Hans-Peter Erb

Individualism, Collectivism, and Authoritarianism in Seven Societies

Building on Hofstedes finding that individualism and social hierarchy are incompatible at the societal level, the authors examined the relationship between individualism-collectivism and orientations toward authority at the individual level. In Study 1, authoritarianism was related to three measures of collectivism but unrelated to three measures of individualism in a U.S. sample (N = 382). Study 2 used Triandiss horizontal-vertical individualism-collectivism framework in samples from Bulgaria, Japan, New Zealand, Germany, Poland, Canada, and the United States (total N = 1,018). Both at the individual level and the societal level of analysis, authoritarianism was correlated with vertical individualism and vertical collectivism but unrelated to horizontal collectivism. Horizontal individualism was unrelated to authoritarianism except in post-Communist societies whose recent history presumably made salient the incompatibility between state authority and self-determination.

When expertise backfires: Contrast and assimilation effects in persuasion

It was proposed that source cues bias message processing in a direction opposite to cue valence if message content violates cue-based expectancies (contrast hypothesis), but consistent with cue valence if message content is ambiguous (bias hypothesis). In line with these hypotheses, students (N = 123) reported less favourable thoughts and attitudes after reading weak arguments presented by a high (vs. low) expertise source (Expts 1 and 2), and reported more favourable thoughts after reading strong arguments presented by a low (vs. high) expertise source (Expt 2). Conversely, students thoughts and attitudes were more (less) favourable when a high (low) expertise source presented ambiguous arguments (Expt 2). Results are discussed in relation to dual- vs. single-process accounts of persuasion and models of assimilation and contrast in social judgment.

Motivational determinants of systematic processing: Expectancy moderates effects of desired confidence on processing effort

Extending the motivational assumptions of the heuristic-systematic model (Chaiken, Liberman, & Eagly, 1989), the authors hypothesized that a discrepancy between desired and actual judgmental confidence raises processing effort only if the expectancy that processing will increase confidence is high. In Experiment I, university students expected to review information for upcoming social judgments. Desired confidence was varied through low versus high task importance. To manipulate expectancy, low versus high perceived processing efficacy was induced via feedback. As predicted, high- (as compared to low-) importance participants expressed greater interest in receiving information and selected more information when perceived efficacy was high, and this effect was mediated via a heightened discrepancy between desired and actual confidence. These effects were not obtained under low perceived efficacy. In Experiment 2, students processed a persuasive message. Only high importance conditions were studied; processing efficacy and argument strength were manipulated. As predicted, high- (but not low-) efficacy participants processed the message systematically, as indicated by a different impact ofargument strength and by mediational path analyses. It is argued that the precision ofsocial judgment models would benefit from an explicit consideration of processing- and outcome-related expectancy variables.