Is the Medium the Message? A Study of the Effects of Media,Communicator, and Message Characteristics on Attitude Change1

The present study examined the interactive effects of type of media, communicator, and position of message on persuasiveness of the communication. Subjects received a communication over television, radio (audio tape), or written medium, which either agreed with a position they held or strongly disagreed with it. The communicator was either a newscaster or a candidate for political office. The results indicated that subjects felt the newscaster to be more trustworthy than the candidate. In line with previous research, there was no main effect of media on persuasiveness. However, media interacted with the other variables so that when the communication disagreed with the audience, television was the most persuasive medium with the newscaster but the least persuasive with the untrusted candidate. There was no effect for media when the message agreed with the audience. Further, the candidate taking a position congruent with the audience's was rated as more attractive but less trustworthy than a candidate taking the opposite position. It was suggested that television may be the most involving medium and that either a counterargument theory or reactance theory could explain why it was not effective with the candidate.     

Field dependence and attitude change: Source credibility can alter persuasion by affecting message-relevant thinking

The present study shows that for a personally relevant counterattitudinal issue, a highly credible source can alter persuasibility by increasing a subject's message-relevant thinking. Previous failures to show this effect were probably due to the highly thoughtful nature of typical research subjects, when confronted with involving issues. In the present study, field-dependent and field-independent subjects heard convincing or refutable counterattitudinal speeches given by sources of high or low credibility. Results indicated that subjects who are typically low in differentiation of stimuli (field-dependent subjects) showed differential persuasion to strong and weak arguments only when they were presented by a highly credible source. For subjects who are typically high in propensity to differentiate stimuli (field-independent subjects), the arguments were differentially persuasive for both high and low credible sources. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that increasing source credibility can enhance message-relevant thought for subjects who typically do not scrutinize message content.     

The relationship between cognitive dissonance and helping behavior

An experiment was conducted to study the relationship between cognitive dissonance and helping behavior. A counterattitudinal procedure was employed to arouse dissonance. For half of the participants, an experimental confederate entered the room and elicited an opportunity for them to offer help. In this situation, fewer subjects in the dissonance condition offered help than subjects in the no‐dissonance condition. The least helping occurred among dissonance subjects with the highest level of commitment to the counterattitudinal task. Those with a medium level of commitment offered significantly more help. Despite the fact that results in line with Festinger's cognitive dissonance theory (subjects' attitudinal change) were obtained in the no‐helping situation, in helping situations, dissonance subjects who offered help presented significantly less attitude change than those who did not offer it. This was considered to be a result of helpfulness reducing dissonance arousal.     

Cognitive dissonance as a function of self-esteem and logical inconsistency

An experiment was conducted to test the importance of self-esteem in the arousal of cognitive dissonance. Recently, Aronson (1969) suggested that the reason an attitude-discrepant speech can arouse dissonance is that it is an indecent act committed by an individual who likes to think of himself as a good and decent person. Looking at counterattitudinal behavior as a discrepancy with one's self-concept rather than as a logical discrepancy between behavioral and attitudinal cognitions differs from Festinger and Carlsnuth's (1959) original notion In the experiment reported, subjects volunteered to take a personality inventory and received either neutral, very favorable, or very unfavorable feedback In this way, subjects' level of self-esteem was raised or lowered Following this procedure, subjects were induced to record a speech that was known to be discrepant with their private beliefs. They were offered either a small or a large inducement for their statements. It was predicted that, regardless of their level of self-esteem, subjects would manifest the inverse relationship between incentive magnitude and attitude change predicted by dissonance theory The major analysis of the results, and the concomitant internal analysis, generally supported the prediction With one qualification, the results were held to be consistent with Festinger and Carlsmith's version of dissonance arousal and inconsistent with the self-esteem analysis     

The Effect of Looking Behavior on Perceptions of a Communicator's Credibility1

A courtroom simulation technique was employed to examine the effects of a communicator's looking behavior on observers' perceptions of his credibility. Half of the subjects heard testimony presented on behalf of a defendent by a witness (one of three confederates) who was visually presented as either looking directly toward the target of his communication (gaze maintenance) or slightly downward (gaze aversion) while testifying. The other half of the subjects merely heard the audio portion of the testimony. The results indicated that witnesses who averted their gaze were perceived to be less credible and, ultimately, the defendant for whom they testified was judged as more likely to be guilty. These results are discussed in terms of their implications for research concerned with the communicative effects of visual behavior.     

Patient Distress Undermines the Credibility of Illness Complaints1

Two studies examined the effects of telling lay perceivers about patients' n]onmedical problems. In Study 1, college students rated a male peer's report of a sore throat as less credible and more psychologically caused when these co-occurred with non-medical problems (midterm exams or insomnia), even when diagnostic results for strep throat were positive. In Study 2, perceivers received no diagnostic information, and gender of the stimulus patient was varied systematically. The patient was rated as less credible if insomnia was mentioned in a conversation, regardless of the patient's gender. Nonmedical problems also affected which health advice perceivers gave to the patient. These findings are compared with those of previous research on credibility judgment processes, and implications are traced for lay perceivers' m]ental models of illness.     

Mistreatment of an esteemed other as a consequence affecting dissonance reduction

Recent research has shown that aversive behavioral consequences affect the magnitude of dissonance reduction. The present experiment was conducted to help clarify the meaning of an aversive consequence. In previous research, an aversive event was manipulated by having a subject believe that a counterattitudinal speech he had delivered was successful in convincing one of the subject's colleagues. In the present study, it was argued that convincing a colleague is aversive only to the extent that the colleague is liked. This reasoning was tested in a 2 × 2 factorial experiment in which subjects delivered a counterattitudinal speech to a recipient whom either was or was not liked by the subject and either was or was not convinced by the subject's speech. It was predicted and found that the subject would evidence attitude change only in the condition in which the speech led to the aversive event of successfully convincing an esteemed other. The results were discussed in terms of refining the relationship between attitude discrepant behavior and attitude change.     

Perceptions of Children's Credibility in Sexual Assault Cases1

Children's testimony often plays a central role in prosecutions of child sexual abuse. Nevertheless, research on jurors' perceptions of the credibility of child sexual assault victims remains limited. In three experiments, we examined mock jurors' reactions to children's testimony about sexual abuse. Participant jurors were exposed to videotaped or written scenarios of child sexual abuse trials and then rated victim credibility and defendant guilt. Analyses indicated that: (a) victim age was either inversely related or unrelated to perceptions of victim credibility, (b) women were more likely than men to find child victims credible, (c) corroborating testimony from a child victim increased the credibility of another child victim, and (d) exposure of participants to past criminal acts and other negative defendant character evidence heightened perceived victim credibility and defendant guilt. Implications for understanding jurors' reactions to child witnesses are discussed.     

Exploring the Valence‐Framing Effect: Negative Framing Enhances Attitude Strength

In his now‐classic research on inoculation theory, McGuire (1964 ) demonstrated that exposing people to an initial weak counterattitudinal message could lead to enhanced resistance to a subsequent stronger counterattitudinal message. More recently, research on the valence‐framing effect ( Bizer & Petty, 2005 ) demonstrated an alternative way to make attitudes more resistant. Simply framing a person's attitude negatively (i.e., in terms of a rejected position such as anti‐Democrat) led to more resistance to an attack on that attitude than did framing the same attitude positively (i.e., in terms of a preferred position such as pro‐Republican). Using an election context, the current research tested whether valence framing influences attitude resistance specifically or attitude strength more generally, providing insight into the effect's mechanism and generalizability. In two experiments, attitude valence was manipulated by framing a position either negatively or positively. Experiment 1 showed that negatively framed attitudes were held with more certainty than were positively framed attitudes. In Experiment 2, conducted among a representative sample of residents of two U.S. states during political campaigns, negatively framed attitudes demonstrated higher levels of attitude certainty and attitude‐consistent behavioral intentions than did attitudes that were framed positively. Furthermore, the effect of valence framing on behavioral intentions was mediated by attitude certainty. Valence framing thus appears to be a relatively low‐effort way to impact multiple features associated with strong attitudes.     

Combining information from sources that vary in credibility

Models describing the role of source credibility in information integration were tested in two experiments. In the first experiment, subjects estimated the value of used cars based on two cues: blue book value and an estimate provided by one of three friends who examined the car. The three sources were described as differing in mechanical expertise. In the second experiment, subjects rated the likeableness of persons described by either one or two adjectives, each adjective contributed by a different source. The sources differed with respect to the length of their acquaintance with the person to be rated. In both experiments, credibility of the source magnified the impact of the information he provided. Further, this multiplicative effect of a source was inversely related to the credibility of the other source, in violation of additive or constant-weight averaging models, but consistent with a relative-weight averaging model.     

Source credibility,attitudes, and the recall of past behaviours

The hypothesis that individuals' memory for their past behaviours may be biased toward apparent consistency with their current attitudes was tested by exposing subjects to a message that argued against frequent toothbrushing. Some subjects believed that the source of this message was an expert (high credibility condition), whereas other subjects learned after the message that the speaker was misinformed (low credibility condition). Subjects in the high credibility condition expressed less favourable attitudes toward toothbrushing and reported that they had brushed their teeth less often in the preceding four weeks than did subjects in the low credibility condition. A three-week follow-up showed that the attitudinal difference was still significant but that estimates of past toothbrushing did not differ reliably between the two conditions. The results suggest that when attitudes are very salient, they increase the accessibility of consistent behaviours in memory.     

The questions lay interviewers ask

Two studies were conducted to determine the kinds of questions people formulate for testing a hypothesis about another's personality. One group of subjects tested the hypothesis that the interviewee was an extrovert; another group tested the hypothesis that the interviewee was an introvert. Still another group was not provided with a hypothesis; instead, this group was asked to discriminate between an extroverted and an introverted interviewee. All subjects were free to formulate any kind of questions they wished. Analysis of the content of the questions performed by independent judges revealed that the great majority of the questions formulated by all of the groups either presented a choice between extroverted and introverted features or were open-ended. The percentage of questions about features that were consistent with the hypothesis was not significantly greater than the percentage of questions about features that were inconsistent with the hypothesis. Furthermore, in all of the groups there were virtually no biased questions–questions that already assume that the hypothesis is true. Finally, the questions asked by subjects who entertained either the extrovert hypothesis or the introvert hypothesis were as diagnostic (as rated by independent judges) as were the questions asked by subjects whose task was to discriminate between extroverts and introverts. The results were shown to be consistent with the diagnosing strategy but not with the confirmatory strategy of information-gathering.     

Gender and reward distributions: A test of two hypotheses

This study was designed as a test of two competing explanations of gender differences in distributive justice: (a) the equity-equality hypothesis, which states that males endorse equitable distributions more than females and females endorse equal distributions more than males; and (b) the exploitation-accommodation hypothesis, which states that the sexes vary their norm endorsement according to self-favoring (males) or other-favoring (females) distribution outcomes. Preadolescent and college-aged subjects rated the fairness of reward distributions of vignette characters who had contributed either more or less than a co-worker in a task, and had subsequently divided the rewards either equitably or equally. The data provided no support for the equity-equality hypothesis, but did support the exploitation-accommodation hypothesis. Specifically, females rated equitable distributions of inferior workers as more fair than males did. Thus, the popular conclusion that males have a stronger commitment to equity than females must be rejected.     

Sexual Arousal and the Polarization of Perceived Sexual Attractiveness

It was predicted that sexual arousal would lead to polarized evaluations of the sexual attractiveness and desirability of those of the opposite sex. More specifically, sexual arousal was hypothesized to enhance the perceived sexual attractiveness of medium and highly attractive target persons but to decrease the perceived sexual attractiveness of unattractive target persons. Sexually aroused and nonaroused subject's of both sexes rated the sexual attractiveness, dating desirability, and marriage desirability of low, medium, and high attractive people of the opposite sex. As expected, sexually aroused subjects rated medium and high attractive targets as more sexually attractive but low attractive targets as less sexually attractive than did nonaroused subjects. The findings were interpreted as consistent with a two process evaluative polarization hypothesis but also discussed in terms of arousal misattribution and arousal transfer hypotheses.     

On shame and the perceived credibility of sexual assault allegations

Despite the high incidence of sexual assault, doubt about allegations is common. Previous research suggests that victims expressing positive or no emotion are perceived as less credible than those expressing negative emotions. However, little is known about which specific negative emotional expressions contribute to credibility in this context. In two studies (N = 623), participants read a date rape vignette. The alleged victim's statement was paired with a picture of a female person expressing either shame, sadness, or no emotion. Participants rated the credibility of her account and completed a measure of rape myth acceptance. Controlling for rape myth acceptance, allegations were perceived as more credible when accompanied by an expression of shame versus sadness (a negative, low arousal control condition). It is critical to be aware of the shame-credibility bias in this context to intervene and support those who have experienced sexual assault.     

Emotional Empathy in a Courtroom Simulation: A Person-Situation Interaction1

A pair of experiments were conducted using a simulated courtroom trial of a criminal case. In Experiment I subject-jurors were asked by defense counsel either to imagine themselves as the defendant (empathy-inducing appeal) or to pay close attention to evidence (nonempathy appeal). Later the judge delivered only general instructions or, in addition, charged jurors to give consideration only to the facts presented. When there was no Fact-focused judge's charge, juror-subjects who heard the empathy-inducing appeal rated the defendant's actions as more lawful and attributed less of the cause for the incident to his personality than did their counterparts in the nonempathy condition. Experiment II included individual differences in the tendency to empathize as an additional mediating variable. The original pattern of effects found for the manipulated variables in Experiment I appeared again, but were overshadowed by the stronger effects of the individual difference variable and of subject sex. Subject-jurors who scored high on the empathy individual difference measure rated the defendant less guilty, assigned less cause to him, and showed corresponding mood shifts when they heard the empathy-inducing appeal. In addition, male subjects empathized more strongly with the male defendant and viewed him more favorably.     

Selective exposure to information and cognitive dissonance

Despite numerous attempts, the selective exposure prediction of Festinger's (A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson, 1957) theory of cognitive dissonance has not been consistently demonstrated. In previous studies, this failure can be attributed to design deficiencies, and other related problems. The present study manipulated dissonance by having subjects write a counterattitudinal essay under conditions of high or low choice. Information in the form of pamphlets and discussion groups was offered to the subjects such that they could choose information that was consonant and dissonant with the decision to write the essay. The information was offered either before or after an attitude measure on the essay topic, as the attitude measure could also be a source of dissonance reduction. The results indicate that the high choice manipulation yielded greater attitude change than the low-choice manipulation. High-choice subjects desired consonant information more and dissonant information less than did low-choice subjects. This effect was found for both measures of information desire (pamphlets and discussion groups). Low-choice subjects who received the attitude questionnaire before the information measures wanted information more than if offered the information before the attitude questionnaire, implying a sensitizing effect produced by the attitude questionnaire for the low-choice subjects. The various effects are discussed as providing support for predictions from Festinger's dissonance theory.     

Children's awareness of their own certainty and understanding of deduction and guessing

We conducted three studies that investigated first through third grade children's ability to identify and remember deductive inference or guessing as the source of a belief, to detect and retain the certainty of a belief generated through inference or guessing and to evaluate another observer's inferences and guesses. Immediately following a deductive inference or guess, first and third grade children rated inferences as more certain than guessing, but following a brief delay, only third grade children rated inferences as more certain than guessing. Children generally were accurate at identifying inference or guessing as the source of their belief, either immediately or after a delay. Rating another observer's deductions as more certain than guesses increased between first and third grade, and among second grade children, was correlated with retention of children's own certainty. Implications of the results for the development of meta‐cognitive knowledge are discussed.     

Equity and Self-Interest: Effects on Perceptions of Intent,Liking, and Desire to Reciprocate

In two experiments subjects were given information about how one person in a dyadic interaction had allocated outcomes to self and the other participant. The interaction was depicted as competitive in Experiment 1 and noncompetitive in Experiment 2. Subjects made judgments about the allocator's intentions and the recipient's liking for the allocator and desire to reciprocate outcome distribution. Subjects were instructed to respond toward the recipient in either an objective or empathic manner. Subjects logically utilized disparity in outcome distribution in determining the allocator's intent to benefit him/herself. Overall, equitable distributions led to the highest judgments of recipient liking; as inequity increased, ratings about liking decreased. However, empathic subjects in Experiment 2 showed different patterns of rated recipient liking as a function of the direction of the inequity. Judgments about intent to reciprocate were also affected by the orientation of the observer. The results were discussed with particular reference to differential thresholds for advantageous versus disadvantageous inequity. In addition, mathematical models describing the dependent measures were derived and validated, providing results consistent with past research utilizing ratio models of judgment within the context of equity theory.     

Personalism and cognitive labels as determinants of attitude attribution

An experiment was conducted to test hypotheses derived from Jones and Davis’ (1965) theory of correspondent inferences in conjunction with research on emotional misattribution effects. Subjects were informed that they had ingested either a stimulant or a tranquilizer (label). They then read an emotional, counterattitudinal essay which was written either personally for them or for another subject (personalism). The primary dependent variable was the attitude on the issue in question attributed to the author of the communication. The results showed that the subjects who read the more personal communication made more extreme attributions concerning the attitude of the author of the essay than did the subjects who read the less personal communication. In addition, subjects who were informed that they had received a tranquilizer made more extreme attitude attributions than subjects who were informed that they had received a stimulant. The implications of the results of the experiment for Jones and Davis’ principles of personalism and hedonic relevance are discussed.