1952
DOI: 10.1177/001872675200500405
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Group-Derived Restraints and Audience Persuasion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
15
0

Year Published

1960
1960
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
1
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although no model was physically present, a list containing "prior donations" supplied information about the behavior of the reference group. Schachter and Hall (1952) examined the effect of group influence on volunteering behavior. Students who observed half of a class appear to volunteer (low restraint) were more likely to sign up for an experiment than those in high restraint conditions.…”
Section: Modeling As a Function Of Information About The Appropriatenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although no model was physically present, a list containing "prior donations" supplied information about the behavior of the reference group. Schachter and Hall (1952) examined the effect of group influence on volunteering behavior. Students who observed half of a class appear to volunteer (low restraint) were more likely to sign up for an experiment than those in high restraint conditions.…”
Section: Modeling As a Function Of Information About The Appropriatenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some behaviors that have been thus faciltiated include volunteering one's services (Rosenbaum, 1956;Schacter & Hall, 1952), performing altruistic acts (Blake, Rosenbaum & Duryea, 1955;Bryan & Test, 1967;Harris, 1968), pledging oneself to a course of social action (Blake, Mouton & Hain, 1956;Helson, Blake, Mouton, & Olmstead, 1956), assisting persons in distress (Bryan & Test, 1967), seeking relevant information (Krumboltz & Thoresen, 1964), and selecting certain types of foods (Duncker, 1938), activities (Madsen, 1968), or articles (Bandura, Ross & Ross, 1963b). …”
Section: A General Overview Of Modeling Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A similar difference in percentage response in public and private conditions was found when the percentage response was reduced by increasing the attractiveness of the non-volunteering situation and when the percentage response was increased by lessening the attractiveness of the nonvolunteering situation. Schachter & Hall (1952) also studied public versus private conditions of response on volunteering. They found a marked difference in response percentage between the public (19 per cent response) and private (59 per cent response) conditions.…”
Section: (Ii) Public Vs Private Responsementioning
confidence: 99%
“…With this qualification to the use of the word ' restraint ', Schachter & Hall (1952) have suggested that: (a) though lower restraint conditions produce higher percentage willingness response, it is the willing subjects from the higher restraint conditions who are most likely to participate in experimentation, and (b) who may tend to bring to the experimental situation the more potent sources of distortion from volunteer bias. Unfortunately, none of the studies of public versus private response conditions examined for personality differences between willing volunteers and participating volunteers.…”
Section: (Ii) Public Vs Private Responsementioning
confidence: 99%