Last night the Reds had a great victory.
Do you ever notice how the players who are on deck will prepare by swinging a heavier-than-normal bat, or one with “doughnut” rings?
Their intention is to have a lighter/quicker swing when they return to their actual bat, which is an example brought to my attention by this book.
Whether or not that works for professional players, the idea is rooted in a persuasion principle known as perceptual contrast.
Since we aren’t all baseball players, here’s another example. Remember the last time you took a hot shower after you were out in the cold for an extended period of time? The temperature of the water felt much different than it normally would at that same temperature!
From baseball to how we perceive temperature, prior experiences have a strong way of altering our current perception.
How do politicians, and of course sales people, use this to their advantage?
Let’s say a sales person is attempting to persuade you to choose Verizon over Sprint. Now imagine she were to tell you a “persuasive” message about Verizon, but first she also told you another message about your other choice, Sprint.
What would be more persuasive in selling you Verizon’s services: a long message about Sprint’s offerings, or a message with just a bit of information regarding Sprint, then followed up with the Verizon message?
Research has shown that in situations similar to this, people will actually feel that they are much more knowledgeable about Verizon when they have first heard a few details about the competitor– in this example, Sprint.
But if you give too much information about Sprint (or a competing product or service) before the additional information about Verizon is given, then you will hurt your chances of closing the deal.
You’d think that merely mentioning the competition as a point of reference wouldn’t be that persuasive…so when is this truly most effective?
I remember when I was fairly sure I was going to buy a MacBook Pro. When I made a remark about the price, an Apple enthusiast mentioned to me that Dell computers often break, but Apple products were much sturdier, and would last me many more years in his opinion.
Just that small comparison reinforced the idea in my head that I was making the right purchase decision. It wasn’t scientific, and it might not have even been true, but after all, I wanted to buy the high quality product.
Sometimes when we are”choosing” a product or service, it should be noted that we would really have to go out of our way to switch to the competition, or similar to my example, we’ve somewhat already made up our mind. (This is especially true when we have contracts with our cell phone companies, for example!)
In these situations–where we hear just a bit about why a competitor’s service is inferior–this prior stimuli is quite powerful in changing our perceived knowledge at hand.