Research shows that people comply more frequently to threats when the credibility of the source is high rather than low and that compliance is directly related to punishment magnitude. To examine the impact of an advisor on a target of threats, male college students (N=74) participated in an experiment that included high or low threatner credibility, high or low punishment magnitude, and high or low advisor credibility. Targets of threats were provided with an advisor, who was alleged to have special information about the threatener. The threatener was either 50% or 0% credible in backing up his demands by punishing noncompliance, and the punishment magnitude was either high or low. The advisor forecasted punishments accurately or inaccurately, with 80% or 20% credibility. Results showed that although early in the interaction both the threatener's and advisor's credibilities affected compliance, overall the subjects' responses became so dependent on the advisor's predictions that threat credibility did not affect compliance rates. (PAS)