Curr Psychol (2010) 29:235–246 245 target infers from his/her initial level of expended effort that he/she seems to care about the issues advocated by the activist group and hence is prepared to invest more time and effort as a volunteer for the group. Future research might profitably explore this possibility more in depth, for instance by systematically varying the valence of the initial and target request of a sequential request technique in addition to the involvement with the initial request. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. References Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage. Baron, R. S. (2000). Arousal, capacity, and intense indoctrination. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 238–254. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182. Baumeister, R. F. (2002). Reflections and reviews: yielding to temptation: self-control failure, impulsive purchasing, and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 28, 670–676. Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego depletion: is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1252–1265. Baumeister, R. F., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (2000). Ego depletion: a resource model of volition, self- regulation, and controlled processing. Social Cognition, 18(2), 130–150. Burger, J. M. (1999). The foot-in-the-door compliance procedure: a multiple process analysis and review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(4), 303–325. Burkley, E. (2008). The role of self-control in resistance to persuasion, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 419–31. Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York: Morrow. Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621. Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindsey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill. Cialdini, R. B., Vincent, J. E., Lewis, S. K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., & Darby, B. L. (1975). Reciprocal concessions procedure for inducing compliance: the door-in-the-face technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 206–215. Cialdini, R. B., Trost, M. R., & Newsom, J. T. (1995). Preference for consistency: the development of a valid measure and discovery of surprising behavioral implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 318–328. Fennis, B. M., Das, E. H. H. J., & Pruyn, A Th. (2004). “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with nonsense”: extending the impact of the disrupt-then-reframe technique of social influence. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(3), 280–290. Fennis, B. M., Janssen, L., & Vohs, K. D. (2009). Acts of benevolence: a limited-resource account of compliance with charitable requests. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 906–924. Fish, B., & Kaplan, K. J. (1974). Does a “foot-in-the-door” get you in or out? Psychological Reports, 34, 35–42. Freedman, J., & Fraser, S. (1966). Compliance without pressure: the foot-in-the-door technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 195–202.