Posing two questions to ourselves can help enormously to accomplish
this trick. The first is to ask, when we are confronted with what appears
to be an authority figure’s influence attempt, “Is this authority truly an
expert?” The question is helpful because it focuses our attention on a
pair of crucial pieces of information: the authority’s credentials and the
relevance of those credentials to the topic at hand. By orienting in this
simple way toward the evidence for authority status, we can avoid the
major pitfalls of automatic deference. An illustration or two is in order.
Let’s examine the highly successful Robert Young Sanka-coffee
commercial in this light. If, rather than responding to his “Marcus
Welby, M.D.” association, people had focused on Mr. Young’s actual
status as an authority, I am confident that the commercial would not
have had so long and productive a run. Obviously, Robert Young does
not possess a physician’s training or knowledge. We all know that.
What he does possess, however, is a physician’s title, “M.D.” Now,
clearly, it is an empty title, connected to him in our minds through the
device of playacting. We all know that, too. But isn’t it fascinating how,
when we are whirring along, what is obvious often doesn’t matter unless
we pay specific attention to it?
That is why the “Is this authority truly an expert?” question can be
so valuable: It brings our attention to the obvious. It channels us effort-
lessly away from a focus on possibly meaningless symbols to a consid-
eration of genuine authority credentials. What’s more, the question
impels us to distinguish between relevant authorities and irrelevant
authorities. And this is a distinction that is easy to forget when the push
of authority pressure is combined with the rush of modern life. The
Texas pedestrians who bustled into city traffic behind a business-suited
jaywalker offer a prime example. Even if the man had been the business
authority his clothes suggested he might be, he was unlikely to be a
greater authority on crossing the street than other people, including
those who followed him into traffic.
Still, they did follow, as if his label, “authority,” overwhelmed the
vital difference between relevant and irrelevant forms. Had they
bothered to ask themselves whether he represented a true expert in the
situation, someone whose actions reflected superior knowledge there,
I expect the result would have been quite different. The same process
applies to Robert Young, a man who is not without expertise. He has
fashioned a long career with many achievements in a difficult business.
But his skills and knowledge are as an actor, not a doctor. When, in
viewing the famous coffee commercial, we focus on his true credentials,
we will realize quickly that he should be no more believed than any
other successful actor who claims that Sanka is healthy.
Robert B. Cialdini Ph.D / 173