In-Depth Reflective Journal: Analyzing Core Concepts in Psychology

This is a student's reflective journal summarizing key articles and concepts in psychology. The journal entries cover a range of topics including the power of labeling, sequential persuasion tactics like the door-in-the-face technique, the definition of compliance gaining with practical examples, and the influence of stereotypes on detecting deception, particularly the 'look me in the eye' phenomenon. The journal explores the theoretical underpinnings and real-world applications of these psychological principles, providing a comprehensive overview of the student's understanding. Desklib provides access to a wide array of similar solved assignments and past papers.

Running Head: Psychology
Psychology

Psychology 1
Power of Labeling
This theory provides a sociological approach which focus on the role of social labeling in the
growth of development and deviance. This theory assumes that deviant behavior’s inception can
be from different condition. Once, when the humans are labeled or define as deviants, they face
problems which start from the self reactions and others to negative stereotypes which are
attached to the deviant. Such obstacles might give rise to the likelihood of criminal minds and
behaviors which can become stable. Lemert said that deviant behavior might become the means
of defense, adaption or the attack for the problems which are created by deviant labeling. Hence,
being labeled by others as a criminal offender might activate the process which tends to make the
involvement in crime, behavioral patter and t he psychological conditions stable which existed
before labeling (Townsend, Stillings and Murphy). There was a modified theory of labeling as
well which described as sophisticated social psychological model of why label matters. In the
year 2000, results were out after the study of two years about the patients. That study showed
that stigma was powerful force in those people’s lives and they had experienced social rejection
which gave them stress. This stigma was linked with the low motivation and the ability to come
back in the mainstream society (Scimecca). Self esteem was also sometimes up and sometimes
down. Constant struggle and stress existed in their lives. This theory ultimately depicts as to how
ill or how well the patient is.
Sequential Persuasion: Door in the Face Tactic
The door in the face tactic is a kind of persuasive strategy of sending the message. This was
introduced in 1975 by Cialdini. DITF works by getting a no in an answer at first and then getting
a yes. When the first request is rejected by the other person, the rejecter might feel guilty about
the rejection and then starts fearing rejection as a result. The second request then allows them the
chance to revert back to that guilt and mitigate threat to social rejection. Hence, the person who
makes the request is actually making an exchange of concession of belonging. For example:
When a salesperson goes to sell the product that he is selling, the usual first answer is no but

Psychology 2
when asked vulnerably so that the guilt feeling arises in the rejecter, then the second answer is a
yes in most of the chances (Feeley, Anker and Aloe). This theory works because:
 Size of the Request: Usually the first request looks like it is large and hence, guarantees
rejection by person being persuaded but still not so large that it is undoable.
 Prosocialness of Request: In case if it is used in self service then it might not be very
effective but still can increase compliance by 17% when it is used in some voluntary
purpose.
 Time between Requests: If conformity is to be increased, the gap between the first and
the second request should be less so that the guilt is fresh in the mind of the person who
rejected the request.
 Who is at Door: To make sure that the fairness exists, exchange oriented people always
have the previous data to what they owe to others and vice versa. This theory is most
effective (Dillard, Hunter and Burgoon).
Action Speaks the Loudest
Persuasion is concerned with the beliefs, attitudes, motivations, behavior and the intentions that
are changing. And compliance is restrictive which critically refers to the person’s changed
behavior over his obvious behavior. Compliance gaining is the concept which deals in the
interpersonal and face to face contexts instead of one to many. The focus is usually on the sender
instead of the receiver while the older or the traditional research is connected with itself by
identifying the strategies which are more effective. Compliance gaining identifies the strategies
which are mostly used by the persuader (Wiebenga). This research also informs the ways people
use when they really want something. The strategies which can be used to persuade people are:
 Dominance: A boss can dominate his subordinates easily as he has the power to do it.
 Intimacy: People can be easily persuaded with the help if the emotional attachment that
people share as they are intimate and concerned about their relationship.
 Resistance: There are strategies which are resisted by the persuader. These strategies are
most likely resisted and not be used instantly.

Psychology 3
 Personal Benefit: The strategies which are used and bring benefit to self are most likely
to be used with everyone. Great benefit giving strategy will always be used the most.
 Apprehension: When the persuader feels the nervousness in the situation, person being
persuaded gets the anxiety and this might lead to various strategies than those without
anxiety (Pennycook).
“Look me in the Eye” Persuasion
“Look me in the eye” is a kind of persuasive dialogue. The science of Psychology suggests that
eye contact might not prove to be of much importance as it is thought in persuasion attempts.
There is no surprise in this that people mostly think that giving hate tells that something is tricky.
In natural ways this makes sense. The people who are embarrassed or ashamed usually do not
make any eye contact. In case of the person is under the pressure of conformity then too, the
person avoids eye contact. The contradictions have come in the study that there is no relation
between the eye contact and the liars. In fact it is just the opposite of this theory which says that
liars will deliberately make the eye contact as compared to the people are truthful (Rousseau and
Foxen). The liars will make the eye contact so that they can look appealing and truthful to the
people they are conversing with. Humans tend to look at things or other people whom they like
and always avoid the eye contact with the people they don’t like. On the contrary, liars will make
the eye contact for as long as it is possible with the people so that they can seem believable to
others. It was made as a belief that the liars will never make the eye contact as they are lying and
this is the best way to judge a liar. This belief is mostly fed in the children since their birth by the
parents (Cornell). These beliefs actually hinder the human’s ability to judge the deception. Eye
aversion is not the reliable factor to judge deception still people rely on this belief that liars
ignore eye contact.

Psychology 4

Psychology 5
References
Cornell, William F. "The Inevitability of Uncertainty, the Necessity of Doubt, and the
Development ofTrust." Transactional Analysis Journal 37.1 (2007).
Dillard, James Price, John E. Hunter and Michael Burgoon. "SEQUENTIAL-REQUEST
PERSUASIVE STRATEGIES." Human Communication Research 10.4 (1984).
Feeley, Thomas Hugh, Ashley E. Anker and Ariel Aloe. "he Door-in-the-Face Persuasive
Message Strategy: A Meta-Analysis of the First 35 Years." Communication Monographs 79.3
(2012).
Moller, Dan. "Dilemmas of Political Correctness." Dilemmas Of Political Correctness 4.1
(2016).
Pennycook, Alastair. "Actions Speak Louder Than Words: Paralanguage, Communication, and
Education." Tesol Quaterly 19.2 (1985).
Rousseau, Cecile and Patrecia Foxen. "“Look Me in the Eye”: Empathy and the Transmission of
Trauma in the Refugee Determination Process." Transcultural Psychiatry 47.1 (2010): 70-92.
Scimecca, Joseph A. "LABELING THEORY AND PERSONAL CONSTRUCT THEORY:
TOWARD THE MEASUREMENT OF INDIVIDUAL VARIATION*." THE JOURNAL OF
CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY 68.4 (1977).
Townsend, John M., Neil Stillings and Jane M. Murphy. "Labeling Theory." Science 196 (1977).
Wiebenga, Jacob H. "Action Speaks Louder Than Words: The Moderating Effect of Verbal
Behavior on the Mediated Relation Between NonverbalBehavior and Compliance via
Credibility." 2006. citeseerx.ist.psu.edu. 26 April 2018
<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.334.5762&rep=rep1&type=pdf>.

Psychology 6