While the average effects of influence strategies on behavior have been studied extensively (Cialdini, 2001), the effects of persuasive strategies on particular individual’s behavior has barely been examined, with a few exceptions (e.g., Kaptein & Eckles, 2011). This gap of knowledge is important for theory and applied interventions because average between-person effects of influence strategies on behavior may not generalize to any of the individuals in the sample (Molenaar, 2004; Molenaar & Campbell, 2009). This means that our current theoretical understanding of persuasion based on average effects may be incomplete at best – or completely wrong at worst (e.g., persuasive processes described in Petty & Cacioppo’s 1986 elaboration likelihood model may not necessarily emerge for most or any individuals, requiring alternative models to explain persuasion processes in these individuals). The goal of the current project is to learn new insights about the effects of influence strategies on persuasion by examining the phenomenon at the level of the individual. We will examine the relative impact of consensus and authority persuasive messages on purchase intentions at the intra-individual level, which will allow us to understand how different individuals are influenced differently by the same influence strategies (in addition to average between-person effects). For instance, a consensus influence strategy may persuade some individuals, but may backfire for other individuals (i.e., persuaded less rather than more relative to control messages). We will assess stable individual difference variables (i.e., need for cognition, conscientiousness, thinking style) to try and understand the nature of this heterogeneity in persuasion strategy effects. That is, what factors explain why different individuals are influenced differently by the same influence strategy?