Does “chaining” always work towards compliance gaining? The case of the “but you are free” technique and social proof applied to charitable donation

Abstract Introduction The chaining procedure consists in linking together two or more compliance gaining strategies in order to obtain greater behavioral compliance. Objective In two studies we tested chaining that included two compliance gaining procedures: the “but you are free” technique (BYAF) and social proof (SP). Method A total of 2204 passersby were approached in different countries (France, Tunisia, China and Moldavia). They were asked to donate money for cancer research with, respectively, a control formulation, a BYAF formulation, a SP formulation or a BYAF + SP formulation. Results Observations indicate that chaining did not work because the BYAF + SP condition produced the same behavioral compliance as BYAF or SP separately (studies 1 and 2). Furthermore, we analyzed the participants’ justifications after complying with or rejecting the request and the reasons were substantially the same under each condition (study 2). Conclusion Failure to observe the chaining process is interpreted through theoretical explanations whereby BYAF and SP are antagonistic.