Notes
This book gives general information. It isn't medical, psychological or legal advice, and it's no substitute for a doctor or therapist who knows your situation.
I've kept sources out of the chapters where I could so they read easily. Here they are by chapter, with the limits I'm aware of. Unless I say otherwise, I read the published summary of each paper and not the full text. I checked each paper for a retraction notice in September 2026 and found none. Where a chapter isn't listed, it rests on my own reasoning. That includes chapters 1, 3, 8, 10, 13 and 16, the policies in chapter 6 and the method in chapter 14. The NHS pages were read in September 2026. They're written for England or the UK, and services differ elsewhere. Most of the research was done in North America, much of it with students, and much of it with requests between strangers. Requests between neighbours, friends and relatives have been studied far less, and carrying the findings over to them is my step throughout.
Before you start. The description of domestic abuse and the helpline details are from the NHS page "Getting help for domestic violence and abuse". The remarks on social anxiety are from the NHS page "Social anxiety (social phobia)".
Chapter 2. Sommers and Bohns, "The voluntariness of voluntary consent: consent searches and the psychology of compliance", Yale Law Journal 128, 2019. Two preregistered laboratory studies with 209 people who received the request and 194 who imagined it. The figure of 100 out of 103 is from the first study. The authors' interest was in police searches, and using the result to explain a tombola is my step. Bohns, Roghanizad and Xu, "Underestimating our influence over others' unethical behavior and decisions", Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40, 2014, pages 348 to 362. Two of the four studies used real requests between students, and two used written scenarios. Flynn and Lake, "If you need help, just ask: underestimating compliance with direct requests for help", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 95, 2008, pages 128 to 143. The account of why the pull is strong is mine.
Chapter 4. Zauberman and Lynch, "Resource slack and propensity to discount delayed investments of time versus money", Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 134, 2005, pages 23 to 37. The question "Would I say yes if it were tomorrow?" is my application of their finding and hasn't been tested.
Chapter 5. Givi and Kirk, "Saying no: the negative ramifications from invitation declines are less severe than we think", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 126, 2024, pages 1103 to 1115. The studies concerned invitations to enjoyable activities, not requests for help. Savitsky, Epley and Gilovich, "Do others judge us as harshly as we think? Overestimating the impact of our failures, shortcomings, and mishaps", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81, 2001, pages 44 to 56. Four studies. Gilbert, Pinel, Wilson, Blumberg and Wheatley, "Immune neglect: a source of durability bias in affective forecasting", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75, 1998, pages 617 to 638. None of their six studies was about guilt after a refusal.
Chapter 6. Sah, Loewenstein and Cain, "Insinuation anxiety: concern that advice rejection will signal distrust after conflict of interest disclosures", Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 45, 2019, pages 1099 to 1112. The doctor with a referral fee is my illustration of the kind of conflict they studied and isn't taken from the paper. Applying the idea to favours, and the suggestion of policies, are mine.
Chapter 7. Weinstein and Ryan, "When helping helps: autonomous motivation for prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98, 2010, pages 222 to 244. Four studies. The summary doesn't give sizes of effect, and I haven't read the full text. Helgeson and Fritz, "A theory of unmitigated communion", Personality and Social Psychology Review 2, 1998, pages 173 to 183. It's a review of correlational work. The authors developed the idea partly to explain differences between women and men in depression, which I haven't gone into. The claim that dropping unwilling yeses makes you a better helper is mine.
Chapter 9. Freedman and Fraser, "Compliance without pressure: the foot-in-the-door technique", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4, 1966, pages 195 to 202. It's an old study and I haven't looked into how well it has replicated. Babcock, Recalde, Vesterlund and Weingart, "Gender differences in accepting and receiving requests for tasks with low promotability", American Economic Review 107, 2017, pages 714 to 747. Extending their mechanism from gender to anyone with a reputation for agreeing is my step. What I say about reputations changing after a few refusals is my expectation and not a finding.
Chapter 11. Donnelly, Wilson, Whillans and Norton, "Communicating resource scarcity and interpersonal connection", Journal of Consumer Psychology 31, 2021, pages 726 to 745. Six studies. Freedman, Williams and Beer, "Softening the blow of social exclusion: the responsive theory of social exclusion", Frontiers in Psychology 7, 2016, article 1570. This paper sets out a theory and its predictions. It doesn't report tests of them.
Chapter 12. Roghanizad and Bohns, "Ask in person: you're less persuasive than you think over email", Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 69, 2017, pages 223 to 226. I read the authors' full manuscript. Forty-five people each made requests of ten strangers. The authors found that people receiving the emails viewed them with suspicion, which is the limit mentioned in the chapter. Roghanizad and Bohns, "Should I ask over Zoom, phone, email, or in-person? Communication channel and predicted versus actual compliance", Social Psychological and Personality Science 13, 2022, pages 1163 to 1172. The holding line is my suggestion. I know of no study that tests it.
Chapter 14. Plans in "when, then" form are from Gollwitzer and Sheeran, "Implementation intentions and goal achievement: a meta-analysis of effects and processes", Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 38, 2006, pages 69 to 119. The rule, its six parts and what I say to expect haven't been tested together. They're my expectation and not a finding.
Chapter 15. Speed, Goldstein and Goldfried, "Assertiveness training: a forgotten evidence-based treatment", Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 25, issue 1, 2018. The advice on social anxiety, talking therapies and domestic abuse is from the NHS pages "Social anxiety (social phobia)", "Talking therapies" and "Getting help for domestic violence and abuse". Self-referral to talking therapies applies in England, for people registered with a GP. I've left phone numbers out because they change. The NHS page lists them.