The role of persuasive arguments in changing affirmative action attitudes and expressed behavior in higher education.

The research reported in this article examined the conditions under which persuasive arguments are most effective in changing university students' attitudes and expressed behavior with respect to affirmative action (AA). The conceptual framework was a model that integrated the theory of reasoned action and the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Studies 1 and 2 established effective manipulations of positive-negative AA information, and peripheral-central routes of processing. Study 3 implemented these techniques, and a path analysis was carried out testing the differential effects of valence of information processed via different routes on AA evaluative beliefs, attitudes, intention, and expressed behavior. Results indicated that positive AA messages processed centrally (i.e., for meaning) resulted in significantly more positive evaluative beliefs. Modifications to the original model resulted in a final model with excellent fit to the data that supported the mediating role of intention in the AA attitude-behavior relationship, as predicted by the theory of reasoned action. The findings highlight potential benefits of interventions for improving support for AA policies, provided that positive information is processed at a central, evaluative level. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The development of schemes for recognizing additive and alternative effects in a "natural experiment" context.

20 Ss at each of 4 age levels (4th, 6th, and 8th grade and college) were presented a "natural experiment" problem situation in which they were asked to interpret the more complex situations in which (a) either of 2 alternative variables is sufficient to produce an outcome, or (b) 2 variables are additive in their effect on an outcome. Not until adolescence could Ss isolate alternative or additive causes in a multivariable situation, though it is speculated they may comprehend the concept of alternative causes well before this age. Only 65% of college Ss exhibited correct reasoning in one or both situations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Processing arguments and adjuncts in isolation and context: The case of by-phrase ambiguities in passives.

Two eye-tracking experiments examined processing of sentences like The shrubs were planted by the apprentice/greenhouse that morning, where the by phrase is locally ambiguous between an agent and a location. Experiment 1 found a preference to initially interpret the by phrase agentively in the absence of context. In Experiment 2, a context like The head gardener decided [who should]/[where to] plant the shrubs induced an expectation that either an agent or a location would subsequently be specified. After agentive contexts, locatives were harder to process than agentives. After locative contexts, both sentences were easy to process. The authors argue that the verb and interrogative words (who, where) activate thematic roles, which can be associated with corresponding phrases. Phrases that express activated roles are easy to process. Phrases that might express activated roles but are subsequently shown not to express those roles require reanalysis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)