The effects of the prestige of the speaker and acknowledgment of opposing arguments on audience retention and shift of opinion∗

169

135

Many theories of the effects of attitudes on memory for attitude-relevant information would predict that attitudinally congenial information should be more memorable than uncongenial information. Yet, this meta-analysis showed that this congeniality effect is inconsistent across the experiments in this research literature and small when these effects are aggregated. The tendency of the congeniality effect to decrease over the years spanned by this literature appeared to reflect the weaker methods used in the earlier studies. The effect was stronger in 2 kinds of earlier experiments that may be tinged with artifact: those in which the coding of recall measures was not known to be blind and those that used recognition measures that were not corrected for bias. Nonetheless, several additional characteristics of the studies moderated the congeniality effect and suggested that both attitude structure and motivation to process attitude-relevant information are relevant to understanding the conditions under which people have superior memory for attitudinally congenial or uncongenial information.

Section: A Brief History Of Attitude Memory Researchmentioning

confidence: 86%

The impact of attitudes on memory: An affair to remember.

Eagly

Chen²,

Chaiken³

et al. 1999

169

135

“…This speculation gains credence from the C. W. Sherif et al (1973) study, which included the von Hindenburg and comedian topics as well as two new topics, and, despite no overall sex difference, reported a significant difference in the female direction for the von Hindenburg topic. Four of the seven studies reporting females more persuasible but not employing the Janis and Field materials had political or military topics: discontinuing nuclear testing (Furbay, 1965), lowering the voting age to 18 (Paulson, 1954), expansion of federal power (Scheidel, 1963), and nationalization of trade, industry, business, and public services (Singh, 1970). Finally, the importance of content is suggested by the use of nutrition as the communication topic in the Feldman (1974) study, which provided the only report of greater persuasibility among males.…”

Section: Content Of the Influence Inductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in influenceability.

Eagly¹

1978

316

206

This article examines the hypothesis that women are more influenceable than men in a variety of situations. On the basis of a literature review focusing primarily on persuasion and conformity research, the hypothesis is rejected. For persuasion research and for conformity studies not involving group pressure, there is scant empirical support for a sex difference, and for group pressure conformity research, there is support among a substantial minority of studies. Also explored in this article is the possibility that various sex differences in social influence studies are a product of contextual features of experimental settings. The importance of the cultural context in which research is conducted is suggested by the fact that findings reporting greater influenceability among females were more prevalent in studies published prior to 1970 than in those published in the 1970s. In addition, the importance of the content area of the influence attempt is well established. Finally, sex differences in various psychological processes that may mediate persuasion and conformity are evaluated as possible explanations for those influenceability sex differences that appear to be genuine. The explanation that there is a propensity to yield inherent in the female sex role appears to account for some aspects of influenceability findings, but a second explanation, a tendency for women more than men to be oriented to interpersonal goals in group settings, is also plausible.Social psychology textbooks that discuss sex differences in influenceability typically express the view that women are more easily influenced than men (

“…The effect of an experimental "introduction" of a speaker upon his ethos as perceived by an audience has been studied by Haiman (1949), Strother (1951), and Paulson (1952; each of these studies showed significant effects on perceived competence of the speaker as well as significant shifts of opinion regarding the viewpoint advocated. In a study by Hovland and Mandell (1957) the introductions contained only suggested differences in speakers' self-interests, and these produced significant changes in ethos but nonsignificant differences in attitude change on the topic.…”

Section: Experimental Studies Op Ethosmentioning

confidence: 99%

The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication process.

Giffin¹

1967

713

352

Interpersonal trust in the communication process is denned as reliance upon the communication of another person in order to achieve a desired but uncertain objective in a risky situation. A theory of the dimensions of interpersonal trust in communication is presented. Experimental studies of ethos and factor-analytic studies of source credibility support the hypothesis that interpersonal trust is based upon a listener's perceptions of a speaker's expertness, reliability, intentions, activeness, personal attractiveness, and the majority opinion of the listener's associates.