that is not personal?



METHOD


[D] Eighty male bus drivers of an important town (more than 400,000 inhabitants) were estimated to be between 20 and 50 years old. Using different bus stops, a single confederate from men and women aged 19 to 22 years old signaled the bus driver to stop, got into the bus, and asked for a ticket. With perplexity the confederate looked through a billfold during 15 to 20 sec., through pockets for another 15 to 20 sec., and again through the billfold. In a confused manner, the confederate explained to the bus driver that he had only 10.00 FF. The confederate when asking him for a ticket briefly touched the bus driver's forearm.


12. The main idea of this paragraph is:


a. Eighty male bus drivers of an important town were estimated to be between 20 and 50 years old.
b. Using different bus stops, a single confederate man or woman aged 19 to 22 years old signaled the bus driver to stop, got into the bus, asked for a ticket while touching the driver's forearm.
c. With perplexity the confederate looked through a billfold during 15 to 20 sec., through pockets for another 15 to 20 sec., and again through the billfold.
d. The confederate when asking him for a ticket briefly touched the bus driver's forearm.


13. How generalizable do you think the results of this experiment will be since the experimenters used only confederates that were very young men and women.


a. The results of this experiment would be the same if the experimenters had chosen to use confederates in their forties and fifties.
b. The results of this experiment would be completely different if the experimenters had chosen to use confederates in their forties and fifties.
c. The experimenters should have used a variety of confederates to see if the age of the person making the request made a difference.
d. The experimenters should have used only young women because bus drivers might look more favorably on them.
14. Directions: Complete the table.

TOUCHNO TOUCH
N=20
MALEn=20


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
br> [E] When touched by a female confederate, 60.0% (12 of 20) of the bus drivers consented to the confederate's request whereas 35.0% (7 of 20) agreed to the request in the control noncontact condition. When touched by a male confederate, 25 % (5 of 20) accepted the confederate's request whereas 10.0% (2 of 20) accepted the same request in the control condition. Generally, touch was associated positively with compliance [2l (N = 80) = 8.44, p <.005], but the difference between male and female confederates was not [21(N = 80) = 3.69, p<.06). Analysis of the interaction between the two factors by a log-linear analysis showed a positive effect [24(N= 80) = 12.58, p <.02].


15. The main idea of this paragraph is:


a. When touched by a female confederate, 60.0% (12 of 20) of the bus drivers consented to the confederate's request whereas 35.0% (7 of 20) agreed to the request in the control noncontact condition.
b. When touched by a male confederate, 25 % (5 of 20) accepted the confederate's request where�as 10.0% (2 of 20) accepted the same request in the control condition.
c. Generally, touch was associated positively with compliance [2l (N = 80) = 8.44, p <.005], but the difference between male and female confederates was not [21(N = 80) = 3.69, p<.06).
d. Analysis of the interaction between the two factors by a log-linear analysis showed a positive effect [24(N= 80) = 12.58, p <.02].


16. Directions: Complete the table by inserting the number of requests consented to.
TOUCHNO TOUCHTOTAL
FEMALE12
MALE52
TOTAL


17. Directions: Check the authors' statistical analysis of results by going to the website operated by Vassar Stats. Remember you have two levels of Gender (Male & Female), two levels of Touch (Touch & No Touch), and two levels of compliance (Complied with Request & Request Denials). Complete the table before posting the numbers on:VASSAR STATS


Directions: Complete the table by inserting the number of requests consented to.
TOUCHNO TOUCHTOTAL TOUCHNO TOUCHTOTAL
FEMALE12 FEMALE8
MALE2 MALE18
TOTAL TOTAL


18. Directions: Complete the Statistics Table from the results on Vassar Stats:
SOURCEx2=(g2)dfp
GENDER & COMPLIANCE8.441
TOUCH & COMPLIANCE
GENDER& TOUCH & COMPLIANCE12.564.0136


In their Results and Discussion section the authors claim that touch was positively associated with compliance, but the difference between male and female confederates was not. The total number of requests consented to in the Touch condition was 17 and there were 9 compliances in the No Touch condition. Of the 26 instances where the bus drivers complied with the confederate's request, 19 were for female confederates and only 7 were for male confederates.


19. From this data we can tell that:


a. The authors were correct in their statistical analysis by concluding that the Touch - No Touch comparison was statistically significant, but that the Female - Male comparison was not.
b. From the table, you can tell that the Female-Male differences were greater than the Touch-No Touch conditions differences and thus, the gender differences reach a higher level of statistical significance than the touch conditions.
c. There are no differences between the Touch-No Touch conditions and the Male-Female conditions.
d. none of the above


In their final statistical analysis of the data, the authors state: "analysis of the interaction between the two factors by a log-linear analysis showed a positive effect [24(N= 80) = 12.58, p <.02]."


20. What does this statement mean?


a. This means that sex, but not touch, made a difference in whether a request was complied with.
b. This means that touch, but not sex, made a difference in whether a request was complied with.
c. This means that the rate of denial with a request was greater when the bus drivers were touched by a female confederate than when touched by a male confederate.
d. This means that the rate of compliance with a request was greater when the bus drivers were touched by a female than when touched by a male.
[F] As in most prior studies, touch was positively associated with compliance to a request for help but only for the woman solicitor. A similar request was reported for a female solicitor when the solicited person was a male (Crusco & Wetzel, 1984). Some studies have shown that helping behavior is more important in a high need situation (Bickman & Kamzan, 1973; Harrel & Goltz, 1980) and that men are more favorable to female solicitors (Dovidio, 1982) especially if need is high (Harris & Bays, 1973).


21. The main idea of this paragraph is:


a. As in most prior studies, touch was positively associated with compliance to a request for help but only for the woman solicitor.
b. A similar request was reported for a female solicitor when the solicited person was a male
c. Some studies have shown that helping behavior is more important in a high need situation
d. Men are more favorable to female solicitors especially if need is high.


[G] Kleinke (1977) reported that touch increased the probability people would give their own money to a solicitor. Our experiment shows that money of someone else (the employer of the bus drivers) was more favorably granted when the subject was encouraged by a tactile contact. Such findings confirm that touch influenced behavior.


22. The main idea of this paragraph is:


a. Kleinke (1977) reported that touch increased the probability people would give their own money to a solicitor.
b. This experiment shows that money of someone else (the employer of the bus drivers) was more favorably granted when the subject was encouraged by a tactile contact.
c. Such findings confirm that touch influenced behavior.
23. Complete the table.
CONCLUSIONS
The bus driver�s were conscious of the fact that they were giving away someone else�s money?
The study suggests that touch favorably influences compliant behavior.
The study suggests that touch favorably influences compliant behavior, especially when it is done by a female solicitor.


REFERENCES


BICKMAN, L., & KAMZAN, M. (1973) The effect of race and need on helping behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 89, 73-77.
CRISCO, A. H., & WETZEL, C. G. (1984) The Midas touch: the effects of interpersonal touch, on restaurant tipping. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 512-517.
DOVIDIO, J. F(1982) Sex, costs, and helping behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 112, 231-236.
GUEGEN, N. (2002) Status, apparel appearance and touch: their joint effects on compliance to a request. North American Journal of Psychology, 4, 279-286.
GUEGEN, N., & FISCHER-LOKOU, J. (2002) An evaluation of touch on a large request: a field setting. Psychological Reports, 90, 267-269.
HARREL, A. W & GOLTZ, W. J. (1980) Effect of victim's need and previous accusation of theft upon bystander's reaction to theft. Journal of Social Psychology, 112, 41-49.
HARRIS, M. B., & BAYS, G. (1973) Altruism and sex roles. Psychological Reports, 32, 1002.
HORNIK, J. (1987) The effect of touch and gaze upon compliance and interest of interviewees. Journal of Social Psychology, 127, 681-683.
HORNIK, J. (1992) Effects of physical contact on customers' shopping time and behavior. Marketing Letters, 3, 49-55.
KAUFMAN, D., & MAHONEY, J. M. (1999) The effect of waitresses' touch on alcohol consumption in dyads. Journal of Social Psychology, 139, 261-267.
KLEINKE, C. L. (1977) Compliance to requests made by gazing and touching experimenters in field settings. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 218-223.
LYNN, M., LE, J.M., & SHERWYN, D. S. (1998) Reach out and touch your customers. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 39, 60-65.
PAULSELL, S., & GOLDMAN, M. (1984) The effect of touching different body areas on prosocial behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 122, 269-273.
SMITH, D. E., GIER, J. A., & WILLIS, F. N. (1982) Interpersonal touch and compliance with a marketing request. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3, 35-38. Accepted November 29, 2002.


24. Looking at the various sources in the Reference section, what are some of the journals one might consult to find other studies on compliance behavior?



25. Who are some of the most prominent researchers in this area?

26. What other titles seem particularly interesting for this research topic?


SUMMARIZATION


27. Directions: Write down all the main ideas from the seven paragraphs.



28. Directions: Re-write the seven sentences in a logical order.



29. Directions: Write a summary of the article using the outline in 28.


Email: jmontelo@calpoly.edu