Communicator discrepancy, measurement delay and influence

Abstract

Both Sherif and Hovland's (1961) judgmental theory and Festinger's (1957) dissonance theory (particularly as mterpreted by Festmger & Aronson, i960, and Aronson, Turner, & Carlsmith, 1963) predict a curviknear relationship between mfluence and coimnumcator-commumcatee discrepancy According to the judgmental mterpretation, a commumcation, like an external anchor, produces mcreasmg positive influence (assimilation) with moderate discrepancy, and decreasmg influence or possibly negative influence (contrast) with more extreme discrepancy As long as a communication is m the latitude of acceptance, mcreasmg discrepancy will produce mcreasmg change, but when a communication is m the more discrepant latitude of rejection, mcreasmg discrepancy will produce decreasmg change The latitude of acceptance is operationally mdexed m terms of the range of positions that the mdividual considers acceptable, and the latitude of rejection in terms of the range of positions that the mdividual considers objectionable Accordmg to the dissonance interpretation, increasing commimicator-commumcatee discrepancy produces mcreasmg amounts of dissonance that theoretically can be reduced m any of four ways conformity to the communicator's point of view, disparagement of the communicator, persuasion of the communicator that he is mcorrect, obtamed social support from other like-minded individuals In most laboratory experiments Ss are not allowed to talk either to the communicator or to other Ss, thus, the latter two modes of dissonance reduction are not available This leaves conformity and disparagement as the only possibilities