Download 289317Bolt_MM7e_IRM53.1-10

MODULE 53: SOCIAL THINKING
OUTLINE OF RESOURCES
I.
Introducing Social Psychology (These items apply to Modules 53–55)
Student Project/Web Site: Social Psychology Web Sites (p. 2)
Videocassettes: Discovering Psychology, Updated Edition: The Power of the Situation (p. 2)
Discovering Psychology, Updated Edition: Constructing Social Reality (p. 2)
Film: Invitation to Social Psychology (p. 2)
II. Attributing Behavior to Persons or to Situations
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Attribution and Models of Helping (p. 4)
Classroom Exercises: The Fundamental Attribution Error (p. 3)
Students’ Perceptions of You (p. 3)
Videocassette: Psychology:The Human Experience, Module 30: Social Cognition and Person Perception:The Blind
Date (p. 4)
III. Attitudes and Actions
Lecture/Discussion Topics: The Looking Glass Effect (p. 5)
The Theory of Reasoned Action (p. 5)
Actions Influence Attitudes (p. 6)
The Justification of Effort (p. 7)
Self-Persuasion (p. 7)
Classroom Exercise: Introducing Cognitive Dissonance Theory (p. 7)
Web Site/Student Project: The Zimbardo Prison Experiment (p. 6)
Videocassette: Quiet Rage—The Stanford Prison Experiment (p. 6)
MODULE OBJECTIVES
After completing their study of this module, students should be able to:
1. Describe the importance of attribution in social behavior and the dangers of the fundamental attribution error.
2. Identify the conditions under which attitudes have a strong impact on actions.
3. Explain the foot-in-the-door phenomenon and the effect of role playing on attitudes in terms of cognitive
dissonance theory.
MODULE OUTLINE
I.
Introducing Social Psychology (p. 695)
Student Project/Web Site: Social Psychology Web Sites
Social Psychology Network (http://www.
socialpsychology.org), maintained by Scott Plous of Wesleyan University, is a comprehensive source of information for
students interested in exploring almost any topic discussed in Modules 53–55. Perhaps of greatest use for students preparing
writing assignments are links to other sites organized by topic such as social influence, cultural influences, prejudice, and
aggression. Students can also participate in online social psychology studies from around the world, visit social
psychology research groups and journals, browse through a list of social psychology textbooks, and visit the homepages of
individual social psychologists.
Resources for the Teaching of Social Psychology (http://www.noctrl.edu/~ajomuel/crow) is part of the CROW project,
Course Resources on the Web, and is sponsored by the Associated Colleges of Illinois. Prepared by Jon Mueller, the site
includes activities and exercises, online studies and demonstrations, class assignments, Web projects, topic resources, online
lectures, and student resources. At the site, you may also sign up to receive Jon Mueller’s periodic newsletter.
Prejudice, an important topic in Module 55, assumes its most blatant expression in “hate talk” and “hate crimes.” For a
particularly interesting out-of-class
project (suggested by Richard Barnes), have students prepare a one- to two-page profile of a hate group described by
tolerance watch at http://www.tolerance. org/maps/hate/index.html.
A discussion group (LISTSERV©UGA.CC.UGA. EDU) is available for use by instructors. It provides a forum for
individuals to discuss current theory and research in social psychology as well as the teaching of social psychology. To join
the list, send an e-mail message to the above address with the body of the message as follows:
subscribe socpsy-L your firstname yourlastname.
Barnes, R. (January 19, 1997). Social psychology projects. Teaching in the psychological sciences (TIPS-Online Discussion Group).
Videocassette: Discovering Psychology, Updated Edition: The Power of the Situation (Annenberg/CPB Project, 30 minutes)
The social context shapes our behavior for good and for ill. This program traces contemporary social psychology back to Kurt
Lewin’s thesis that behavior is a function of both the person and the environment. Beginning with Lewin’s early work on
autocratic, laissez-faire, and democratic leadership styles, the program covers research on conformity, the fundamental
attribution error, and obedience. Original footage from Stanley Milgram’s obedience studies and Philip Zimbardo’s famous
Stanford Prison simulation are highlighted. The prison study showed how the boundary between social role and personal
identity can be erased. Both the obedience and prison studies also raise questions regarding the ethics of experimentation.
Today’s stricter ethical guidelines would likely prevent any attempt at
replication.
The program concludes with an example of positive social influence—Ellen Langer’s study of visual acuity. ROTC
cadets treated as pilots demonstrated significantly better perception than those given an alternative role assignment. This
program is particularly strong in showing how psychological research helps us understand significant social events.
Videocassette: Discovering Psychology, Updated Edition: Constructing Social Reality (Annenberg/CPB Project, 30 minutes)
This program explores the power of our beliefs to shape reality. An opening interview with Steven Hassan, a former member
of the Moonies, conveys the strategies that cults use to control thoughts. Three studies involving young students are used to
illustrate the importance of our beliefs in shaping our social behavior. In 1968, Jane Elliot, a third-grade schoolteacher in
Riceville, Iowa, used eye color as the basis for discriminating among her students and dramatically altered relationships
among them (see the film description Module 55 of these resources). The program shows the students, now adults, revisiting
their experience 15 years later. Robert Rosenthal demonstrated how teachers’ expectations shape their students’ academic
performance. Rosenthal identifies four factors that seem to mediate the effect. Finally, Elliot Aronson and Alex Gonzalez
describe how the jigsaw classroom can foster cooperation when students come to see themselves as interdependent.
This program also explores the ways in which television commercials attempt to shape our perception of reality. Robert
Cialdini explains how agents of influence elicit our compliance using six different principles: reciprocation, scarcity,
authority, commitment, liking, and consensus.
Film: Invitation to Social Psychology (MTI, 25
minutes)
This film, narrated by Stanley Milgram, provides an excellent overview of the issues addressed by social psychologists,
including conformity and obedience, the relationship between attitudes and behavior, social perception, attraction, aggression,
and altruism. The film begins by emphasizing the importance of social
influence in everyday life and then uses short vignettes to review the major findings of this field. Included are convincing
reenactments of the Asch and Milgram studies. Basic principles of cognitive dissonance and attribution theory are vividly
applied to events in the typical college student’s life. For example, the frustration-aggression hypothesis is used to explain a
fight that erupts between two students over loud music being played on a radio. Albert Bandura’s famous Bobo doll
experiment is shown in an introduction to social learning theory. The ethics of using deception is raised in the context of field
research on altruism, and role playing, a possible alternative to the use of deception, is demonstrated through a reenactment of
the fascinating Zimbardo prison experiment.
II. Attributing Behavior to Persons or to Situations (pp. 706–708)
Classroom Exercise: The Fundamental Attribution Error
The fundamental attribution error is the tendency of observers, when analyzing another’s behavior, to underestimate the
impact of a situation and to overestimate the impact of personal disposition. You can introduce this error by replicating the
findings of Richard Nisbett and his colleagues, who discovered that people often attribute other people’s behavior to their
dispositions while giving environmental reasons for their own behavior.
Distribute two copies of Handout 53–1 to each student. Have students complete the scale twice, once for a former teacher
(or some prominent public figure, say, Rush Limbaugh) and once for themselves. After they have completed both forms, have
them count the number of times they circled “depends on the situation” on each rating sheet. A show of hands will
demonstrate a greater tendency to attribute the other person’s behavior to personal disposition, while attributing their own
behavior to the environment. Ask students why this may be the case.
We tend to attribute causation to the focus of our attention, which is different when we are observing than when we are
acting. When another person acts, our focus is on that person, who thus seems to cause whatever happens. When we act,
however, the environment commands our attention and thus seems to explain our behavior. Michael Storms demonstrated that
if perspectives can be reversed, attributions also change. In a clever experiment, students were told to talk with each other
while television cameras, placed next to each, recorded the conversation. In addition, observers sat beside the students.
Afterward, each observer and each subject were asked to estimate whether the subject’s behavior was caused more by
personal characteristics or by the situation. As expected, the observer attributed less importance to the situation than did the
subject. But what if perspectives were reversed by having each watch the videotape recorded from the other’s point of view?
Attributions were also now reversed. The observer attributed behavior more to the situation, the subject more to personal
characteristics.
Conclude your discussion with the following example of the actor-observer difference in perception. In 1979, rock fans
were waiting to get into Riverfront Coliseum for a concert by The Who. When the Coliseum doors were finally opened,
people stampeded and several were trampled to death. Time magazine, which had reported the tragedy, later received a letter
from an outside observer and one from an actor participant. To whom does each attribute the cause?
The observer:
The violently destructive message that The Who and other rock groups deliver leaves me little surprised that they attract a mob that
will trample human beings to death to gain better seats. Of greater concern is a respected news magazine’s adulation of this sick
phenomenon.
The actor:
While standing in the crowd at Riverfront Coliseum, I distinctly remember feeling that I was being punished for being a rock fan. My
sister and I joked about this, unaware of the horror happening around us. Later, those jokes came back to us grimly as we watched the
news. How many lives will be lost before the punitive and inhuman policy of festival seating at rock concerts is outlawed?
Nisbett, R. E., Caputo, C., Legant, P., & Marecek, J. (1973). Behavior as seen by the actor and as seen by the observer. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 154–164.
Storms, M. D. (1973). Videotape and the attribution process: Reversing actors’ and observers’ points of view. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 27, 165–175.
NOTE: Read the next exercise for an alternative use of Handout 53–1.
Classroom Exercise: Students’ Perceptions of You
If you are feeling courageous, ask students to use Handout 53–1 to give their impressions of you. Also ask them to judge such
characteristics as your age and marital status; favorite kind of music, food, and color; ideal vacation and hobbies; state of
birth; and number of siblings. Have your students anonymously turn in their judgments; prepare a summary tally and use the
next class period to discuss the results.
Robin Lashley suggests that you use the exercise to illustrate the following principles of person perception.
1. Students’ responses often reveal strongly stereotyped thinking, specifically the “teacher stereotype.” Lashley notes that
students judge the typical teacher to be a married, conservative, introverted individual who prefers dark colors, sedentary
hobbies, and structured vacations. Other stereotypes surface as well—for example, those based on age, gender, and
physical attractiveness.
2. First impressions are often important. In justifying their judgments, students will often refer to events occurring early in
the semester. In fact, students may have already formed impressions from your reputation on campus. Furthermore,
students may have selectively perceived and recalled your behavior to fit their initial impressions.
3. Responses to Handout 53–1 may be used to demonstrate the actor-observer difference in perception. To illustrate, you
will need to disclose your self-ratings on these characteristics. You probably will most frequently report, “It depends on
the situation.” Differences between your ratings and those of your students may be examples of the fundamental
attribution error (they are wrong) or, if your perceptions are more favorable, examples of a self-serving bias (you are
wrong).
4. Agreements between you and your students’ judgments serve as instances of successful perception. Many of these reflect
inferences made from physical appearance (a wedding ring to infer marital status, facial wrinkles to infer age, clothing to
infer favorite color, to name a few).
5. One result of this exercise is that students will become aware of their implicit personality theories. We all have theories
about which traits are correlated; which traits characterize persons of a particular age, gender, or occupation; and what
causes
specific behaviors. Most generally, person perception is an active process in which we go beyond the information given.
Lashley notes several benefits of this exercise. Students acquire a better understanding of person perception, they come to
appreciate the relevance of this process to their own social interactions, and, last but not least, they get to know their
instructor better.
Lashley, R. (1987). Using students’ perceptions of their instructor to illustrate principles of person perception. Teaching of
Psychology, 14, 179–180.
Videocassette: Psychology: The Human Experience, Module 30: Social Cognition and Person Perception:The Blind Date
See the Faculty Guide that accompanies the Psychology:The Human Experience teaching modules by Coast Learning Systems
for a description.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Attribution and Models of Helping
In discussing the effects of attribution, the text suggests that finding dispositional versus situational causes for poverty and
unemployment can have important consequences for our attitudes and actions. You can reinforce and extend this discussion
by introducing Philip Brickman’s models of helping and coping. Brickman and his colleagues have suggested that whether we
help as well as how we help someone in need depend largely on our answers to two important questions: Who is responsible
for the problem? Who is responsible for the solution?
In Brickman’s moral model, actors are held responsible for both problems and solutions. They are most in need of proper
motivation. Traditionally, we have viewed criminality and alcoholism in this way: “You got yourself into this mess, now get
yourself out.” Helpers simply exhort people to assume responsibility for their problems and to work their own way out.
In the compensatory model, people are not seen as responsible for problems, but they are responsible for solutions. Jesse
Jackson once stated, “You are not responsible for being down, but you are responsible for getting up.” People need the
resources or opportunities that the helper may provide. Nonetheless, the responsibility for using this assistance rests with the
recipient.
In the medical model, people are seen as responsible for neither the problem nor the solution. Helpers say, “You are ill
and I will try to make you better.” This approach, of course, characterizes the health care
system in all modern societies. Helping involves providing treatment and care.
In the enlightenment model, actors are seen as responsible for problems but as unable or unwilling to provide solutions.
They are viewed as needing
discipline. Helping means earning their trust and giving them guidance. Alcoholics Anonymous explicitly requires new
recruits both to take responsibility for their past history of drinking (rather than blaming it on something or someone else) and
to admit that it is beyond their power to control the drinking without the help of God and the community of ex-alcoholics.
Brickman suggests that each of these models has some deficiency in terms of effective helping and coping. For example,
the potential deficiency of the moral model is that it can lead its adherents to hold victims of leukemia and rape responsible
for their fate. Those advocating the compensatory model may alienate the people they help: The recipients may come to see
themselves as having to solve problems they did not create, thereby developing a rather negative, even paranoid, view of the
world. The deficiency of the medical model is that it fosters dependency, causing people to lose the ability to do something
that they once did well. The possible drawback of the enlightenment model is that it can lead to a fanatical or obsessive
concern with certain problems and a reconstruction of a person’s entire life around the behaviors or the relationships designed
to help him or her deal with these problems.
Brickman, P., Rabinowitz, V., Karuza, J., Coates, D., Cohen, E., & Kidder, L. (1982). Models of helping and coping. American
Psychologist, 37, 368–384.
III. Attitudes and Actions (pp. 708–711)
Lecture/Discussion Topic: The Looking Glass Effect
The text notes that when we are keenly aware of our attitudes, they are more likely to guide our actions. For example, if we
are made to feel self-conscious, we are truer to our convictions.
Researchers have cleverly made participants self-conscious by installing mirrors in the laboratory. For example, Edward
Diener and Mark Wallbom noted that nearly all college students say that cheating is morally wrong. But do they follow their
stated principles? Diener and Wallbom had students work on an anagram-solving task that was presumably an IQ test. They
told them to stop when a bell sounded. Left alone, 71 percent cheated by working past the bell. However, for students made
self-aware by working in front of a mirror, only 7 percent cheated. More recently, Brad Bushman found that people who can
see their reflections eat less unhealthy food than those who can’t see themselves. Bushman and his colleagues asked college
students to try full-fat, low-fat, and fat-free cream cheese. Participants in a room with a mirror ate less of the full-fat spread
than did those with no mirror. The researchers also asked grocery shoppers to taste full-fat, reduced-fat, and fat-free
margarines. Those snacking over a mirrored tabletop ate less of the fatty type. Bushman reports that he has installed a mirror
on his own
refrigerator door.
Diener, E., & Wallbom, M. (1976). Effects of self-awareness on antinormative behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 10, 107–
111.
Haugen, P. (1999, May/June). The looking glass effect. Psychology Today, 24.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: The Theory of Reasoned Action
You can extend the text discussion of the conditions under which attitudes guide actions by introducing Martin Fishbein and
Icek Ajzen’s influential theory of reasoned action. The theory states that two major predictors of behavior are attitudes toward
the behavior and subjective social norms. A person’s attitude toward a behavior is a function of the desirability of the possible
outcomes weighted by the likelihood of those outcomes. Subjective social norms reflect one’s perception of whether
significant others approve of the behavior weighted by the motivation to conform with those expectations. So, in predicting a
woman’s use of birth control pills, one would take into account her attitude (Does she think that taking the pill is the right step
for her?) and subjective social norms (Does she think her parents, husband, friends, church want her to?). Her attitude toward
taking the pill would be a function of the desirability of the possible outcomes and the likelihood of their occurring (e.g.,
avoiding pregnancy is very important, and the pill is nearly certain to prevent it; the pill can have unpleasant side effects, but
these occur infrequently). Subjective social norms are predicted from her perceived expectations of others close to her
weighted by her motivation to comply with them (e.g., her parents want her to take the pill and she wants to please them; her
church opposes it, but she considers its views outdated and cares little about them). According to Fishbein and Ajzen,
attitudes toward the behavior and subjective social norms predict one’s behavioral intentions (the subjective probabilities of
how one intends to behave), which in turn determine behavior.
The model has been successfully applied in predicting a variety of behaviors. For example, in one study researchers
attempted to predict whether pregnant women would breast-feed or bottle-feed their babies. Through questionnaires they
measured the women’s attitudes toward the behavior (Did they believe that breast-feeding established a closer mother-baby
relationship? How important is that?), subjective social norms (What did the woman’s husband prefer? How motivated were
they to follow their husbands’ wishes?), and behavioral intentions (Did they intend to breast-feed?). The researchers found
that the correlation of these factors with actual postbirth breastfeeding was 0.77.
Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior extends the model of reasoned action to incorporate another variable, namely,
perceived behavioral control. The development and testing of the theory of reasoned action assumes that the behaviors studied
were under full volitional control. Clearly, that is not always the case, and Ajzen argues that taking into account the actor’s
perceived ability to carry out the behavior of interest contributes to the accuracy of predicting behavior. Recently, researchers
have compared the theory of planned behavior with the theory of reasoned action for ten behaviors chosen to represent a
range with respect to personal control (from “getting a good night’s sleep” to “taking vitamin supplements”). The results
indicated that inclusion of perceived behavioral control enhanced the prediction of behavioral intention and the behavior
itself.
Taylor, S., Peplau, L., Sears, D. & Peplau, A. (2003). Social psychology (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Actions Influence Attitudes
One of social psychology’s most significant findings is that action shapes attitude, a principle that can be illustrated further in
class. For example, the low-ball technique, a device presumably used by some new-car dealers, demonstrates the powerful
effects of action on attitude. After a customer has signed on to buy a new car because of its very low price, the salesperson
reports that the sales manager won’t agree because “we’d be losing money.” Reportedly, more customers stick with their
purchase, even at the higher price, than would have agreed if the full price had been disclosed from the start. In one
investigation of the technique, introductory psychology students were asked to participate in a laboratory experiment at 7:00
A.M. Only 24 percent of those asked came. When students agreed to participate without knowing the time and then were
asked if they would come at 7:00 A.M., 53 percent of those who had been asked showed up!
As the text points out, brainwashing, a technique first used on American prisoners during the Korean War, also
demonstrates how attitudes may follow actions. The captors would have the prisoners write a series of essays, each one
representing a more serious attack on the U.S. government. Slowly the writer’s attitude would become consistent with his
words. In his delightful book Influence, Robert Cialdini gives numerous examples of how other compliance professionals use
the written statement to shape attitudes. The Amway Corporation, for example, promotes sales by asking its personnel to set
individual sales goals and then record them on paper: “Whatever the goal, the important thing is that you set it . . . and write it
down. There is something magical about writing things down
. . . when you reach that goal, set another, and write that down. You’ll be off and running.”
Similarly, some door-to-door sales companies have used a “write-it-down” technique to counteract legislation that allows
customers a few days to cancel their order. By having the customer rather than the salesperson fill out the original sales
agreement, they push them to commit to the purchase. As one encyclopedia company official notes, this change alone has
proved to be “a very important psychological aid in preventing customers from backing out of their agreements.”
The actions-shaping-attitude principle may also operate in the “50 words or less” testimonial contests. Why do
manufacturers of toothpaste, breakfast cereal, and chewing gum pay thousands of dollars to a contestant who composes a
short personal statement that begins, “Why I like…”? To get as many people as possible to go on record as favoring the
product. Saying is believing!
Cialdini, R. B. (2000). Influence: Science and practice. (4th ed.) Boston: Allyn Bacon.
Web Site/Student Project: The Zimbardo Prison Experiment
The text briefly describes how Philip Zimbardo created a simulated prison and randomly assigned college students to play
either the role of guard or prisoner. A Web-based slide show at http://zimbardo.com/flash. html provides a detailed account of
this fascinating study that demonstrates how role playing can powerfully shape attitudes and even self-identity. A total of 80
narrated slides show how the guards developed degrading routines and, in only six days, the prisoners either broke down,
rebelled, or became passively resigned. Students can provide an oral or written report on their visit to this Web site. Helpful
discussion questions accompany the slide program and can be printed for classroom use.
Videocassette: Quiet Rage—The Stanford Prison Experiment (Insight Media, 50 minutes)
The text briefly describes how Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison study demonstrates the power of role playing. Zimbardo has
released a 50-minute video in which students can revisit this now-classic social psychological investigation. The program will
take your class back to the site of the study and through a series of flashbacks using original archival footage that graphically
shows the surprise arrests by City Police, students becoming absorbed into the roles of prisoners and guards, and the
pathology that forced the two-week study to be terminated early. The video includes the postexperiment interviews with the
participants and, of special interest, follow-ups two decades later.
Classroom Exercise: Introducing Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Timothy Osberg suggests a classroom exercise in which he asks students to predict the outcomes of research on cognitive
dissonance. In addition to introducing cognitive dissonance theory, the exercise provides an important reminder that
psychology is not merely common sense. It is our vulnerability to the hindsight bias that makes research findings seem
obvious—that is, they are obvious only after we learn the results.
Present the following scenario.
Suppose you had volunteered to participate in a psychology experiment on campus. Upon arrival, you were seated at a table and asked
to undertake a series of dull, meaningless tasks for about an hour. Afterward, the experimenter convinced you to extol the virtues of
the tasks you had performed by describing them to other potential participants as highly worthwhile, interesting, and educational. You
were paid either $1 or $20 to do this. Suppose you were then asked to privately rate your enjoyment of the tasks on a questionnaire.
After which amount do you believe your actual enjoyment rating of the tasks would be higher—$1 or $20?
Students can provide their answers either by a show of hands or by writing them down. Give the collective results in class
before disclosing the research answer. Osberg reports that almost all students will intuitively indicate the $20 payment.
Finally, report that Festinger and Carlsmith found that those receiving $1 rated the tasks as more enjoyable than those paid
$20. Explain that the authors used the concept of cognitive dissonance to explain this finding. Those who received only $1
presumably had insufficient justification for their behavior, which led to dissonance, which, in turn, produced a change in
attitude about the tasks.
Festinger, L., &Carlsmith, J. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58,
203–210.
Osberg, T. (1993). Psychology is not just common sense:An introductory psychology demonstration. Teaching of Psychology, 20,
110–111.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: The Justification of Effort
Cognitive dissonance theorists have predicted that working hard to attain a goal makes the goal more attractive than the same
goal obtained with no effort. Robert Cialdini applies the principle to the hazing ceremonies of college fraternities. During the
traditional “Hell Week,” pledges are run through a variety of activities designed to test their limits of physical exertion,
psychological strain, and social embarrassment. Too often, of course, the results are tragic. One pledge was told to dig his
“own grave.” After he complied with orders to lie flat in the finished hole, the sides collapsed and suffocated him before his
prospective fraternity brothers could dig him out. Another pledge choked to death after repeatedly trying to swallow a large
slab of raw liver soaked in oil. A third broke a bone in each foot when he was required to keep his feet under the rear legs of a
folding chair while the heaviest fraternity brother sat down and drank a beer.
Despite efforts to eliminate dangerous hazing practices, they persist. Why? It may be that they promote commitment to
the group. As a result of their efforts, new fraternity members may find the group more attractive and worthwhile. Elliot
Aronson and Judson Mills (1959) tested this idea. They found that college women who had to endure a very embarrassing
initiation ceremony in order to gain access to a sex discussion group convinced themselves that their new group and its
discussions were extremely valuable—even though the initial discussion was extremely dull. Coeds who did not go through an
initiation were much less positive about the new group.
Cialdini, R. (2000). Influence: Science and practice. (4th ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Self-Persuasion
Elliot Aronson has used principles of cognitive dissonance theory to get sexually active teenagers to use condoms more
regularly. Although most teens know the benefits of condoms, only a fraction use them consistently. “Most of us engage in
hypocritical behavior all the time because we can blind ourselves to it,” argues Aronson. “But if someone comes along and
forces you to look at it, you can no longer shrug it off.”
In his study, he recruited 72 sexually active college students to help design an AIDS-prevention program to be used in
high schools. Two groups of students were asked to make videotapes explaining the dangers of AIDS and the benefits of
condoms. Aronson told them they were role models and, to help them prepare their presentations, reminded them of the dire
facts they had often heard before. Afterward, he had some of the students form separate groups to brainstorm why people do
not use condoms when they should. They were encouraged to talk about the times they failed to follow their own rules. “In
effect, what our research does is to rub people’s noses in their own hypocrisy, and that’s painful to confront,” says Aronson. A
third group did not make the video; they simply brainstormed why people do not use condoms when they should.
The results were striking. Immediately following the experiment, far more of those in the “induced-hypocrisy” group
bought condoms than did those who just made the videos or who just brainstormed. Even more dramatic were the differences
three months after the experiment. Aronson found that 92 percent of those in the hypocrisy group said that they had been
using condoms without fail. In contrast, only 55 percent of those who had just made the videotape and 71 percent of those
who had only brainstormed reported doing so. “Because of self-reporting, we can’t be sure of those numbers,” says Aronson,
“but we can be sure of the
relative difference.”
Aronson, E. (1997, May). Adventures in applied social psychology: How to convince sexually active teenagers to use condoms. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Society, Washington, DC.
HANDOUT 53–1
Attribution Scale
For each of the following 20 pairs of traits, circle the one trait in each pair that is most characteristic of
.
If neither of the traits in a trait pair is the most characteristic, indicate that by circling “depends on the situation.”
serious
gay (merry)
depends on the situation
subjective
analytic
depends on the situation
future oriented
present oriented
depends on the situation
energetic
relaxed
depends on the situation
unassuming
self-asserting
depends on the situation
lenient
firm
depends on the situation
reserved
emotionally expressive
depends on the situation
dignified
casual
depends on the situation
realistic
idealistic
depends on the situation
intense
calm
depends on the situation
skeptical
trusting
depends on the situation
quiet
talkative
depends on the situation
cultivated
natural
depends on the situation
sensitive
tough-minded
depends on the situation
self-sufficient
sociable
depends on the situation
steady
flexible
depends on the situation
dominant
deferential
depends on the situation
cautious
bold
depends on the situation
uninhibited
self-controlled
depends on the situation
conscientious
happy-go-lucky
depends on the situation
Source: Nisbett, R. E. Attribution Scale. Reprinted by permission.