Assumed similarity and opinion certainty.

To examine the effect of projected attitude similarity on certainty of own attitude, 2 samples of male undergraduates (N?=?40), commuters and fraternity members, indicated their own attitudinal position on 8 issues and then served in 1 of 4 opinion projection conditions: estimating the positions of those in their in-group, a student out-group, an irrelevant out-group (old veterans), or a no-target group. They then indicated their certainty about their previously expressed positions. In both studies, in-group targets elicited the most assumed similarity, and the irrelevant out-group elicited the least. Certainty of S's own position was greater after estimation of the positions of in-group Ss than after estimation of the opinions of relevant or irrelevant out-group Ss, or when given no opportunity to project. These certainty effects were due primarily to those issues Ss considered important. Additional analyses provided empirical support for 2 orthogonal components of assumed similarity, item content similarity and elevation similarity. The importance of a strong group identity as a basis for the increment in certainty conferred by assumed in-group similarity is discussed. (22 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Group decision making and social influence: A social interaction sequence model.

Discusses the social interaction sequence (SIS) model, which represents the group decision-making process in terms of the sequential choice behavior—changes in preference and certainty—of group members. This model states that the probabilities of preference and certainty changes are related to the current distribution of opinion in the group. An application of the SIS model to a study of jury decision making (G. Strasser, 1977) is presented, and results of earlier empirical studies are predicted by a computer simulation version of the model. Shift and opinion change versions of the model are proposed, with both extensions incorporating the concept of a characteristic certainty distribution. Characteristic certainty distributions are used to examine the expected effects of group size and assigned-decision rule on members' confidence in a group's decision. (57 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of a communication on attitude change and scale judgments.

"The purposes of this study were to assess the effects of a persuasive communication on attitude change and on judgments of the scale values of opinion items and to examine the relationship between attitude change and evaluations of the communication. An experimental group of subjects was exposed to a communication advocating abolution of capital punishment, after which they evaluated the communication, judged the scale values of 36 opinion statements, and revealed their own attitudes by responding to 20 opinion items… . The major results are: The communication changed attitudes in the direction advocated. But the groups were alike in their judgments of the scale values of the related opinion statements. Hence, a change in scale judgments is not a necessary condition for attitude change." From Psyc Abstracts 36:01:3GD33W. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A follow-up study influence of individual opinion on the construction of an attitude scale.

The present study was done in order to more or less replicate an earlier study by Hinckley (see 7: 1179) on the relationship between individual opinion and the construction of an attitude scale. Using Thurstone's technique of attitude scale construction, 2 sets of scale values for 114 statements were obtained from the sorting of 2 groups of Ss. The 2 groups were separated on the basis of their attitudes toward Negroes and the problem was to compare the sortings and scale values of Group I with the sortings and scale values of Group II. The results of this study were as follows: (a) the correlation coefficient between the scale values of Group I and the scale values of Group II was .9437. (b) This correlation of .94 can be compared with the correlation coefficient computed in the earlier study of .98. (c) There was no tendency for the statements to be placed in more extreme positions by either group. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of sound films on opinions about mental illness in community discussion groups.

One or more sound films on mental illness were shown to adult community groups with or without group discussion, and before-and-after attitude tests were administered to evaluate opinion changes. "… a single mental health film did not produce significant changes in opinions toward mental illness in groups," with or without group discussion. "A series of three films, however, induced significant shifts of opinion in the directions intended by the film content. Degree of… change was no greater in groups which had discussed the films than in groups which had not held discussions." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Group cohesiveness, social norms, and bystander intervention.

Previous research suggests that the larger a group of bystanders is, the less likely any one bystander is to offer a victim help in an emergency. Nearly all of this research has been conducted with unacquainted bystanders, and thus, an important group characteristic—cohesiveness—may have been held at a low level. Two studies with 192 male undergraduates assessed the impact of group cohesiveness on the bystander effect. Study 1 found support for the hypothesis that group size inhibits helping in low-cohesive groups but facilitates helping in high-cohesive groups. Study 2 found support for the hypothesis that the effects of cohesiveness on bystander intervention depend on the salience of the social-responsibility norm: Cohesiveness facilitated helping more when the social-responsibility norm was salient than when it was not. Thus, group cohesiveness is a theoretically critical variable for understanding bystander effect. Results suggest that the effects of group and situation variables depend on the group's meaning to the individual. (29 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

In-group variability and motivation to reduce subjective uncertainty.

Building on the subjective uncertainty reduction model of social identity processes (M. A. Hogg, in press-b; M. A. Hogg & B.-A. Mullin, 1999), it was hypothesized that homogeneous groups would be better than heterogeneous groups at reducing uncertainty and therefore that people would show more intergroup differentiation and turn more to a homogeneous in-group under conditions of uncertainty rather than certainty. Two minimal-group studies were conducted to investigate this idea. As predicted, when groups were homogeneous, more intergroup differentiation was observed under low certainty than under high certainty (Study 1). Study 2 provided evidence that group members turn actively to their group to reduce low certainty when the group is homogeneous. Low certainty led group members to request more feedback about other group members' responses, and they were more likely to change their initial responses when the in-group was perceived as homogeneous. These findings confirm predictions derived from the uncertainty model proposing that uncertainty reduction is a motivation for group behavior. These findings also highlight the importance of social structural factors such as perceived group variability in the uncertainty reduction process. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Reference groups, membership groups, and attitude change.

"The present study is an examination of the attitude changes which occur over time when reference groups and membership groups are identical and when they are disparate… . The Ss were women students at a large private coeducational university… . In the social context of the lives of the subjects, and in a natural social experiment which provided randomization of the relevant condition effects, the influence of both membership and reference groups on attitude change was assessed. All subjects shared a common reference group at the start of the period of the study. When divergent membership groups with disparate attitude norms were socially imposed on the basis of a random event, attitude change in the subjects over time was a function of the normative attitudes of both imposed membership groups and the individuals' reference groups. The greatest attitude change occurred in subjects who came to take the imposed initially nonpreferred, membership group as their reference group." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The assessment of group opinion by leaders, and their influence on its formation.

"Leadership status was defined and established for each member of ten psychotherapeutic groups on a comblined criterion of dominance, popularity, and leadership role… . The results confirm the hypothesis that leaders influence the formation of group opinion, bringing this in line with their personal views. It is suggested that this influence should be considered in accounting for the finding that leaders evaluate group opinion more accurately than other members." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attitude prototypes as determinants of attitude–behavior consistency.

Hypothesized that individuals determine their attitudes toward a social group by assessing their reactions to an imagined group representative who embodies the defining or central group characteristics—the prototypical group member. When they encounter a specific group member whose characteristics match well those of the "attitude prototype," individuals display attitude–behavior consistency; when the match is poor, they display attitude–behavior inconsistency. This proposition was tested in 2 experiments with 56 undergraduates: Ss completed questionnaires assessing their attitudes toward various groups, and later their behavior toward prototypical and unprototypical individuals of those groups was evaluated. In each experiment, the attitude–behavior relationship was greater in relation to prototypical than to unprototypical group members. Knowledge of an unprototypical group member had little or no effect on attitude prototypes. Rather, the unprototypical group member was dismissed as atypical, leaving the prototype intact to influence future social behavior. (34 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attitude change and justification for compliance.

"This experiment has tentatively illustrated some of the processes involved in creating and reducing psychological dissonance and the implications of such dissonance for attitude change in compliance situations. It was hypothesized that increased justification for taking an opinion position discrepant from one's private opinion would lead to decreased dissonance and therefore decreased attitude change toward the discrepant position. Ss were asked to write an essay taking a stand opposite to their initial opinion on a given issue. One group of Ss was then given a number of reasons for compliance with the request (high justification condition). For another group (low justification condition) Ss were given no detailed justification for writing the essay. Attitude change was determined from a postexperimental questionnaire… . Attitude change tended to be greater where manipulated (and perceived) justification was least." From Psyc Abstracts 36:01:1GD76C. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-definition, defensive processing, and influence: The normative impact of majority and minority groups.

Past research has found that recipients agree with majority group positions and resist minority group positions on direct measures of influence. The authors suggest that these attitude shifts reflect normative pressures to align with valued majorities and to differentiate from derogated minorities. In support of this idea, participants who considered a majority group relevant to their own self-definitions (but not those who judged it irrelevant), on learning that the group held a counterattitudinal position, shifted their attitudes to agree with the source. In a second study, recipients who judged a minority group (negatively) self-relevant, on learning that the group held a similar attitude to their own, shifted their attitudes to diverge from the source. These shifts in attitudes were based on participants' interpretations of the attitude issues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attitude intensity, importance, and certainty and susceptibility to response effects.

Changes in attitude question form, wording, and context have repeatedly been shown to produce change in responses. It is often assumed that such response effects are less pronounced among individuals whose attitudes are intense, personally important, or held with great certainty. We report the results of 27 experiments conducted in national surveys designed to evaluate this hypothesis. Measures of attitude intensity, importance, and certainty were found not to differentiate individuals who show response effects from those who do not. We discuss possible explanations for these counterintuitive findings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individuation, gender role, and dissent: Personality mediators of situational forces.

An experimental analysis of dissenting and conforming behavior in small groups revealed a significant interaction between personality and situational variables. Individual differences in gender role and in willingness to be "individuated" were predictive of subjects' choices to disagree or agree with the opinions of other group members. However, this link between personality and social behavior showed within-subjects variation as a function of two situational factors: group norm and opinion topic. Contrary to traditional expectations, personality was a better predictor of behavior on those trials when peer pressure was strong than when it was weak. Personality variables also differentially predicted responses to masculine opinion topics versus feminine ones. These results contribute to a new understanding of the interaction of person and situation, as well as to the psychological meaning of conformity and dissent. They also bear on the long-standing debate about sex differences in influenceability. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of straw polls on group decision making: Sequential voting pattern, timing, and local majorities.

Six-person juries (evenly divided between members inclined toward guilty and not-guilty verdicts) responded to a straw poll either early or late, with subjects inclined toward guilty or not guilty voting first, or simultaneous voting. Critical (fourth) voters in straw polls were somewhat influenced by the preceding voter sequence, and were substantially influenced by the timing of the poll. We interpreted the asymmetry in opinion change observed for members initially inclined toward guilty and toward not guilty in terms of the defendant protection norm (leniency bias), the salience of which had apparently been emphasized by discussion and voting, even the prospect of public voting. We extrapolated member-level opinion changes to the group level, illustrating the verdict consequences of individual-level opinion changes. Observed group consensus verdicts, however, deviated from predictions, implying a different role for procedural factors and emphasizing the importance of group-level data in such research settings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

A new look at the consequences of attitude certainty: The amplification hypothesis.

It is well established that increasing attitude certainty makes attitudes more resistant to attack and more predictive of behavior. This finding has been interpreted as indicating that attitude certainty crystallizes attitudes, making them more durable and impactful. The current research challenges this crystallization hypothesis and proposes an amplification hypothesis, which suggests that instead of invariably strengthening an attitude, attitude certainty amplifies the dominant effect of the attitude on thought, judgment, and behavior. In 3 experiments, the authors test these competing hypotheses by comparing the effects of attitude certainty manipulations on univalent versus ambivalent attitudes. Across experiments, it is demonstrated that increasing attitude certainty strengthens attitudes (e.g., increases their resistance to persuasion) when attitudes are univalent but weakens attitudes (e.g., decreases their resistance to persuasion) when attitudes are ambivalent. These results are consistent with the amplification hypothesis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Overevaluation of own groups product in ingroup competition.

"Four hundred and ten persons participating as members of 48 groups in human relations training programs, engaged in a parallel sequence of ingroup and intergroup activities. Groups were placed in competition in pairs, trios, and quartests of groups, with the outcome determined by the quality of the solutions created by the groups. Quality judgments were made by group members on a private, or personal, basis for the adequacy of their own and of the other group's positions. They resulted in one's own product being rated higher than that created by a competitor's. The results confirm the prediction that group members evaluate their own group product above the judgments they accord to the proposal from a comparison group." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of repeated expressions on attitude polarization during group discussions.

Classic explanations of the "group polarization phenomenon" emphasize interpersonal processes such as informational influence and social comparison (Myers & Lamm, 1976). Based on earlier research, we hypothesized that at least part of the polarization observed during group discussion might be due to repeated attitude expression. Two studies provide support for this hypothesis. In Study 1, we manipulated how often each group member talked about an issue and how often he or she heard other group members talk about the issue. We found that repeated expression produced a reliable shift in extremity. A detailed coding of the groups' discussions showed that the effect of repeated expression on attitude polarization was enhanced in groups where the group members repeated each other's arguments and used them in their own line of reasoning. Study 2 tested for this effect experimentally. The results showed that the effect of repeated expression was augmented in groups where subjects were instructed to use each others' arguments compared to groups where instructions were given to avoid such repetitions.… (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Generalizing the illusory correlation effect.

We used two experiments to examine the influence of one's own attitude on the perception of group attitudes. In the first experiment, subjects viewed opinion statements, supposedly made by residents of two towns, on the issue of building a local nuclear power station. One town was large and had frequently occurring statements and the other was small with infrequently occurring statements; there was an equal proportion of pro and anti statements in both towns. The prediction that subjects would perceive an illusory correlation between attitude positions similar to their own (self-relevance) and the infrequently cited (distinctive) town was supported for anti subjects only. Subsequent investigation indicated that this was due to the confounding effect of a prior expectation associating small towns with more antinuclear attitudes. Experiment 2 eliminated the variable of town size by informing subjects that towns of equal size had been more heavily or lightly sampled. Consistent with the hypotheses, both pro and anti subjects perceived an illusory correlation between their own attitude and the town providing the smaller sample, this effect increasing with attitude extremity. The consequences of these findings for the generalizability of illusory correlation explanations of stereotyping are discussed. (42 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Some effects of decision and discussion on coalescence, change, and effectiveness.

Differential effects of group decision, group discussion, and their interaction were examined, using discussion-no decision, decision-no discussion, discussion-decision and no discussion-no decision treatments. 20 groups of 5 Ss per group were divided randomly into the 4 treatment categories. "The results… . coalescence was increased by group discussion, group decision and most of all by the combination of both treatments." Greatest opinion change also occurred when both discussion and decision were permitted. The findings are consistent with the assumption that changes and effectiveness in groups primarily result from interaction among members. 15 references. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)