{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025819958129797628, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0027913468248429866, 'mean_word_length': 5.102127659574468, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Blood donation and the foot-in-the-door technique: a limiting case.

Three experiments testing the effectiveness of the foot-in-the-door technique for recruiting blood donors consistently failed to demonstrate that this procedure influences either verbal or behavioral compliance, suggesting that the generality of the foot-in-the-door phenomenon is limited. Experiment 1 attempted to demonstrate that an earlier failure of this technique was due to poor operationalization rather than to the magnitude of the critical request or to the invalidity of the phenomenon, but it failed to do so. Experiment 2, designed to more closely resemble other foot-in-the-door studies by using telephone contacts and an initial request for persons to answer questions, was conducted to examine other possible explanations for the two previous failures. This experiment also failed to show any foot-in-the-door effect. Experiment 3 was a conceptual replication of Experiment 2 but used personal contacts. One apparent foot-in-the-door effect emerged in this case, but it was more likely due to a factor other than the experimental treatment. It is concluded that although the foot-in-the-door procedure may indeed influence verbal compliance with requests for minimal forms of aid, it probably will not significantly affect people's willingness to comply with more substantial requests involving behaviors that are psychologically costly to perform.