Final answer:
Prisoners of war were more likely to comply with major requests after agreeing to minor ones, due to the 'foot-in-the-door' psychological principle. Trust between prisoners can influence their likelihood to cooperate in such scenarios, and the power imbalance can lead to a sense of obligation to comply with captors' demands.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the context of thought-control programs and POWs (prisoners of war), prisoners were more likely to comply with a significant request if they complied with a trivial request first. This concept relates to the psychological principle known as the 'foot-in-the-door' technique, where agreeing to a small request increases the likelihood of agreeing to a larger one. In a POW scenario, this technique might be used by captors to gradually increase their control over a prisoner's actions and thoughts.Considering a prisoner's dilemma scenario, the more the "suspects" or prisoners know and trust each other, the more likely they are to cooperate, which could lead to better outcomes for them collectively rather than acting in their own self-interest. However, in the adverse conditions of a POW setting, trust could be hard to establish, making it even less likely for POWs to cooperate with each other but potentially more susceptible to the captor's influence.In addition, inmates may feel uncomfortable refusing participation in the captors’ requests, feeling obligated to take advantage of any promised benefits, even if they aren't truly free to refuse. Such a situation indicates the dire power imbalance and potential for manipulation in a POW setting.