Novel argumentation and attitude change: The case of polarization following group discussion

This study is concerned with attitude polarization as a function of two properties of a persuasive message: (a) its validity or acceptability and (b) its novelty. The latter is defined as the extent to which the message contains new arguments unlikely to have been already considered by the individual. Acceptability is assumed to be a necessary condition for inducing attitude change; the impact of novelty, therefore, was expected to be most pronounced for arguments of high validity. This hypothesis was tested in two related studies using arguments produced in response to choice dilemma items, widely used in research on polarization. First, it was shown that arguments rated as both valid and novel were perceived as more persuasive than arguments rated either as highly valid but obvious (non-novel) or as low in validity (non-valid) but novel. Second, when subjects read samples of valid arguments, their attitudes polarized in the direction advocated by the novel arguments rather than by the non-novel ones. These findings are considered relevant to the polarization of attitudes in groups. Other research demonstrates that this phenomenon is the result of persuasive arguments raised during group discussion, The present study suggests why such arguments may be persuasive.     

Extremity shifts,risk shifts and attitude shifts after group discussion

Moscovici and Zavalloni (1969) suggest that both risk shifts and attitude shifts after group discussion are examples of a general group tendency to polarize opinions. In the present experiment, using both attitude and risk items, group discussion did not make individual opinions more extreme; only the group average became more extreme. This group extremity increase was not simply a more general way of conceptualizing the directional shifts in attitude and risk; group extremity increase appeared to be an effect of discussion that was independent of the risk and attitude shifts. Also, subjects in the co-working pretest of the standard risk-shift paradigm were found to be less extreme and more ‘agreeing’ than pretest subjects who were truly alone. This co-working/alone difference persisted after discussion and was not related to group extremity increase. On both attitude and risk items, group extremity increase was strongly correlated with group opinion convergence. It is argued from this correlation that group extremity increase may be an effect of some aspect of conformity influence.     

Self-generated attitude change: A person by situation analysis of attitude polarization and attenuation

The potential moderating effects of differences in the need for cognition on the attitude polarization process were explored. Based on putative schematabased differences in information processing, it was predicted that an increased opportunity for thought would result in (a) more attitude polarization for low need for cognition persons than for high need for cognition persons and (b) more attitude attenuation for high need for cognition persons than for low need for cognition persons. Participants completed the Need for Cognition scale and were given either little or ample time to think about issues toward which they previously held moderate attitudes. Attitudes were reassessed following thought about the issues. The results were consistent with the predicted moderating effects of individual differences in the need for cognition on thought-induced attitude polarization. Implications of and alternative explanations for the findings are discussed.     

Changing men's male gender-role attitudes by applying the elaboration likelihood model of attitude change

The traditional male gender role has been associated with a host of psychological and physical problems. In this study, 118 male university students viewed one of two videotaped interventions based on R. E. Petty and J. T. Cacioppo's [(1986) Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change, New York: Springer-Verlag) elaboration likelihood model of attitude change (ELM) or were in a control group. One intervention was designed to create less traditional male gender-role attitudes, the other to enhance participants' attitudes toward seeking psychological help. Both interventions significantly changed male gender-role attitudes on Brannon Masculinity Scale scores, but not their Gender Role Conflict Scale—I scores, and neither influenced help-seeking attitudes. The overall pattern of scores suggests that men's attitudes about the male role may be less resistant to change than attitudes about one's own gender role or one's fear of femininity.     

Distraction and attitude change: A resolution

Previous studies have shown that distraction may either increase or decrease attitude change. The present experiment, designed to reconcile earlier findings, was based on the hypothesis that distraction should interfere with message reception but also increase yielding to the message. Distraction should thus increase attitude change to a simple message (one which is easily understood but not very convincing), but decrease attitude change to a complex message (one which is difficult to understand but convicing if understood). Subjects beard messages on two topics, sometimes while distracted by a tape recording of music and sometimes not. Message complexity was successfully manipulated for one of the topics. The results support a model of attitude change which considers the effects of independent variables on both reception and yielding.     

Juror decision making: A case of attitude change mediated by authoritarianism

For a jury to reach a unanimous decision, certain individuals must change their attitudes with regard to the defendant's guilt during deliberations. Because these changers are the key to the group decision-making process, they were carefully scrutinized to ascertain demographic or personality characteristics which might be mediating their behavior. In three experiments, two using college students as subjects and one using Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas jury pool members, it was found that authoritarians changed their attitude with regard to the defendant's guilt more than equalitarians. Further, most of these “changers” were aware they had changed their attitude. There was no generalizable evidence for the proposition that authoritarians are more likely to favor a guilty verdict.     

A general connectionist model of attitude structure and change: the ACS (Attitudes as Constraint Satisfaction) model

A localist, parallel constraint satisfaction, artificial neural network model is presented that accounts for a broad collection of attitude and attitude-change phenomena. The network represents the attitude object and cognitions and beliefs related to the attitude, as well as how to integrate a persuasive message into this network. Short-term effects are modeled by activation patterns due to parallel constraint satisfaction processes, and long-term effects are modeled by weight changes due to the settling patterns of activation. Phenomena modeled include thought-induced attitude polarization, elaboration and attitude strength, motivated reasoning and social influence, an integrated view of heuristic versus systematic persuasion, and implicit versus explicit attitude change. Results of the simulations are consistent with empirical results. The same set of simple mechanisms is used to model all the phenomena, which allows the model to offer a parsimonious theoretical account of how structure can impact attitude change. This model is compared with previous computational approaches to attitudes, and implications for attitude research are discussed.     

Implicit ambivalence from attitude change: an exploration of the PAST model

Traditional models of attitude change have assumed that when people appear to have changed their attitudes in response to new information, their old attitudes disappear and no longer have any impact. The present research suggests that when attitudes change, the old attitude can remain in memory and influence subsequent behavior. Four experiments are reported in which initial attitudes were created and then changed (or not) with new information. In each study, the authors demonstrate that when people undergo attitude change, their old and new attitudes can interact to produce evaluative responses consistent with a state of implicit ambivalence. In Study 1, individuals whose attitudes changed were more neutral on a measure of automatic evaluation. In Study 2, attitude change led people to show less confidence on an implicit but not an explicit measure. In Studies 3 and 4, people whose attitudes changed engaged in greater processing of attitude-relevant information than did individuals whose attitudes were not changed.     

Internalization of conflict and attitude change

In a 2 × 2 × 2 design, eighty smokers were exposed to an anti-smoking appeal attributed either to an expert source (superior status) or a minority source (inferior status). Subjects were either allowed or not to smoke during the experiment. In addition subjects had to memorize part of the appeal and a recall task either followed after reading the appeal (completed task) or not (uncompleted task). The results show that the expert source produces more attitude change than the minority when the tension induced by the source is weakened (either by the opportunity to smoke or task completion). In contrast the minority has more impact when subjects are not able to smoke or when the task is not completed, which is to say when the conflict has been internalized. An explanation of these effects is offered in terms of the more defensive forms of resistance involved with respect to sources of superior status compared to more assertive forms with respect to minorities.     

A latent trait model for response times on tests employing the proportional hazards model

For computer-administered tests, response times can be recorded conjointly with the corresponding responses. This broadens the scope of potential modelling approaches because response times can be analysed in addition to analysing the responses themselves. For this purpose, we present a new latent trait model for response times on tests. This model is based on the Cox proportional hazards model. According to this model, latent variables alter a baseline hazard function. Two different approaches to item parameter estimation are described: the first approach uses a variant of the Cox model for discrete time, whereas the second approach is based on a profile likelihood function. Properties of each estimator will be compared in a simulation study. Compared to the estimator for discrete time, the profile likelihood estimator is more efficient, that is, has smaller variance. Additionally, we show how the fit of the model can be evaluated and how the latent traits can be estimated. Finally, the applicability of the model to an empirical data set is demonstrated.     

Some conditions that affect admissions of attitude change

Previous research has shown yielders to persuasive communications to be negatively evaluated by observers of the persuasion but positively evaluated by the persuaders. Resisters of persuasion, on the other hand, are evaluated positively by observers but negatively by the initiators of the persuasive effort. Two studies were conducted to determine (a) whether individuals are aware of the differing evaluations of yielders and resisters by persuaders and observers and (b) the extent to which targets of influence attempts strategically employ this information to enhance their images in the eyes of others. Experiment 1, a role-playing study, demonstrated that targets of persuasive appeals are cognizant of the pattern of evaluations provided to yielders and resisters by persuaders and observers. Experiment 2 indicated that targets' public reports of attitude change were shaped so as to produce the most positive evaluations from the audience to those reports. The greatest stated influence occurred in the sole presence of the persuasive agent, an intermediate amount of stated change occurred when both persuader and observer were present, and still less occurred in the sole presence of an observer to the influence attempt. The results of anonymous, private measures of change paralleled in pattern those of the publicly admitted change, but were not significant.     

Interpersonal determinants of attitude change following counterattitudinal behavior

In a test of predictions derived from an identity-analytic model of self-presentational behavior, individuals who privately endorsed positive or negative attitudes about sexual behavior were asked to deliver a prosexuality speech while alone, while watched by observers, or while being watched by observers who questioned the morality of the subject’s actions. Subsequent attitude measures indicated that the subjects who initially adopted negative attitudes justified their behavior by expressing more favorable attitudes about sexuality, but only when no audience witnessed their speech. When an audience was present, these individuals emphasized their lack of choice. In contrast, subjects who privately endorsed positive attitudes publicly expressed less favorable attitudes when their morality was challenged by the observers. These findings suggest that attitude change following counterattitudinal behavior (a) stems from private image-maintenance needs as well as public self-presentational concerns, and (b) is sometimes designed to secure an image of morality as well as an image of consistency.     

Symposium: A discussion of the videotapes of a difficult group

Three conference participants (Drs. Yvonne Agazarian, Louis Ormont and Saul Tuttman), each an experienced group therapist employing distinctly different styles and theoretical frames, react to a videotape of a Difficult Group and offer their respective critique and suggestions. The material was originally presented before an audience at the Eastern Group Psychotherapy Association Annual Conference (1985) in New York City. The audience first saw the videotape at the conference and then observed the interaction among panelists. This material was submitted for publication because: 1) issues of contrasting technique and theory are heightened by a concrete comparison of different clinicians' reactions to the same material; 2) the serious task of coping with a group of difficult patients is of concern to all group therapists who are faced with such challenges; 3) the circumstances, in which patients who feel needy and neglected chronically put pressure on the therapists, occur with frequency; at the same time, 4) the therapists are also under stress in that their supervisors and evaluators are scrutinizing their work. All of this makes for a fascinating and difficult dynamic situation. Finally, 5) examining this group material resulted in a lively exchange which was stimulating and interesting to both audience and participants.Yvonne Agazarian, Ed.D., is in private practice in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.