« How I use the 'Noted' category | Home | CSS-based radio theme »
May 12, 2002
True or Not, Flattery Works: Report
Wed Apr 24,10:27 AM ET
By Amy Norton
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Flattery may indeed get you everywhere, regardless of whether the compliments are true, new research shows.
But in a series of experiments with college students, researcher Roos Vonk of the University of Nijmegen in the Netherlands found that participants generally liked their admirers regardless of whether they thought the compliments were true--and regardless of a range of other factors.
Instead, it seems people are just suckers for flattery, according to Vonk's report in the April issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (news - web sites).
"Flattery works because it feels good when you're being flattered, even if you know that the flattering comments may not be entirely accurate," Vonk told Reuters Health.
To investigate, the researcher set up a series of experiments designed to look at specific situations and personality traits thought to sway a person's opinion of his or her flatterer. For example, past research has shown that while the subject of flattery tends to take it at face value, people observing the exchange take a more skeptical view. And some researchers have said this could be due to the fact the object of praise, being actively involved in the conversation, may be distracted from critically evaluating it.
But Vonk's experiments showed that while people who were objects of flattery liked their admirers more and saw them as less "slimy" than observers did, distraction did not account for this.
Similarly, people's moods, self-esteem, and desire to like those complimenting them were not the keys to whether flattery worked.
In the real world (news - Y! TV), Vonk points out, these variables are probably a factor. But, he adds, they don't beat the simple feel-good aspect of flattery.
"Flattery is the way to go," he said, "especially in superficial relationships."
SOURCE: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2002;82:515-526.