Jane Roberts Criticism What did this do Roberts and the Seth Material have attracted critiques from outside the paranormal community. What was the worst part of this The poet Charles Upton, in his collection of essays titled The System of Antichrist, posited that Roberts multiplied the self due to a fear of death.
What did this lead him to try
What did Charles Upton's critique of Jane Roberts lead Roberts to try?
Roberts and the Seth Material have attracted critiques from outside the paranormal community. The poet Charles Upton, in his collection of essays titled The System of Antichrist, posited that Roberts multiplied the self due to a fear of death. His opinion was that the Seth texts are based on a misunderstanding of both Christianity and of Eastern religions.  Professor of psychology and noted critic of parapsychology James E. Alcock opined, "In light of all this, the Seth materials must surely be viewed as less than ordinary. There certainly was the time and talent for fraud to play a role, but we cannot discriminate between that possibility and the possibility of unconscious production--at any rate, given these circumstances, there seems little need to consider the involvement of any supernatural agency."  Seth's teaching of a philosophy far more detailed than and not in keeping with traditional Church-authority, God-separate-from Creation, one-mortal-life, Jesus-centered messages has also received its share of criticism from some Christian believers. Various ministries have warned their members about the dangers and deceptions of reading channeled messages from Roberts and others. The Seth Material has been considered in certain circles to be "a book entirely written by a demon. A woman simply wrote it down as it was dictated to her by the demon; and, of course, it just destroys everything that is true in terms of God's revelation," and as evidence for "Devil possession." Videos such as Jane Roberts' Seth Speaks is Anti-Catholic Hate Books - Allowed By The Media protested that Seth was "a demon from hell contacted through a ouija board."  Science writer Karen Stollznow has written that much of Roberts work was "criticized for being a rip-off of Christian and Eastern philosophy. It comes as no surprise that Seth influenced such authors as Deepak Chopra and Louise Hay."  Since Roberts' death, others have claimed to channel Seth. In the introduction to Seth's first dictated book, Seth Speaks, "he" says, "communications will come exclusively through Ruburt [Seth's name for Jane] at all times, to protect the integrity of the material." In The Seth Material, Jane Roberts wrote: "Several people have told me that Seth communicated with them through automatic writing, but Seth denies any such contacts." At least one person has claimed more recently to channel Roberts. CANNOTANSWER
His opinion was that the Seth texts are based on a misunderstanding of both Christianity and of Eastern religions.
Dorothy Jane Roberts (May 8, 1929 – September 5, 1984) was an American author, poet, psychic, and spirit medium, who channeled an energy personality who called himself "Seth."  Her publication of the Seth texts, known as the Seth Material, established her as one of the preeminent figures in the world of paranormal phenomena.

Early life and career
Roberts was born in Albany, New York and grew up in nearby Saratoga Springs, New York. Her parents, Delmer Hubbell Roberts and Marie Burdo, divorced when she was two years old. With her only child, the young Marie then returned to her own parents, and the home that the family had rented for a number of years: half of a double dwelling in a poor neighborhood. Marie had begun experiencing the early stages of rheumatoid arthritis by 1932 but worked as much as possible. Eventually, Roberts' grandfather, Joseph Burdo, with whom she shared a deep mystical identification, was unable to support two extra people, and the family had to rely upon public assistance. Roberts' grandmother was killed in an automobile accident in 1936.

The next year, her grandfather moved out of the house. By then Marie was partially incapacitated, and the Welfare Department began to furnish mother and daughter with occasional and often unreliable domestic help. When Marie became a bedridden invalid, it was Jane's responsibility to take care of her. This included cooking, cleaning, bringing her the bedpan, and getting up in the middle of the night to refuel the stove. Her embittered mother would tell Jane she was going to turn on the gas jets in the middle of the night and kill them both. When her mother attempted suicide for about the fifth time, she took sleeping pills and was in the hospital. Jane wrote that she went to the welfare worker and said, 'I can't take it anymore. I've just got to leave.'" Over and over Marie told Jane she was no good, that the daughter's birth had caused the mother's illness, and that she was disowned and considered no longer her daughter.

The persistent psychological abuse and mistreatment by her mother resulted in the young girl's deep fear of abandonment. Such situations increased Jane's sense of not being safe, yet also reinforced feelings of independence, for she did not have to feel as dependent upon Marie as she might otherwise.

Well before she was 10 years old Jane had developed persistent symptoms of colitis. By her early teens, she had an overactive thyroid gland. Her vision was poor; she required very strong glasses (which she seldom wore). For most of 1940 and half of 1941, Jane was in a strictly-run Catholic orphanage in Troy, NY while her mother was hospitalized in another city for treatment of her arthritis. Priests came to the house regularly and support was offered to the fatherless family. Jane's initial bonding to the cultural beliefs of religion was very strong to make up for the lack of a loving, nurturing family. For a time she was left between belief systems.

In the summer of 1945, when she was 16 years old, Jane began working at a variety store. It was her first job. That fall she continued on the job after school hours and on an occasional Saturday. After attending public schools she went to Skidmore College from 1947 to 1950 on a poetry scholarship. Roberts' grandfather died when she was age 19. It was a time of severe shock for her. She began to substitute scientific world view for religious belief.

At that time Jane was dating Walt Zeh, a long-time Saratoga Springs friend. Together they went to the west coast by motorcycle to see Jane's father who had also come from a broken home. Jane then married Walt and continued to write while taking a variety of other jobs, including society editor for the Saratoga newspaper, and as a supervisor in a radio factory. Walt and Jane lived together for three years. It was then in February 1954 while "cutting up, dancing, and raisin' hell at a party," that Jane first met the former commercial artist Robert Fabian Butts, Jr. (June 20, 1919 - May 26, 2008).  The fourth time they met at another party and Jane 'just looked at him and said, "Look, I'm leaving Walt, and I'm going to live by myself or I'm going to live with you, so just let me know."'" Eventually the two left town together and Jane filed for divorce. Jane and Rob married on December 27, 1954 at the home of his parents in Sayre, PA.

Roberts wrote in a variety of genres: poetry, short stories, children's literature, nonfiction, science fiction, and fantasy, and novels. She was the only woman invited to the first science-fiction writer's conference in 1956 in Milford, PA.

The couple moved to Elmira, NY, in 1960, to find steady part-time work – Rob in the local greeting card company, Jane in an art gallery. Now in her 30s, she and her husband began to record what she said were messages from a personality named "Seth," and she wrote several books about the experience.

Seth Material

On a September evening in 1963, Roberts sat down at her table to work on poetry; Butts was in his back-room studio, painting. "It was very domestic, very normal, very unpsychedelic," she would later remember. And then "Between one normal minute and the next, a fantastic avalanche of radical, new ideas burst into my head with tremendous force ... It was as if the physical world were really tissue-paper-thin, hiding infinite dimensions of reality, and I was flung through the tissue paper with a huge ripping sound." When she "came to," Roberts found herself scrawling the title of this batch of notes: The Physical Universe as Idea Construction.

Before this, though her fiction typically dealt with such themes as clairvoyance and reincarnation, intellectually neither she nor Butts believed in extrasensory abilities. Yet soon after this episode, Roberts suddenly began recalling her dreams, including two that were precognitive. Their curiosity piqued, the couple decided to investigate further, and she managed to land a contract with a New York publisher for a do-it-yourself book on extra-sensory perception.

In late 1963, Roberts and Butts started experimenting with a Ouija board as part of Roberts' research for the book. According to Roberts and Butts, on December 2, 1963, they began to receive coherent messages from a male personality who eventually identified himself as Seth.  Soon after, Roberts reported that she was hearing the messages in her head. The first seven sessions were entirely with the Ouija board. The three-hour session on the evening of  Jan. 2, 1964 was the first where she began to dictate the messages instead of using the Ouija board.  For a while, she still opened her sessions with the board, but finally abandoned it after the 27th session on Feb. 19, 1964.

Roberts described the process of writing the Seth books as entering a trance state. She said Seth would assume control of her body and speak through her, while her husband wrote down the words she spoke.  They referred to such episodes as "readings" or "sessions."  The 26th session on Feb. 18, 1964, was the first held in the presence of another person—a friend.

On Jan. 17, 1964, Roberts channeled an allegedly recently deceased woman who told Butts that his and his wife's work with Seth was a life-time project, that they would publish his manuscripts, and help spread his ideas. At the 27th session Seth also told the couple how to rearrange the furniture in their apartment which would better suit their energies. Despite feelings of disbelief toward both messages, the couple somewhat reluctantly agreed.  Two days afterward they heard from a psychologist interested in reincarnation to whom they had written three weeks earlier with some session copies enclosed.   The psychologist told them that the very fluency of the material suggested that it might come from Roberts' subconscious, though it was impossible to tell.  He also cautioned that in some circumstances, amateur mediumship could lead to mental problems.

The letter upset her but helped her deal with her doubts. She felt there were no "alarming changes" in her personality.  "I was doing twice the creative work I had done earlier.  I was satisfied with the quality of the Seth Material; it was far superior to anything I could do on my own.  If nothing else, I thought the sessions presented a way of making deeply unconscious knowledge available on a consistent basis."
"Because we were so innocent about psychic literature, we weren't hampered by superstitious fears about such [psychic] phenomena.  I didn't believe in gods or demons, so I didn't fear them.  I wanted to learn.  Rob and I had discovered a whole new world together, and we were going to explore it."

Roberts assumed Seth was a subconscious fantasy, personified because she did not believe in spirits or life after death.  She monitored her personality characteristics and went to a psychologist. But she felt that "Seth seemed far more mature and well-balanced than the psychologist, so finally I stopped worrying. This is not to say the experience did not cause certain strains and stresses that could accompany any worthwhile venture in an entirely new field."

Roberts also purportedly channeled the world views of several other people, including the philosopher William James, Rembrandt, and the Impressionist painter Paul Cézanne, through a process she described as using a typewriter to write "automatically."

For 21 years until Roberts' death in 1984 (with a one-year hiatus due to her final illness), Roberts held more than 1500 regular or private "ESP class" trance sessions in which she spoke on behalf of Seth. Butts served as the stenographer, taking the messages down in shorthand he had made up,  having others on occasion make recording of some sessions. The messages from Seth channeled through Roberts consisted mostly of monologues on a wide variety of topics. They were published by Prentice-Hall under the collective title Seth Material.

Over the years, hundreds of people witnessed Roberts channeling "Seth". Some went to the ESP classes Roberts held (Tuesday and some Thursday nights,  Sept. 1967 – Feb. 1975) for an evening, others attended for longer periods. (By this time Jane had given up her gallery work, and was teaching nursery school during part of this time.) Outside of the ESP class structure, Roberts gave many personal Seth sessions to various individuals who had written her, asking for help. She never charged for those sessions; however, at some point, she did charge $2.50 to $3.50 per ESP class of 5 to 40 people. When the books began to sell in sufficient numbers, she dropped that fee.  Book sessions were almost always private, held on Monday and Wednesday evenings without witnesses from 1967 through 1982 (except for Tues and Thurs from Aug. to Nov. 1981).

The material through 1969 was published in summary form in The Seth Material, written by Roberts from the output of the channeling sessions. Beginning in January 1970, Roberts wrote books which she described as dictated by Seth.  Roberts claimed no authorship of these books beyond her role as a medium. This series of "Seth books" totaled ten volumes.  The last two books appear to be incomplete due to Roberts' illness.  Butts contributed extensive footnotes, appendices, and other comments to all the Seth books, and thus was a co-author on all of them.  These additions describe what was going on in Roberts' and his life at the time of the various sessions, annotated in light of contemporary beliefs and materials he and Roberts were reading, described excerpts from some fan mail and letters from professionals commenting on Seth's material about their fields, and, especially later, provided insight as to the many steps of production of multiple books with the publisher. By February 1982 they were still receiving "from 30 to 50 letters and packages a week" from readers of their various books.

Some of Roberts' earlier and later poetry was occasionally included to show how she had touched upon some of Seth's concepts. Roberts also wrote The Oversoul Seven trilogy to explore via fiction some of Seth's teachings on the concepts of reincarnation and oversouls.

According to Roberts, Seth described himself as an "energy personality essence no longer focused in physical matter," and was independent of Roberts' subconscious.  Roberts initially expressed skepticism as to Seth's origins, wondering if he was a part of her own personality. While speaking as Seth, Roberts at times appeared stern, jovial, or professorial. "His" voice was deeper and more masculine sounding than Jane's and was possessed of a distinct, although not identifiable, accent. Unlike the psychic Edgar Cayce, whose syntax when speaking in trance was antiquated and convoluted, Roberts' syntax and sentence structures were modern and clear when speaking as Seth. Later books continued to develop but did not contradict the material introduced in earlier works.  Some "Practice Elements" were even included on how a  few of the concepts could be practically experienced.

A few contemporary world events were commented upon, such as the Jonestown Guyana deaths and the Three Mile Island accident.

Seth also provided an alternative creation myth to that of the Big Bang or Intelligent Design.

Roberts' father died in November 1971 at the age of 68; her mother died six months later at the same age. In early 1982 Roberts spent a month in the hospital for severely underactive thyroid gland, protruding eyes and double vision, an almost total hearing loss, a slight anemia, budding bedsores—and a hospital-caused staph infection.  She recovered to an extent, but died two and a half years later in 1984, having been bedridden with severe arthritis-like her mother—for the final year and a half of her life. Roberts had spent 504 consecutive days in a hospital in Elmira, N.Y. The immediate causes of her death were a combination of protein depletion, osteomyelitis, and soft-tissue infections.  These conditions arose out of her long-standing rheumatoid arthritis. (Butts believed for some 15 years that in Roberts' case, at least, the young girl's psychological conditioning was far more important—far more damaging, in those terms—than any physical tendency to inherit the disease.) Roberts was cremated the next day, in a process, she and Butts had agreed upon several years earlier.

After Roberts' death, recorded in The Way Toward Health (1997), Butts continued his work as a guardian of the Seth texts and continued to supervise the publication of some of the remaining material, including The Early Sessions, making sure all of the recordings, manuscripts, notes, and drawings would be given to the Yale Library. Butts remarried, and his second wife, Laurel Lee Davies, supported his work during the more than 20 years they were together and helped answer mail and proofread manuscripts. Butts died of cancer on May 26, 2008. Jane Roberts Butts and Robert F. Butts Jr. are interred together in the Wayne County, NY Furnaceville cemetery; however, there is another gravestone with their names on it in the Sunnyside cemetery in Tunkhannock, PA. A number of groups have compiled anthologies of quotes from Seth, summarized sections of his teachings, issued copies of Seth sessions on audio tape, and further relayed the material via classes and conventions.

Reception and influence
Seth's effect upon New Age thinkers has been profound. The title jacket of "The Nature of Personal Reality, A Seth Book," republished in 1994 (Amber-Allen/New World Library), contains testimonials from some of the most notable thinkers and writers within the movement. Marianne Williamson, Deepak Chopra, Shakti Gawain, Dan Millman, Louise Hay, Richard Bach, and others express the effect the Seth Material had upon their own awakening. In words similar to Williamson's they state: "Seth was one of my first metaphysical teachers. He remains a constant source of knowledge and inspiration in my life." Catherine L. Albanese, professor of religious history at the University of Chicago, stated that in the 1970s the Seth Material "launched an era of nationwide awareness" of the channeling trend.  She believes it contributed to the "self-identity of an emergent New Age movement and also augment[ed] its ranks."

John P. Newport, in his study of the impact of New Age beliefs on contemporary culture, described the central focus of the Seth material as the idea that for each individual: "you create your own reality." (Briefly summarized, our beliefs generate emotions that trigger our memories and organize our associations.  Eventually, those beliefs become manifested in our physical lives and health.) Newport wrote that this foundational concept of the New Age movement was first developed in the "Seth Material." Historian Robert C. Fuller, a professor of religious studies at Bradley University, wrote that Seth filled the role of guide for what Fuller called "unchurched American spirituality," related to concepts of reincarnation, karma, free will, ancient metaphysical wisdom, and "Christ consciousness."

Some writers noted, "Husband Robert Butts stated that similarities exist between Seth's ideas and those of various religious, philosophical, and mystical doctrines from the Near, Middle, or Far East… and we've done a little reading on Buddhism, Hinduism, Zen, and Taoism, for example, not to mention subjects like shamanism, voodooism, and obeah."

New Age writer Michael Talbot wrote, "To my great surprise—and slight annoyance—I found that Seth eloquently and lucidly articulated a view of reality that I had arrived at only after great effort and an extensive study of both paranormal phenomena and quantum physics."

The Yale University Library Manuscripts and Archives maintains a collection entitled Jane Roberts Papers (MS 1090), which documents the career and personal life of Jane Roberts, including journals, poetry, correspondence, audio, and video recordings, and other materials donated after her death by Roberts' husband and other individuals and organizations. Yale University's collection entitled "Jane Roberts papers" occupies 164.08 linear feet of shelf space and is contained in 498 boxes.

Criticism
Roberts and the Seth Material have attracted critiques from outside the paranormal community. The poet Charles Upton, in his collection of essays titled The System of Antichrist, posited that Roberts multiplied the self due to a fear of death.  His opinion was that the Seth texts are based on a misunderstanding of both Christianity and of Eastern religions.

Professor of psychology and noted critic of parapsychology James E. Alcock opined, "In light of all this, the Seth materials must surely be viewed as less than ordinary. There certainly was the time and talent for fraud to play a role, but we cannot discriminate between that possibility and the possibility of unconscious production—at any rate, given these circumstances, there seems little need to consider the involvement of any supernatural agency."

Some religious groups have warned their members about the dangers and deceptions of reading channeled messages from Roberts and others. John MacArthur, host of a syndicated Christian talk show, considers The Seth Material to be "a book entirely written by a demon.", while the New Age Urantia Foundation considers the book evidence for "Devil possession." Videos such as Jane Roberts' Seth Speaks is Anti-Catholic Hate Books – Allowed By The Media claimed that Seth was "a demon from hell contacted through a ouija board."

Science writer Karen Stollznow has written that much of Roberts work was "criticized for being a rip-off of Christian and
Eastern philosophy. It comes as no surprise that Seth influenced such authors as Deepak Chopra and Louise Hay."

Since Roberts' death, others have claimed to channel Seth. In the introduction to Seth's first dictated book, Seth Speaks, "he" says, "communications will come exclusively through Ruburt [Seth's name for Jane] at all times, to protect the integrity of the material." In The Seth Material, Jane Roberts wrote: "Several people have told me that Seth communicated with them through automatic writing, but Seth denies any such contacts." At least one person has claimed more recently to channel Roberts.

Complete writings 

Books:

 Roberts, Jane (1966).  How To Develop Your ESP Power.  Publisher:  Federick Fell.  (Later retitled and reprinted as The Coming of Seth.)  .
 Roberts, Jane (1970). The Seth Material. Reprinted, 2001 by New Awareness Network.   .
 Roberts, Jane (1972).  Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul. Reprinted 1994 by Amber-Allen Publishing.  .
 Roberts, Jane (1974). The Nature of Personal Reality.  Prentice-Hall.  Reprinted 1994, Amber-Allen Publishing. .
 Roberts, Jane (1975).  Adventures in Consciousness:  An Introduction to Aspect Psychology.  Prentice-Hall.  .
 Roberts, Jane (1975).  Dialogues of the Soul and Mortal Self in Time.  Prentice-Hall.  .  Poetry.
 Roberts, Jane (1976).  Psychic Politics:  An Aspect Psychology Book.  Prentice-Hall.  .
 Roberts, Jane (1977). The "Unknown" Reality Vol. 1. Prentice-Hall.  Reprinted 1997, Amber-Allen Publishing.  . 
 Roberts, Jane (1979). The "Unknown" Reality Vol. 2. Prentice-Hall.  Reprinted 1997, Amber-Allen Publishing.   .
 Roberts, Jane (1977).  The World View of Paul Cézanne:  A Psychic Interpretation.  Prentice-Hall.  .
 Roberts, Jane (1978).  The Afterdeath Journal of An American Philosopher:  The World View of William James.  Prentice-Hall.  .
Roberts, Jane  (1979).  Emir's Education in the Proper Use of Magical Powers.  Prentice-Hall.  .  Children's literature.
 Roberts, Jane (1979). The Nature of the Psyche: Its Human Expression.  Prentice-Hall. Reprinted 1996, Amber-Allen Publishing.   .
 Roberts, Jane (1981). The Individual and the Nature of Mass Events.  Prentice-Hall, .  Reprinted 1994, Amber-Allen Publishing, .
Roberts, Jane (1995). The Oversoul Seven Trilogy.  Amber-Allen Publishing.  .  Edition: Paperback; May 1, 1995 (originally published as three separate books: The Education of Oversoul 7 (1973); The Further Education of Oversoul Seven (1979); Oversoul Seven and the Museum of Time (1984)).
Roberts, Jane (1981). The God of Jane: A Psychic Manifesto.  Prentice-Hall.  .  Reprinted 2000, Moment Point Press.  .
 Roberts, Jane (1982).  If We Live Again, Or, Public Magic and Private Love.  Prentice-Hall.  .  Poetry.
 Roberts, Jane (1986).  Dreams, Evolution and Value Fulfillment.  Prentice-Hall, two volumes,  and .
 Roberts, Jane (1986).  Seth, Dreams and Projections of Consciousness.  Stillpoint Publishing.
 (1993).  A Seth Reader.  Vernal Equinox Press.  Compendium edited by Richard Roberts.  .
 Roberts, Jane (1995).  The Magical Approach : Seth Speaks About the Art of Creative Living.  Amber-Allen Publishing.  .
Roberts, Jane (1997).  The Way Toward Health.  Robert F. Butts (Foreword), Amber-Allen Publishing.  .
 Roberts, Jane (2006).  The World View of Rembrandt.  New Awareness Network.  .
 Roberts, Jane (1997 and after).  The Early Sessions (Sessions 1 through 510 of the Seth Material).  New Awareness Network.  Edited by Robert Butts.  Nine volumes.  .
 Roberts, Jane (2003).  The Personal Sessions.  New Awareness Network.  Deleted session material.  Seven volumes.  .
Roberts. Jane.  The Early Class Sessions.  New Awareness Network.  Four volumes.

Short Stories and novellas:
Roberts, Jane. "Prayer of a Wiser People" in Profile, 1950. 
Roberts, Jane. "The Red Wagon" in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, 1956 (republished 1993, Reality Change Magazine; anthologized in 1975, Ladies of Fantasy).
Roberts, Jane. "The Canvas Pyramid" in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, 1957 (French edition, 1958).
Roberts, Jane. "First Communion" in Fantastic Universe, 1957. 
Roberts, Jane. "The Chestnut Beads" in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, 1957 (French edition, 1958; anthologized in Triple W: Witches, Warlocks and Werewolves, 1963).
Roberts, Jane. "The Bundu" (novella, sequel to "The Chestnut Beads") in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, 1958. 
Roberts, Jane. "A Demon at Devotions" in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, 1958 (reprinted in Reality Change Magazine, Winter 1994).
Roberts, Jane. "Nightmare" in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, 1959. 
Roberts, Jane. "Impasse" in The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, 1959 (Spanish anthology edition ca. 1960).
Roberts, Jane. "Three Times Around" in the Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, 1964 (anthologized in Earth Invaded, 1982). 
Roberts, Jane. "The Big Freeze" in Dude, 1965 (reprinted in Reality Change Magazine, Summer 1994).
Roberts, Jane. "The Mission," purchased by Topper magazine in August 1965.  (Publication not yet confirmed.)

Poetry Submissions:

"Time" in The Saratogian [Saratoga Springs, NY], 1947 Mar 19.
"Enigma" in The Saratogian, 1947 Mar 19.
"Spring Gaiety" in The Saratogian, 1947 Apr 26.
"Rain" in Profile [Skidmore College literary magazine], December, 1947.
"Pretense" in Profile, December, 1947.
"Code" in Profile, December, 1947.
"Skyscrapers" in Profile, December, 1947.
"Introvert" in Profile, May, 1948.
"Poem" in Profile, May, 1948.
"How Public Like a Frog" in Profile, Fall, 1948.
"Motorcycle Ride" in Profile, Fall, 1948.
"Echo" in Profile, May, 1949.
"Death Stood at the Door" in Profile, May, 1949.
"Compromise" in Profile, May, 1949.
"I Shall Die in the Springtime." Patterns. v.1, n.1, October 1954.
"Lyric" Patterns. v.1, n.1, October 1954. 
"Matilda" in Quicksilver, Spring, 1960. 
"It is Springtime, Grandfather." Epos., v.12, n.3, Spring 1961. 
"The Familiar." Bitterroot. v.1, n.2, Winter 1962. 
"I Saw a Hand" in Treasures of Parnassus: Best Poems of 1962, Young Publications, 1962 (reprinted in The Elmira Star-Gazette, 1962).
"My Grandfather's World." Epos. v.14, n.3, Spring 1963. 
"Lullaby." Epos. v.14, n.3, Spring 1963. 
"Beware, October." Epos. v.16, n.1, Fall 1964. 
"This Wrist, This Hand." Epos. v.16, n.4, Summer 1965. 
"The Game." New Lantern Club Review. n.2, Summer 1965. 
"The Flowers." Steppenwolf. n.1, Winter 1965–1966. 
"Vision." Dust/9. v.3, n.1, Fall 1966. 
"Who Whispers Yes." Dust/12. v.3, n.4, Spring 1969.
"Hi, Low, and Psycho."  Excerpts published in Reality Change, Third Quarter, 1996.

See also 

 Stewart Edward White
 Modal realism
 Counterpart theory
 Eternalism
 New Thought

References

External links

 
 Jane Roberts Papers (MS 1090). Manuscripts and Archives, Yale University Library. Includes both published and unpublished materials
 Seth Center Index to the Early Sessions
 Seth Learning Center An overview of titles and related audio clips, New Awareness Network
 Nirvikalpa Archive of over 1500 quotations and excerpts from the Seth Material
 'The Problem of Seth's Origin: A Case Study of the Trance-Possession Mediumship of Jane Roberts' by Paul Cunningham
 List of Seth Sessions by Mary Dillman
 Index of Eleven Seth Books by Sue R. Williams
 Seth Talk - by Lynda Madden Dahl

 
1929 births
1984 deaths
20th-century American poets
American children's writers
American motivational writers
Women motivational writers
American psychics
American spiritual mediums
American women poets
Channellers
Consciousness researchers and theorists
Deaths from arthritis
New Age writers
People from Saratoga Springs, New York
Skidmore College alumni
American women children's writers
20th-century American women writers
American women non-fiction writers
Women's page journalists
Compliance gaining is a term used in the social sciences that encompasses the intentional act of altering another's behavior. Research in this area originated in the field of social psychology, but communication scholars have also provided ample research in compliance gaining. While persuasion focuses on attitudes and beliefs, compliance gaining focuses on behavior.

Overview
Compliance gaining occurs whenever a person intentionally induces another person to do something that they might have not done otherwise. Compliance gaining and persuasion are related; however, they are not one and the same. Changes in attitudes and beliefs are often the goal in persuasion; compliance gaining seeks to change the behavior of a target. It is not necessary to change a person's attitude or beliefs to gain compliance. For instance, an automobile driver might have positive attitudes towards driving fast. The threat of a speeding ticket from a police officer positioned in a speed trap may gain compliance from the driver. Conversely, persuading someone to change their attitude or belief will not necessarily gain compliance. A doctor might tell a patient that tobacco use poses a serious threat to a smoker's health. The patient may accept this as a fact and view smoking negatively, but might also continue to use tobacco.

Developments
Compliance gaining research has its roots in social psychology, but overlaps with many other disciplines such as communication and sociology. Compliance gaining can occur via mediated channels, but the research is most associated with interpersonal communication.  In 1967, sociologists Marwell and Schmitt attempted to explain how people select compliance gaining messages. The researchers posited that people have a mental bank of strategies that they draw from when selecting a message. Marwell and Schmitt created a typology for compliance gaining techniques: promise, threat, positive expertise, negative expertise, liking, pregiving, aversive stimulation, debt, moral appeal, positive self-feeling, negative self-feeling, positive altercasting, negative altertcasting, altruism, positive esteem, and negative esteem. This study was the catalyst for more interest in compliance gaining from communication scholars.

Miller, Boster, Roloff, and Seibold (1977) as well as Cody and McLaughlin (1980) studied the situational variables that influences compliance gaining strategies. The latter study identified six different typologies of situations that can influence compliance gaining behaviors: personal benefits (how much personal gain an actor can yield from the influencing behavior), dominance (the power relation between the actor and the target), rights (whether the actor has the right to expect compliance), resistance (how easy will the target be influenced), intimacy (whether the relation between actor and target is shallow), and consequences (what sort of effect this situation would have on the relationship between actor and target). Dillard and Burgoon (1985) later investigated the Cody-McLaughlin typologies. They concluded that situational variables, as described by Cody and McLaughlin, did very little to predict compliance gaining strategy selection. As early as 1982, there was already strong criticism about the strength of the relationships between situational variables and compliance gaining message selection.

By the 1990s, many research efforts attempting to link compliance gaining strategy selection and features of a situation or features of the individual "failed to coalesce into a coherent body of knowledge". Situational dimensions and individual differences were not effective in predicting so researchers went into other perspectives in an effort to understand compliance gaining. For instance, Schrader and Dillard (1998) linked primary and secondary goals to compliance gaining strategy. Using the theoretical framework of Goals-Plans-Actions developed by Dillard in 1980, Schrader and Dillard operate from the assumption that individuals possess and act on multiple goals. In any compliance seeking situation, the actor has primary goals that drive the attempt to influence a target. The primary goal is what the interaction is all about. For instance, if an actor wants a target to stop smoking, this is the primary goal and this is what drives the interaction. However, in the course of pursuing that goal, there are "secondary" goals to consider. These are goals that limit the behavior of the actor. If getting a target to stop smoking is the primary goal, then a secondary goal might be to maintain a friendly relationship with the target. Dillard specifies five types of secondary goals that temper the compliance gaining behavior: identity goals (morals and personal standards), interaction goals (impression management), relational resource goals (relationship management), personal resource goals (material concerns of the actor), and arousal management goals (efforts to manage anxiety about the compliance gaining attempt).

Despite the charges of individual differences making very little progress in prediction compliance gaining strategies, some researchers in the 2000s have focused their efforts to rectify this weakness in the research to link individual differences with compliance gaining effectiveness. King (2001), acknowledging the paucity of robust situational and trait studies linked to compliance gaining, attempted to isolate one situation as a predictor for compliance gaining message selection. King's research suggested that when target of compliance gaining were perceived to be less resistant to influence attempts, the actors used more compliance gaining tactics. When targets were perceived as strongly resistant, the actors used less tactics. Elias and Loomis (2004) found that gender and race affect an instructor's ability to gain compliance in a college classroom. Punyanunt (2000) found that using humor may enhance the effectiveness of pro-social compliance gaining techniques in the classroom. Remland and Jones (1994) found that vocal intensity and touch also affect compliance gaining. Goei et al. (2003) posited that "feelings of liking" between target and actor as well as doing favors for the target lead to liking and obligation, which leads to increased compliance. Pre-giving (giving a target a small gift or favor such as a free sample of food) is positively associated with increased compliance in strangers. 
One of the major criticisms of examining compliance gaining literature is that very little research studies actual compliance. Filling out a survey and reporting intent to comply with a request is certainly different than actually completing the request. For example, many people might report that they will comply with a doctor's order, but away from the doctor's office, they may ignore medical advice.

Application
Compliance gaining research has a fairly diverse background so much of the research uses alternate paradigms and perspectives. As mentioned above, the field of compliance gaining originated in social psychology, but was adopted by many communication scholars as well. Many fields from consumer psychology to primary education pedagogy have taken great interest in compliance gaining.

Medicine 
Doctors have expressed much frustration with compliance resistance from their patients. A reported 50% of patients do not comply with medical advice and prescriptions. Researchers, as well as medical professionals, have a vested interest in learning strategies that can increase compliance in their patients. Many severe and chronic conditions can be avoided if early treatments are followed as prescribed, avoiding death, permanent injury, and costlier medical treatments later on. Researchers in communication have reported some key findings such as: clear and effective communication about a patient's condition or illness increases the likelihood of patient compliance with medical advice; doctors that use humor in their communication with patients have higher satisfaction rates; high satisfaction rates with physicians is highly correlated with patient compliance.

Pedagogy 
For teachers, gaining compliance from students is a must for effective teaching. Studies in compliance gaining have ranged from elementary education  all the way to adult and higher education.

Sales and consumer psychology 
Advertising and marketing are tools of persuasion. There is literally centuries' worth of literature available about persuasion. However, changing attitudes and beliefs about a product does not necessarily change behaviors. Purchasing a product is a behavior. Researchers such as Parrish-Sprowl, Carveth, & Senk (1994) have applied compliance gaining research to effective sales.

Compliance
Compliance gaining was not originally conceived in the field of communication but found its roots in the late 1960s as a result of studies and research by two sociologists, Gerald Marwell and David Schmitt. In 1967, Marwell and Schmitt produced some interesting compliance-gaining tactics concerning the act of getting a teenager to study. The tactics, sixteen in all, are as follows.

 Promise: If you comply, I will reward you. For example, you offer to increase Dick's allowance if he studies more.
 Threat: If you do not comply, I will punish you. For example, you threaten to forbid Dick to use the car if he doesn't start studying more.
 Expertise (positive): If you comply, you will be rewarded because of the "nature of things." For example, you tell Dick that if he gets good grades he be able to get into college and get a good job.
 Expertise (negative): If you do not comply, you will be punished because of the "nature of things." For example, you tell Dick that if he does not get good grades he will not be able to get into college or get a good job.
 Liking: Act friendly and helpful to get the person in a "good frame of mind" so they comply with the request. For example, you try to be as friendly and pleasant as possible to put Dick in a good mood before asking him to study.
 Pre-giving: Reward the person before requesting compliance. For example, raise Dick's allowance and tell him you now expect him to study.
 Aversive stimulation: Continuously punish the person, making cessation contingent on compliance. For example, you tell Dick he may not use the car until he studies more.
 Debt: You owe me compliance because of past favors. For example, you point out that you have sacrificed and saved to pay for Dick's education and that he owes it to you to get good enough grades to get into a good college.
 Moral appeal: You are immoral if you do not comply. You tell Dick that it is morally wrong for anyone not to get as good grades as possible and that he should study more.
 Self-feeling (positive): You will feel better about yourself if you comply. For example, you tell Dick that he will feel proud if he gets himself to study more.
 Self-feeling (negative): You will feel worse about yourself if you do not comply. For example, you tell Dick that he will feel ashamed of himself if he gets bad grades.
 Altercasting (positive): A person with "good" qualities would comply. For example, you tell Dick that because he is a mature and intelligent person he naturally will want to study more and get good grades.
 Altercasting (negative): Only a person with "bad" qualities would not comply. For example, you tell Dick that he should study because only someone very childish does not study.
 Altruism: I need your compliance very badly, so do it for me. For example, you tell Dick that you really want very badly for him to get into a good college and that you wish he would study more as a personal favor to you.
 Esteem (positive): People you value will think better of you if you comply. For example, you tell Dick that the whole family will be very proud of him if he gets good grades.
 Esteem (negative): People you value will think the worse of you if you do not comply. For example, you tell Dick that the whole family will be very disappointed in him if he gets poor grades.

In 1967, Marwell and Schmitt conducted experimental research, using the sixteen compliance gaining tactics and identified five basic compliance-gaining strategies: Rewarding activity, Punishing activity, Expertise, Activation of impersonal commitments, and Activation of personal commitments.

Power
Another element of compliance-gaining was produced in the early 1960s, as French and Raven were researching the concepts of power, legitimacy, and politeness. They identified five influential aspects associated with power, which help illustrate elements of the study of compliance. The fives bases of power are as follows:

 Reward Power: A person with reward power has control over some valued resource (e.g., promotions and raises).
 Coercive Power: A person with coercive power has the ability to inflict punishments (e.g., fire you).
 Expert Power: Expert power is based on what a person knows (e.g., you may do what a doctor tells you to do because they know more about medicine than you do).
 Legitimate Power: Legitimate power is based on formal rank or position (e.g., you obey someone's commands because they are the vice president in the company for which you work).
 Referent Power: People have referent power when the person they are trying to influence wants to be like them (e.g., a mentor often has this type of power).

(French & Raven, 1960)

Techniques
The study of compliance gaining has been central in the development of many commonly used or heard of techniques. The following techniques are a few of what has evolved as a product of the study of compliance gaining strategies. Note, many of these techniques have been empirically documented increasing compliance.

Foot-in-the-door (FITD) 

With research starting in 1966 by Freedman & Fraser, foot-in-the door is one of the earliest and most researched compliance gaining techniques. This technique gains compliance by making a smaller easy  request then a larger more difficult request at a later time. The smaller request is usually one that would be widely accepted without scrutiny. The larger request is usually the actual the task or goal wanted to be completed.

Effectivity 
Freedman and Fraser thought that after satisfying the smaller initial request, if the person was not forced to do then they must be "the type of person who fulfills such requests".

The smaller task/request should relate to the larger request and not be trivial. For the foot-in-the-door technique to be successful it must generate the self-aware "I am the kind of person who fulfills this type of request" other wise known as the self-perception theory. Other studies found that if the initial request is easy but unusual or bizarre, it would also generate the foot-in-the-door effectiveness. This idea was developed further into the Disrupt-Then-Reframe technique.

There are other reasons besides the self-perception theory that makes the foot-in-the-door technique successful.

Consistency – Cialdini and Guadagno, Asher, and Demaine believe that what makes people want to fulfill larger request is the need to be consistent.

The Norm to Help Others – Harris believed that after the first request, the norm to help others becomes clear. It only becomes evident after the person reviews his or her reason why they completed the original request.

Satisfying the First Request – Crano and Sivacek thought what made the technique so effective was personal satisfaction. "The person learns that the fulfillment of request brings the reward of a positive experience. One may assume that the likelihood that satisfaction of this type appears willi increase if the person has to react to something unusual that awakens his or her mindfulness, and will decrease in situations in which the person reacts automatically and habitually".

Door-in-the-face (DITF) 

Door-in-the-face was first introduced in 1975 by Cialdini and colleagues. The opposite of foot-in-the-door, in the door-in-the-face technique, the requestor asks a large objectionable request which is denied by the target instead of gaining compliance by asking a smaller easy request. The requestor seeking compliance ask a smaller more reasonable request.

There are several theories that explain why door-in-the-face is an effective gaining compliance technique.

Self-presentation theory – "that individuals will comply with a second request due to fears one will be perceived negatively by rejecting successive prosocial request for compliance".

Reciprocal concessions – this theory describes the effects of door-in-the-face as a "process of mutual concessions". "The second request represents a concession on the part of the sender (from his or her initial request), and compliance to the second request represents a concession on the part of the receiver (from his or her inclination to not comply with the first request)".

Guilt – One reason that makes door-in-the-face such an effective technique is people feel guilty for refusing to comply with a request twice.

Social Responsibility – this theory describes the social repercussions and pressures that occur if an individual declines a request.

All together the theories propose that a target who declines the first request feel a "personal or social responsibility" to comply with the second request. In an effort to avoid feeling guilty or reduce the sense of obligation the target would have.

Recent techniques

Disrupt-then-reframe (DTR) 
DTR was first introduced by Barbara Price Davis and Eric S. Knowles in 1999. This technique states that a person will be more likely to comply with a request if the initial request or pitch is confusing. The pitch is immediately followed by a reframing or a reason to comply with the request.

An example of this technique is: A waiter states that "the steak dinner is on special for 800 pennies; it's a really good deal". Disrupting the couple by saying "800 pennies" instead of "8 dollars", the waiter is able to increase the likelihood that they will buy the steak dinner.

DTR was found to be a very effective way to gain compliance in non-profit instances such as raising money for charities or asking people to take a survey. DTR was found to be less successful as a sales technique; this may be because the message is more scrutinized, making it harder to confuse the target.

Persistence 
Persistence used as a compliance gaining technique, gets the target to comply by repeating the message. In 1979, Cacioppo and Petty found that repeating the message more than five times lead to decrease in compliance. Success is enhanced if the repetition comes from more than one person and is enhanced further if the message has the same idea or meaning but is not exact.

An example of this technique would be: "My wife kept reminding me to take out the trash until I finally did it."

Dump and chase (DAC) 
Persistence has a high probability of annoying the target and creating a negative interaction which could be viewed as "nagging". A way to avoid this would be rejecting the targets objection to your request by asking "why not?", then forming another message to overcome the second objection to gain compliance. This technique is called dump and chase.

Mechanics of this technique are urgency and guilt. When the repeated message is presented to the target it may be perceived as urgent, thus making it seem more important, and more willing to comply. By creating a sense of obligation in the request, the target may develop guilt if not willing to comply.

Just-One-More (JOM) 
Just-One-More was developed as a way to make a donation seem more important. The use of this technique involves using the language of "Just-One-More" to gain compliance. The technique is found to be most useful in instances regarding volunteering and donations. It is seen as "the last person to help will be more rewarding than being one of the first or those in the middle, due to the expectation that the requestor will appreciate the last person more than any of those who complied previously".
For Example: "Do you want to buy this car? I need just one more sale to reach my quota this month."

If the target finds that the requestor is lying or being deceptive about being the last one, it will create a negative outlook on the person and the organization that he or she represents. Even though losing some of the effectiveness the requestor could state that they are "close to their goal" or "almost there".

64 compliance gaining strategies 
In "Classifying Compliance Gaining Messages: Taxonomic Disorder and Strategic Confusion", Kathy Kellermann and Tim Cole put together 64 compliance gaining strategies as an attempt to classify more than 820 previous strategies.
 Actor Takes Responsibility:  Try to get others to comply by stating your willingness to help them or even work on the request yourself.  That is, try to gain their compliance by offering to do it yourself as a means of getting them to do what you want. Example: "Is there anything I can do to so you can finish the project on time?"
 Altercasting (Negative):  Try to get others to comply by pointing out that only a bad person would not do what is wanted.  That is, try to gain their compliance by noting that only a person with negative qualities wouldn't comply. Example: "You should stop watching these types of television shows as only a disturbed  person would like them."  
 Altercasting (Positive):  Try to get others to comply by pointing out that a good person would do what is wanted.  That is, try to gain their compliance by noting that any person with positive qualities would comply. Example: "A good boy would eat all his vegetables."
 Altruism:  Try to get others to comply by asking them to give you a hand out of the goodness of their heart.  That is, try to gain their compliance by asking them to be altruistic and just do it for you. Example: "Could you help me move, I would really appreciate it."
 Assertion:  Try to get others to comply by asserting (forcefully stating) what you want.  That is, try to gain their compliance by demanding (commanding) them to comply. Example: "Go get a bandaid now!"
 Audience-Use:  Try to get others to comply by having a group of other people present when you make your request.  That is, try to gain their compliance by asking them in front of other people as a way to back up your request. Example: "I asked her to go to the prom with me in front of her friends." 
 Authority Appeal:  Try to get others to comply on the basis of the authority that you or other people have.  That is, try to gain their compliance by using or relying on a position of power over them to get them do to what you want. Example: "My boss told me to get him the reports by 10 am so I did."
 Aversive Stimulation:  Try to get others to comply by doing things they don't like until they agree to comply.  That is, try to gain their compliance by bothering them until they do what you want. Example: "My co-worker kept bothering me to quit smoking until I finally did."
 Bargaining:  Try to get others to comply by striking a bargain with them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by negotiating a deal where you each do something for the other so everyone gets what they want. Example: "If you help me with the dishes, I will help you with the laundry."
 Benefit (Other):  Try to get others to comply by telling them people other than themselves would benefit if they do what you want.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out how it helps people other than themselves if they comply. Example: "By donating to our fundraiser, You ensure that everyone will have a coat this winter."
Benefit (Self):  Try to get others to comply by telling them you personally would benefit if they do what you want.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out how it helps oneself if they comply. Example:  "If you helped me with the yard work, then I won't get a ticket by the city tomorrow."
Benefit (Target):  Try to get others to comply by telling them they personally would benefit if they do what you want.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out how it helps them if they comply. Example: "If you go grocery shopping for me tonight then you will have something for lunch tomorrow."
Challenge:  Try to get others to comply by challenging them to do what you want.  That is, try to gain their compliance by provoking, stimulating, tempting, goading, and/or galvanizing them to comply. Example: I didn't want to race until his car pulled beside mine and he revved the engine. 
Compliment:  Try to get others to comply by complimenting them on their abilities or accomplishments.  That is, try to gain their compliance by praising them to get them to do what you want. Example: With that jump shot, you would be really good at basketball. 
Compromise:  Try to get others to comply by offering to compromise with them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by making a concession to them so they'll make their concession to you and do what you want. Example: "I will drop you off at the airport if you will go to the dentist with me."
 Cooperation:  Try to get others to comply by being cooperative and collaborating with them.  That is, try to gain their compliance not by telling the other person what to do but by offering to discuss things and work them out together. Example: "We should get the team together and brainstorm new ideas for this problem."
Criticize:  Try to get others to comply by criticizing them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by attacking them on a personal level to get them to do what you want. Example: "It looks like you're really gaining some weight, why don't you go on a run with me."
Debasement:  Try to get others to comply by acting pitiful and pleading.  That is, try to gain their compliance by debasing, demeaning, degrading, devaluing, humiliating, and/or lowering yourself so as to deprive yourself of esteem or self-worth to get them to do what you want. Example: "I am so stupid, I can't believe I deleted the report. Can you please go delay the presentation." 
Debt:  Try to get others to comply by reminding them they are in debt to you because of things you have done for them in the past.  That is, try to gain their compliance by indicating that they owe it to you to do what you want. Example: "You should paid for my lunch, I bought your lunch last time."
Deceit:  Try to get others to comply by misleading them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by lying to or deceiving them. Example: "We told them the car was in perfect working order, but the transmission is about to go out."
Direct Request:  Try to get others to comply by just making a direct request.  That is, try to gain their compliance by simply asking or stating what you want without giving any reasons for them to comply. Example: "Can I use the computer?"
Disclaimer (Norms/Rules):  Try to get others to comply by downplaying or disavowing restrictions and constraints that might prevent them from doing what you want them to do.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out that otherwise applicable procedures, rules, norms, and/or expectations should be broken in this instance. Example: "You should drive faster than the speed limit, this is an emergency!"
Disclaimer (Other):  Try to get others to comply by downplaying or disavowing the ability of anyone else to do so.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out that other people can't help you or do what is needed. Example: "I would ask Ted for his help but we know that he is not good at presentations."
Disclaimer (Self):  Try to get others to comply by downplaying or disavowing your reasons for asking.  That is, try to gain their compliance by indicating that:  (a) you don't want to make a bad impression nor do you have bad intentions, (b) you don't really want to make the request and you are only doing so reluctantly, and/or (c) you simply have no choice but to make the request. Example: "I'm sorry that I am asking you for money, I'm really not a beggar."
Disclaimer (Target):  Try to get others to comply by acknowledging and sympathizing with why they may not want to do so.  That is, try to gain their compliance by indicating that:  (a) you understand and are aware of their reasons, feelings, and abilities, and/or (b) that you are sensitive to their needs and concerns even though you must ask them to do what you want. Example: "I know that you're disappointed that you can't go on the trip, but do you mind helping me get the presentation ready?"
Disclaimer (Task):  Try to get others to comply by downplaying what you are asking them to do.  That is, try to gain their compliance by indicating that what you want them to do isn't what they think it is and shouldn't pose a problem; it isn't awful, effortful, difficult, or dumb. Example: "Updating the database shouldn't take that much time."
Disclaimer (Time):  Try to get others to comply by downplaying or disavowing being busy as a reason to refuse your request.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out that there is or soon will be enough time for them to do what you want. Example: "We should go to the store now, you can finish your report later."
Duty:  Try to get others to comply by pointing out it is their duty to do so.  That is, try to gain their compliance by stating they should fulfill obligations, responsibilities, and commitments that they have. Example: "Taking out the trash at the end of the day is a part of your job."
Equity:  Try to get others to comply on the grounds that it is equitable to do so.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out that being fair, just, and impartial means they should do what you want. Example: "Your brother cleaned the house last time; it's your turn now."
Esteem (Negative) by Others:  Try to get others to comply by pointing out that, if they do not do so, other people will think worse of them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by noting that in the eyes of others they will be viewed more negatively if they don't do what you want. Example: "If you don't go to that college, other people will think you're going to a party school."
Esteem (Positive) by Others:  Try to get others to comply by pointing out that, if they do so, other people will think better of them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by noting that in the eyes of others they will be viewed more positively if they do what you want. Example: "If you play football, everyone will think that you're really tough."
Esteem (Negative) by Actor:  Try to get others to comply by pointing out that, if they do not do so, you will think worse of them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by noting that in your eyes they will be viewed more negatively if they don't do what you want. Example: "I would be really disappointed if you went to the party instead of studying."
Esteem (Positive) by Actor:  Try to get others to comply by pointing out that, if they do so, you will think better of them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by noting that in your eyes they will be viewed more positively if they do what you want.  Example: "If you went to law school, I would have a new level of respect for you."
Expertise (Negative):  Try to get others to comply by pointing out that because of the way the world works, unfavorable things will happen if they don't change their behavior. That is, try to gain their compliance by noting that in the natural course of things, bad outcomes will occur if they don't do what you want. Example: "You will get the flu, if you don't get a flu shot."
Expertise (Positive):  Try to get others to comply by pointing out that because the way the world works, favorable things will happen if they change their behavior. That is, try to gain their compliance by noting that in the natural course of things, good outcomes will occur if they do what you want. Example: "If you work hard at your job, you're sure to get that promotion."
Hinting:  Try to get others to comply by hinting around at what you want them to do.  That is, try to gain their compliance by indicating indirectly what you want, hoping they will figure it out and comply even though you never come out and really say it. Example: "I left the trash by the front door, so Dan would take it out." 
I Want:  Try to get others to comply for no reason other than you want them to.  That is, try to gain their compliance by telling them to do what you want because you desire it. Example: "I want you to go with me to the city."
Invoke Norm:  Try to get others to comply by indicating they would be out of step with the norm if they didn't do what you want.  That is, try to gain their compliance by prodding them to conform to what others have, do, or desire. Example: "Everyone is going to the gym after work."
It's Up to You:  Try to get others to comply by telling them the decision is theirs to make and it's up to them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by telling them the choice to comply is up to them. Example: "It's up to you to save your money, instead of spending it on video games."
Logical Empirical:  Try to get others to comply by making logical arguments.  That is, try to gain their compliance through the use of reasoning, evidence, facts, and data. Example: "Statistics show that non-smokers live longer than smokers."
Moral Appeal:  Try to get others to comply by appealing to their moral or ethical standards.  That is, try to gain their compliance by letting them know what is right and what is wrong. Example: "Don't buy those shoes they are made using child labor."
My Concern for You:  Try to get others to comply because of your concern for them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by referring to your regard for, consideration of, interest in, and feelings for them. Example: "Please go to the doctor, I'm worried about you."
Nature of Situation:  Try to get others to comply by being attentive to the situation or circumstances you find yourselves in.  That is, try to gain their compliance by taking note of the appropriateness of their behavior to the situation and/or the appropriateness of your request in the situation. Example: "I told my son that the bed was not a trampoline." 
Negative Affect:  Try to get others to comply by being really negative:  expressing negative emotions, acting really unfriendly, and creating an unappealing impression.  That is, try to gain their compliance by acting displeased to get them to do what you want. Example: "Angrily, I told her to put her phone on silent after it went off in class.."
Not Seek Compliance:  No attempt is made to get others to do what you want.  That is, no compliance is sought. Example: "I didn't ask if I could go out tonight."
Persistence:  Try to get others to comply by being persistent.  That is, try to gain their compliance by persevering (continuing) in your attempts to get them to do what you want. Example: "After asking for over a year, we are finally getting a pool."
Personal Expertise:  Try to get others to comply by referring to your credibility (your personal expertise).  That is, try to gain their compliance based on your experience, know-how, trustworthiness, and judgment. Example: "You should get those shoes, I have them and they feel great when running. 
Positive Affect:  Try to get others to comply by being really positive:  expressing positive emotions, acting really friendly, and creating an appealing impression.  That is, try to gain their compliance by charming them into doing what you want. Example: "She was really happy, when she asked for a raise."
Pre-Giving:  Try to get others to comply by doing positive and nice things for them in advance of asking them to do what you want.  That is, try to gain their compliance by giving them things they'd like and then only afterwards making your request. Example: "I bought my wife flowers, then later asked if I could go fishing this weekend."
Promise:  Try to get others to comply by making a promise.  That is, try to gain their compliance by offering to give them a reward or something they'd like if they do what is wanted. Example: "If you behave in the store, I promise that we will stop for ice cream on the way home."
Promote Task:  Try to get others to comply by promoting the value and worth of what you want them to do.  That is, try to gain their compliance by identifying one or more positive qualities of the thing you are asking them to do (e.g., what you want them to do is important, meaningful, rewarding, enjoyable etc.). Example: "If you complete this presentation on time, you will be less stressed and will get a good grade."
Self-Feeling (Negative):  Try to get others to comply by stating that not doing so will result in an automatic decrease in their self-worth.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out that they will feel worse about themselves if they don't do what you want. Example: "You will feel bad if you throw all that food away instead of donating it."
Self-Feeling (Positive):  Try to get others to comply by stating that doing so will result in an automatic increase in their self-worth.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out that they will feel better about themselves if they do what you want. Example: "You will feel better if you donate that old coat to charity instead of selling it in the garage sale." 
Suggest:  Try to get others to comply by offering suggestions about what it is you want them to do.  That is, try to gain their compliance by subtly proposing an idea that indirectly points out and describes what it is you want them to do. Example: "Why don't you try the steak instead of the chicken?"
Surveillance:  Try to get others to comply by indicating your awareness and observation of what they do.  That is, try to gain their compliance by referring to your general vigilance, surveillance, scrutiny, and/or monitoring of their behavior. Example: "I will find out if you're lying to me about the car accident." 
Third Party:  Try to get others to comply by having someone else ask them for you.  That is, try to gain their compliance by getting someone else to intervene and do it for you. Example: "Jane don't you think Jim should go on that date with the girl from accounting." 
This Is the Way Things Are:  Try to get others to comply by telling them they have to because that is just the way things are.  That is, try to gain their compliance by referring to rules, procedures, policies, or customs that require them to comply. Example: "You should slow down since the speed limit is only 25 mph."
Thought Manipulation:  Try to get others to comply by convincing them that the request you are making is really their own idea.  That is, try to gain their compliance by having them think they were the ones who really wanted to do it in the first place. Example: "We should go on the roller coaster, since you wanted to come to the fair in the first place." 
Threat:  Try to get others to comply by threatening them.  That is, try to gain their compliance by saying you will punish them if they don't do what you want. Example: "If you go to the bar again tonight, consider us done." 
Value Appeal:  Try to get others to comply because of important values that compel action in this instance.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing to central and joint beliefs that should guide what they do. Example: "Since we both care about the ocean, we should volunteer for the cleanup."
Warning:  Try to get others to comply by warning them about what they are doing.  That is, try to gain their compliance by alerting them to possible negative consequences of their behavior. Example: "You might get fired if you stay up all night." 
Welfare (Others):  Try to get others to comply by telling them how other people would be hurt if they don't do what you want.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out that the welfare of other people is at stake. Example: "If you are not going to be in the family photo then we won't take one." 
Why Not?:  Try to get others to comply by making them justify why they should not.  That is, try to gain their compliance by pointing out there are no real grounds for not doing so. Example: "Why wouldn't you help your sister?"
Your Concern for Me:  Try to get others to comply because of their concern for you.  That is, try to gain their compliance by referring to their regard for, consideration of, interest in, and feelings for you. Example: "If you really cared for me then you would go to the dance recital."

References

Further reading
 
 Dillard, J.P. (2004). The goals-plans-action model of interpersonal influence. In J. S. Seiter & R. H. Gass (Eds.) Readings in persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining (pp. 185–206). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
 French, J. P. R., Jr., & Raven, B. (1960). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics (pp. 607–623). New York: Harper & Row.
 
 
 
 McQuillen, J. S., Higginbotham, D. C., & Cummings, M. C. (1984). Compliance-resisting behaviors: The effects of age, agent, and types of request. In R. N. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication yearbook 8 (pp. 747–762). Beverly Hills: SAGE.
 
 
 Wheeless, L. R., Barraclough, R., & Stewart, R. (1983). Compliance-gaining and power in persuasion. In R. Bostrom (Ed.), Communication yearbook 7 (pp. 105–145). Beverly Hills: Sage.

Persuasion
Attitude change
Sociological theories ...Play Nine Songs with Mr. Quintron is the third studio album by the Oblivians, released in 1997 on Crypt Records. The album features noted Ninth Ward nightclub organist Mr. Quintron playing organ and percussion on a number of tracks.

Overview
The album's concept came about in part due to Greg Cartwright's fondness for gospel music: "Greg had been really into black gospel music, and wanted to try some gospels songs in Oblivians fashion, but only if they were kinda screwed up. We didn't want to try to come off as religious, but we didn't want to make a joke out of the whole thing, either. It was a tribute to the spirit of the music, more the holy ghost than the saviour."

The album was recorded in a single day: "Quintron took a bus up to Memphis from New Orleans for 8 hours, and we took him to my (Eric "Oblivian" Friedl's) house to play him some songs that we were thinking of covering." Mr. Quintron began arranging his contributions upon arrival, without any prior knowledge of the content of the album. "We had sent him a tape of the songs but it never got delivered to him- so he came up not knowing what songs we wanted to do!" The album was recorded in eight hours, at which point Mr. Quintron returned home via bus to New Orleans. "He (Quintron) was on a bus for eight hours then in a studio for eight hours and then we took him to the bus the same day, so he had a tough 24 hours."

The dramatic shift in styles between this album and its predecessors was one of the reasons for the eventual break up of the band. As Greg Cartwright once explained, "this is really why the band ended - the ...Play 9 record sounded more like a Gamblers record than an Oblivians record. I'm not sure Eric was happy with the direction of the band cause he has more of a punk rock aesthetic, but it was a good finale."

Track listing

Personnel
Greg Oblivian – Lead and backing vocals, guitar
Eric Oblivian – Lead and backing vocals, guitar
Jack Oblivian – Drums, backing vocals
Mr. Quintron – Organ, percussion

References

1997 albums
Oblivians albums
Crypt Records albums