The issue: Prior commitments and social interaction affect have a strong influence on an how an individual makes a choice.

Major strength: Cialdini pulls for a strong variety of examples in this writing per normal. There is a nice balance between stories and exact scientific studies. The “knowing what I know now” questioned continued throughout the chapter without getting repetitive.

Major weakness:  I felt a big weakness was when Cialdini argued that knowing the physical signs were helpful. He pointed out that we generally don’t feel good when committing to something but due it anyway. Clearly knowing these signs physically does not provide a huge amount of help. I also wonder if some observed or test subjects went through with commitments with plans to change their minds later. If an individual feels obligated to a commitment, they could just be making agreements they have no intention to keep.

Underlying assumption: Individuals will rely on past commitments as well as internal and social pressure to make decisions− event if they aren’t for the best.

Provocative questions:

Do other cultures have the same type of commitment issues? Cialdini briefly mentions one test but how might this be further tested?

How does trust affect an individuals decisions when it comes to trust?

Does working harder for something (i.e. joining Greek life or becoming a citizen) always give it more value and increase an individuals loyalty to that commitment?

How would Cialdini relate the idea of commitment to a political party?