Gerald G. Gaes

Impression management in the forced compliance situation: Two studies using the bogus pipeline

Abstract Two studies were performed to assess the interpersonal concerns of subjects in the forced compliance paradigm. The first study counterposed dissonance and impression management theory predictions in a 2 × 2 design by varying the public versus private nature of the counterattitudinal behavior and by assessing attitudes with the usual pencil-and-paper method or with a bogus pipeline technique designed to create strong pressures toward sincere reporting. Attitude change occurred only in the Public/Pencil-and-Paper condition and thus supported an interpersonal or impression management interpretation. The second study examined the effect of measuring the critical attitude a second time in the mode not experienced in the first assessment. This three-group design (Pencil-and-Paper/Bogus Pipeline, Bogus Pipeline/Pencil-and-Paper, Control) demonstrated that attitude change occurred only in the Pencil-and-Paper/Bogus Pipeline condition and was maintained on the second assessment when measured by the bogus pipeline. A common-factor analysis of the secondary measures in the second study demonstrated that the Pencil-and-Paper/Bogus Pipeline subjects reported a great deal of negative arousal such as embarrassment and guilt, while the subjects in the Bogus Pipeline/Pencil-and-Paper condition reported feeling manipulated and constrained. The findings of both studies were interpreted as consistent with impression management theory.

Evaluating a Sex-Related Ability: Comparison With Same-, Opposite-, and Combined-Sex Norms.

Abstract A study was conducted to replicate and extend Zanna, Goethals, and Hills ( Zanna, M. P., Goethals, G. R., & Hill, J. F. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1975 , 11, 86–93) experiment investigating social comparison choices for evaluating a sex-related ability. In a 2 × 3 design male and female undergraduates received ambiguous feedback about their performance on a test. The test was described as one in which either males typically excel or females typically excel, or no sex differences for performance were mentioned. Subjects were then given the opportunity to select normative comparison information in order to evaluate their performance. Information about same-sex, opposite-sex, and combined (male and female) norms was available. The results showed that interest in same-sex and combined information was high on both first and second choices. Opposite-sex comparisons were of low priority. Same-sex comparisons were of high priority even when sex differences were not made salient. Males and females differed to some extent in their comparison choices. The results suggest that while persons prefer to compare with similar (same-sex) others, they are also interested in making broader kinds of comparisons (with combined-sex norms). The results are discussed in terms of Wilsons ( Wilson, S. R. Sociometry, 1973 , 36, 600–607) two-process analysis of ability comparison and Goethals and Darleys ( Goethals, G., & Darley, J. In J. M. Suls & R. L. Miller (Eds.), Social comparison processes; Theoretical and empirical perspectives. Washington, D. C.: Hemisphere/Halsted/Wiley, 1977 ) related attribute hypothesis.

Effects of Effort on Attributed Intent and Perceived Aggressiveness

Aggression is commonly defined as synonymous with intent of an actor to do harm. A problem for observers is to ascertain whether such an intent is present in an actor. Heider ( 1 ) suggested that intent can be attributed when observers can presume that the actor had foreknowledge of the effects produced by his action and that he had the capability of executing it. Furthermore, the degree of effort expended by the actor provides information that allows the observer to make an attribution of intent. Jones and Davis ( 2 ) argued that a trait or disposition corresponding to the quality of behavior can be attributed to the actor when intent has been inferred. Thus, an actor may be considered as dispositionally aggressive when his behavior is so characterized, and intent to d o harm has been attributed to him. From these considerations degree of effort should be positively related to attributions of intent and perceived aggression. These predictions were tested in a simple two-group experiment varying degree of effort expended by an actor to harm another person. Seven male and seven female college students were randomly assigned to each condition. They read scenarios that described Mr. X as driving either 5 min. (low effort) o r 3y2 hr. (high effort) in order to incapacitate Mr. Ys car so he would miss a scheduled airplane flight. Subjects then raced Mr. X on a set of polar adjective, semantic differential scales (ranging from -3 to + 3 ) , including aggressiveness, intentionality, purposefulness, and potency. The latter was the sum of four polar adjectives. Questions regarding Mr. Xs effort, foreknowledge and motive were posed and observers responded on sevenpoint Likert scales. Although there were no effects of sex of subjects, effort affected all dependent measures (all ps < ,027). W h e n exerting high effort Mr. X was perceived as having more foreknowledge ( M = 5 . 9 ) , a greater desire to harm Mr. Y ( M = 6.0). as expending more effort ( M = 6.4) and as more intentional ( M = 2.6), purposeful ( M = 2.7), aggressive ( M = 2.9), and potent ( M = 6.6). The corresponding means for low efforc were respectively: 4.4, 5.4, 4.6, 1.4, 1.5, 1.4, and 2.6. Results were consistent with hypotheses above. Increase in effort did lead observers to attribute stronger intent, purpose, foreknowledge, and motive to the actor. Although the same amount of harm was done to the same victim in both scenarios, the harm-doer was perceived as more aggressive and potent when he expended greater effort in performing the harm-doing action.

An evaluation of self-esteem and impression management theories of anticipatory belief change

Abstract The predictions of self-esteem and impression management theories of anticipatory belief change were examined as a function of whether or not subjects were reminded that their preexperimental attitudes has been assessed, the source of the expected persuasive communication (expert vs. peer), and whether or not explicit instructions were given regarding the experimenters concern with opinion change. Anticipatory shifts changed as a function of an interaction of all three variables. In the Reminder conditions, subjects changed their attitudes toward a peers position when the experimenter explicitly referred to opinion change. In the No Reminder conditions, subjects shifted toward an expert when the instructions were explicit and toward a peer when the instructions were implicit. The results were discussed as qualifying previous research in this area and as problematic for both self-esteem and impression management approaches to anticipatory shifts.

First Impressions, Norms, and Reactions to Threats

The impact of first impressions, norms, and opponents use of power on a targets behavior in a conflict situation was investigated. A simulated opponent was perceived as either good and impotent or bad and potent in a mixed motive situation where the rule of interaction was given as a cooperative or competitive one, and the opponents exercise of unilateral coercive power was either highly credible or not credible. All three factors affected the responses of the subjects. The general principle underlying the results appears to be one of cooperating when first impressions or a salient norm leads to positive expectations for the interaction, but to respond in the most prudent manner possible and according to how the opponent responds when a negative expectation exists for the interaction.

Impression Management Effects in the Forced Compliance Situation

Two forced compliance studies were conducted in which the Ss expectations regarding the situational appropriateness of his behavior were manipulated. In the first study (N = 36 female undergraduates) E indicated agreement or disagreement with the Ss counterattitudinal essay or else did not give an opinion. Although attitude change occurred in the Agree and No Feedback groups, there was none in the Disagree condition. Three conditions were created in the second study (N = 142 male and female undergraduates): Standard Dissonance, Control, and a Model condition in which a confederate told the E his essay did not reflect his real attitude. Attitude change occurred in both experimental groups, but more occurred in the Dissonance than the Model condition. These results are interpreted in terms of impression management theory.

A study examining the arousal properties of the forced compliance situation

Abstract An experiment was performed to evaluate the arousal mechanism proposed by dissonance theory as mediating attitude change in the forced compliance situation. In a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design subjects were given choice or no choice (2) to write counterattitudinal essays, and were asked about their attitudes either before or after performance (2) on either a simple or complex task (2). The results showed that subjects performed best on the simple task when they had been given choice, and attitude assessment occurred after task performance. Attitude change was manifested in all of the choice conditions but in none of the no choice conditions. A factor analysis of self-report data supported the hypothesis that concern about responsibility for negative consequences is associated with attitude change. However, there was no indication of any relationship between arousal, attitude change, and task performance.

Social Psychology and Cumulative Knowledge

A set of categories was developed and used to assess the character of research papers published in two journals for the years 1976 and 1977 and in one of them in 1967. The results indicated that about half of current research does not attempt to test available theories, but that over the last decade there has been a noticeable change in the direction of doing so.

Pills and Attitude Change: Misattribution of Arousal or Excuses for Negative Actions?

Two experiments evaluated the competing interpretations of cognitive dissonance and impression management theories regarding the pill and misattribution studies of attitude change in the forced compliance situation. Attitude change was eliminated when subjects were told about the tension side effects of taking a placebo, replicating the usual effect. Attitude change was also eliminated, however, when subjects took the pill following counterattitudinal behavior. In one condition of the second experiment, subjects were given instructions about tension side effects but were also told that the drug would not affect their moral judgment or behavior. These instructions eliminated attitude change in a standard pill condition. The typical finding of attitude change was manifested in the misattribution/no-excuse condition. The primary and secondary data from both studies provided more support for the impression management interpretation of the standard misattribution manipulations than for a theory of misattribution of dissonance-produced arousal.