No abstract

To test the hypothesis that forewarning would facilitate attitude change under conditions of high personal involvement and inhibit change under low involvement, an experiment was conducted in which hoth forewarning and personal involvement were manipulated in a 2X2 design. The interaction was significant and in the expected direction. Unanticipated incidental findings suggested additional complexities with the variable of personal involvement.The effects of forewarning on attitude change have been investigated recently in several studies. The term "forewarning" describes two rather different kinds of prior warnings to subjects. One involves forewarning the subject of the specific position which the communicator is about to advocate (Freedman & Sears, 196S;McGuire & Millman, 1965;Sears, Freedman, & O'Connor, 1964). The other warns him that the intent of a forthcoming communication is to change his attitude, but does not provide him with information about the topic or position of the communication (Kiesler & Kiesler, 1964; McGuire & Papageorgis, 1962;Mills, 1965; Mills & Aronson, 1965). Some experiments have embodied both types of warnings in the same manipulation (Allyn & Festinger, 1961;Deaux, 1968;Papageorgis, 1967). The present study is concerned with the first kind of forewarning.The effects of this first type of forewarning obtained so far seem complex, as McGuire (1966) has noted. Freedman and Sears (1965) found that warning reduced the persuasive impact of a communication which came several minutes later. On the other hand, Deaux (1968) and McGuire and Millman (1965) found that positive attitude change was produced by the warning itself under some conditions.But why should forewarning have any effect at all upon the success of attempts at persuasion? It might simply act as a sensitizer that multiplies whatever response the subject would have manifested upon receiving

Two experiments tested predictions derived from Goffman and from two models of compliance behavior in studying embarrassed individuals' actions toward persons involved in the embarrassing situation and toward others unaware of the incident. A preliminary study showed that embarrassed subjects complied more with a request for help than did unembarrassed subjects or controls. In the main study, 60 female subjects performed tasks that did or did not make them look foolish to an observer. Their help was then requested by either the observer or a nonobserver. Results indicated that embarrassed subjects complied more with the request for help than did unembarrassed subjects (p < .02) regardless of the source of the request. The results are consistent with the compliance model that embarrassed individuals seek the positive experience of helping someone in order to relieve the discomfort of their embarrassment. No support was found for predictions derived from Goffman or from the other model of compliance behavior.

For this study, 95 consecutive female victims who came to the attention of the police for a domestic violence incident involving a partner were interviewed. Victims' helpfulness ratings of police were very positive, and more than 80% would definitely call the police for help in the future. Most victims wanting their offenders arrested or wanting help with a restraining order received the help. However, many victims wanting help finding counseling were not helped. The impact on helpfulness ratings of receiving or not receiving desired assistance was mixed. Police arresting offenders despite victims' objections did not diminish victims' willingness to call the police in the future.