Balance, agreement, and attraction in pleasantness, tension, and consistency ratings of hypothetical social situations.

Abstract

Eighty-four subjects rated eight hypothetical situations for pleasantness, tension, and consistency on 9-point scales. The situations were of the personother-object (P-O-X) type, consisting of two persons and an unspecified but important "thing." The situations varied in terms of the liking relation between P and O (positive or negative) and the presence or absence of agreement concerning X. Intercorrelation of the ratings indicated that the subjects tended to regard as unpleasant the same situations that they regarded as tension provoking. Tension and pleasantness ratings correlated less with the consistency ratings than with each other. There was evidence that the pleasantness and tension ratings were based more on attraction (i.e., the sign of the P/0 bond) than on agreement or balance. Balance was, however, the more important factor when the subjects rated for consistency. The findings, when taken together, have three major implications: (a) balance relates more directly to the cognitive than to the affective component of social perception; (6) dependent measures based on affect, for example, pleasantness ratings, seem inappropriate to Heider's theory; and (c) when an appropriate cognitive task is employed, contrary to Newcomb's predictions, balance effects emerge for both P/O positive and P/O negative sentiment bonds.A number of studies that have used pleasantness ratings to test derivatives of Heider's (1946Heider's ( , 1958 balance hypothesis indicated that subjects tend to distinguish between balanced situations containing positive relations between person (P) and other (O) and those in which the P/O bond is negative, the latter being rated considerably more unpleasant than the former (e.g.,

A two‐valued logic or two‐valued balance resolution of the challenge of agreement and attraction effects in p‐o‐x triads, and a theoretical perspective on conformity and hedonism

“…The contact interpretation cannot account for such a difference, and it is clear that any totally adequate interpretation of the attraction and agreement effects must be able to explain their differential magnitudes. Second, consistent with indications from earlier studies (Crockett, 1974;Gutman and Knox, 1972;Gutman, Knox and Storm, 1974;Miller and Norman, 1976) that pleasantness scales reveal larger attraction and agreement effects than do consistency and/or expectancy scales, Insko and Adewole (1979) found in two separate studies that ratings on affective scales (pleasantness and harmony) yield larger attraction and agreement effects than do ratings on relatively more cognitive scales (expectancy, consistency and stability). Again, there is no obvious way in which the contact interpretation of the attraction and agreement effects can account for such results.…”

“…This was done some time ago by Insko (1967). More recently, Gutman and Knox (1972), Crockett (1974), and Willis and Burgess (1974) have made the same or similar points.…”

Factors affecting balance, agreement and positivity biases in POQ and POX triads

“…Gutman and Knox (1972) showed that their pleasantness ratings data gave greater evidence of positivity and agreement biases, than of balance. A similar experiment by Whitney (1971) indicated agreement and positivity biases but not a balance bias.…”

“…In addition, a positivity bias on the P/O relation appears to be fairly pervasive, so that triangles containing P/ 0 positive are seen as more pleasant than those containing P/ 0 negative (e.g. Gutman and Knox, 1972;Jordan, 1953;Rodrigues, 1967;Whitney, 1971). Further, the P/O relation is more easily learned when it is positive (e.g.…”

“…Zajonc's insistance that other biases can be more influential than balance has led to their consideration by many other workers (e.g. Gutman and Knox, 1972;Miller and Norman, 1976;Rubin and Zajonc, 1969). However, one problem with his conclusion is that it implies the relative importance of the biases is predetermined, irrespective of the conditions which prevail in the triad.…”