Effects of subject self-esteem, test performance feedback, and counselor attractiveness on influence in counseling.

Abstract

Hypothesized that (a) changes in the achievement orientation of 60 male undergraduates, as measured by the Achievement scale of the Survey of Personal Values, would be greater for Ss interviewed by a counselor performing an attractive rather an unattractive role; (b) change scores would be greater for Ss who were told they had failed an experimental test than those who were told they had succeeded; (c) change scores would be negatively related to S's self-esteem (measured by the Class 1 scale scores on the California Psychological Inventory); and (d) there would be a Counselor Attractiveness * Success or Failure * Self-Esteem interaction effect. No relationships between the independent variables and counselor influence were found, although the experimental induction of attractiveness was successful. Implications for a theory of counseling influence and future research are noted.

A Review of the Interpersonal Influence Process in Counseling

“…The function of perceived counselor attractiveness is unclear. In some cases such perceptions allowed interviewers to influence clients to alter their opinions or self-ratings (Greenberg, 1969;Goldstein, 1971;Hoffman-Graff, 1977;Patton, 1969;Strong & Dixon, 1971), whereas unsupportive evidence is found in other investigations (Schmidt & Strong, 1971;Sell, 1974). The interaction effects between perceived attractiveness and expertness may explain some of the above-mentioned inconsistencies, as some research suggests that attractiveness is more functional when the counselor lacks credibility (Strong & Dixon, 1971).…”

“…Results indicated that the counselors were not able to differentially alter students' self-ratings regarding their perceived need for achievement. Similarly, Sell (1974) found that the differential perceptions of counselor attractiveness did not affect ratings regarding their need for achievement. Another study found that while interviewers in an attractive role were able to influence self-reports of completing an action plan, the frequency of these reported completions were not statistically different from other experimental manipulations (Dell, 1973).…”

“…Attractive and unattractive counselor roles were developed for analogue research (Schmidt & Strong, 1971) that combined many verbal and nonverbal behaviors (e.g., expressed similarities, body-lean, friendliness, responsiveness). These role prescriptions have been successful in several investigations (e.g., Dell, 1973;Merluzzi et al, 1977;Sell, 1974;Strong & Dixon, 1971). The relative effects of the nonverbal and verbal behaviors on perceived counselor attractiveness are largely unknown, although one study suggests that initial perceptions of counselor attractiveness are more heavily dependent on nonverbal than verbal behaviors (Claiborn, 1979).…”

“…Of the 51 reviewed studies that examined events associated with perceived expertness, attractiveness, and trustworthiness, 29 did not meet any of the boundary conditions, 16 met only the first two conditions (Boucher, 1972;Cimbolic, 1972;Fretz et al, 1979;Heppner & Pew, 1977;Hoffman-Graff, 1977;Jackson & Pepinsky, 1972;Kerr & Dell, 1976;Merluzzi et al, 1977;Patton, 1969;Schmidt & Strong, 1971;Sell, 1974;Snyder et al, 1976;Stillman & Resnick, 1972;Strong & Dixon, 1971;Strong & Schmidt, 1970a, 1970b, five studies fulfilled three conditions (Binderman et al, 1972;Browning, 1966;Dell, 1973;Heppner & Dixon, 1978;Rothmeier & Dixon, 1980), and one study met four conditions (Hartley, 1969). Over half of the studies reviewed met none of the five boundary conditions.…”

The Social Influence Model: A Social Psychological Approach to Counseling

“…In addition, the counselor's qualities of unconditional positive regard and a nonpossessive attitude toward the client also enhance the perception of the counselor as an attractive individual. As is the case with perceived expertness and trustworthiness, there are several studies that support the concept of counselor social attractiveness (Carter, 1978;Cash, Begley, McCown, & Weise, 1975;Cheney, 1975;Kerr & Dell, 1976;Lacrosse, 1975;Lewis &Walsh, 1978;Schmidt & Strong, 1971;Sell, 1974;Vargas & Borkowski, 1982).…”