Hammond developed social judgment theory which provided a comprehensive quantitative approach for describing and improving judgment processes. The second principle states that as people evaluate incoming information, they determine the category of judgment, or latitude, to which it belongs. However should the message fall in to our latitude of rejection it would be views as objectionable. Issues involving family, politics, and religion tend to have narrower latitudes of acceptance and rejection. The author attempts to integrate these two approaches via a two-stage model of evaluative judgment whose testing incorporates aspects of both analytic procedures. This theory seeks to explain how influence in communication occurs. Rooted in judgment theory, which is concerned with the discrimination and categorization of stimuli, it attempts to explain how attitudes are expressed, judged, and modified.
On the other hand, another less wealthy person might currently have a vehicle that is close to breaking down for good. Priming Us and Them: Automatic Assimilation and Contrast in Group Attitudes. We adjust an attitude once we have judged a new position to be in our latitude of acceptance. Communication increased policy similarity and agreement, but feedback had no effect. Principle four states that people distort incoming information to fit their categories of judgment. Test participants were asked to compare the features of differing objects such as height, weight, and color.
The opposite of Contrast is Assimilation, and that is a perceptual error whereby people judge messages that fall within their latitude of acceptance as less discrepant from their anchor than they really are. In Persuasion: Theory and research, 29-44. This individual will also have a large latitude of noncommitment because, again, if they do not care as much about the topic, they are not going to commit to certain ideas, whether they are on the latitude of rejection or acceptance. Understanding social judgment theory allows you to better understand how you develop your opinions. If they were in the latitude of rejection, the opinions were pushed away from each other; otherwise, the opinions were pulled towards each other.
That's good news for the would-be persuader. Because they are less educated and do not care as much about the issue, they are more likely to accept more ideas or opinions about an issue easily. In short, Sherif et al. Therefore for a Jehovah Witness a message about blood transfusions being wrong or holidays being Pagan festivals would be considered reasonable as it is one of their core beliefs thus that message falls in to their latitude of acceptance. Current circumstances as well as the subject's past experience help to shape the formation of attitudes. In this system of point awarding, when a participant chose a score x for one boy, the other boy automatically got a score 15 - x. If we judge that message to be in our latitude of rejection, we will also adjust our attitude, but in the opposite direction from what we think the speaker is advocating.
In each time-period, two random agents were selected to interact. The last stage of the experiment is the rewards allocation task. This suggests that even successful attempts at persuasion will yield small changes in attitude. Persuasion, Social Influence, and Compliance Gaining 4 th Edition. Completely related to this study is a follow-up research done by Tajfel and Billig in the year 1973.
Testability Can the hypothesis be tested? The subjects also apparently gave too much weight to the communication from the other subject in the pair, and too little weight to the feedback from the task. That's why when people come across a piece of information that's very different from their worldview, the mind will immediately label that as inconceivable and will try to block it out. Nonetheless, the distinction is important in order to have a clear understanding of the role these factors play in persuasion. Are the measures of ego-involvement strongly correlated with each other? Groups with known stands tend to have high ego involvement thus they also have wide latitudes of rejection and are not easily influenced. Now matter how many times we have this conversation my friend will never be able to convince me that blood transfusions are acceptable. Thus, a person's full attitude can only be understood in terms of what other positions he or she finds acceptable or unacceptable, in addition to his or her own stand.
However, it also presents feedback that provides analysis of each individual's judgment and comparisons with his or her counterpart's judgment. When an assimilation effect occurs, the perceived discrepancy between the message's stand and the receiver's position is reduced, and hence the communicator is seen as asking for less change than he or she actually seeks. Put differently, persuasion occurs at the end of the process where a person understands a message then compares the position it advocates to the person's position on that issue. The opposite of contrast is assimilation, a perceptual error whereby people judge messages that fall within their latitude of acceptance as less discrepant from their anchor than they really are. Attitude and attitude change: The Social Judgment-Involvement Approach. Since no one can really say what 'gun control' means, we'll create a fictional set of provisions called the 'Gun Act of 2015'.
If you are persuaded, then the further a message's position is away from your anchor point, the larger your attitude change will be. Using this situation we can see how the Social Judgement Theory works. Of course, if I really wanted to know the temperature of the water in three buckets I would just use a thermometer. This means that a person may not agree with less extreme stands relative to his or her position, even though they may be in the same direction. These degrees or latitudes together create the full spectrum of an individual's attitude. For instance, an individual who is solicited for a donation to a cancer society will have a smaller latitude of acceptance if his or her mother suffers from cancer, as compared to someone who has no personal connection to the malady.