The Pratfall Effect
The pratfall effect is the idea that a competent person, or brand, becomes more likeable after a small blunder. The 1966 study behind it shows less than the folklore: the boost for the competent contestant was not statistically reliable on its own, while the drop for an average contestant who blundered was.
What it is
Elliot Aronson, Ben Willerman and Joanne Floyd played 48 male students a tape of a quiz applicant who was either brilliant, answering 92 per cent correctly, or average, answering 30 per cent. In half the tapes he spilled coffee over his suit. The brilliant contestant who spilled scored 30.2 on likeability against 20.8 without the spill. The average contestant who spilled scored minus 2.5 against 17.8.
Richard Shotton's The Choice Factory applies the idea to advertising, citing campaigns that admitted a weakness, and advises brands to flaunt small flaws. The 2012 blemishing studies give the idea a firmer and narrower basis.
In effect
A small, admitted flaw can make a competent brand seem more human, especially for an audience not scrutinising the message. For a brand seen as ordinary, a visible mistake is more likely to confirm the impression than soften it.
What it does not say
It does not say flaws make anything more likeable. The competence condition does the work, and even then the original evidence is weaker than its reputation.
It has not been directly replicated as far as this publication can find, and the original sample was small and all male.
Sources
- Aronson, E., Willerman, B., & Floyd, J. (1966). "The effect of a pratfall on increasing interpersonal attractiveness." Psychonomic Science, 4(6), 227-228. doi:10.3758/BF03342263.
- Shotton, R. (2018). The Choice Factory. Harriman House. pp. 123-129.