态度对社会刺激判断影响的心理物理研究

R. S. Fraser, B. Stacey
{"title":"态度对社会刺激判断影响的心理物理研究","authors":"R. S. Fraser, B. Stacey","doi":"10.1111/J.2044-8260.1973.TB00080.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The often reported finding that a person's attitude on an issue can be a potent influence on judgements relating to that issue is discussed with reference to three theories of social judgement—assimilation contrast, adaptation-level, and variable perspective. It is pointed out that the study of social judgement has been dominated by the measurement technique of equal-appearing intervals, and that this domination has led to a potentially biased and restricted view of judgemental processes. In an attempt to remove such restriction an investigation is reported which extends the study of social judgement by utilizing some of the newer techniques of psychophysical scaling. \n \n \n \nA sample of students judged 18 statements with respect to statement favourability toward the church. Four scales—partition (equal-appearing intervals), confusion (based on the method of successive categories), magnitude estimation and ratio estimation—were derived from the judgemental data. When the subjects were divided into five groups on the basis of their own religious attitudes it was found that the more favourable the attitude of subjects towards the church (1) the higher are their ratings of statements expressing favourable opinions about the church and (2) the lower their ratings of statements expressing neutral or unfavourable opinions about the church. Although some differences between the partition, confusion, magnitude estimation and ratio estimation scales were found concerning the extent of these two effects, the general pattern for all four scales was similar. It is concluded that the adaptation-level and variable perspective theories are inadequate to account for the results. The third, assimilation contrast theory, is seen to fit the pattern of results reasonably well.","PeriodicalId":76614,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of social and clinical psychology","volume":"65 1","pages":"337-352"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1973-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Psychophysical Investigation of the Influence of Attitude on the Judgement of Social Stimuli\",\"authors\":\"R. S. Fraser, B. Stacey\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/J.2044-8260.1973.TB00080.X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The often reported finding that a person's attitude on an issue can be a potent influence on judgements relating to that issue is discussed with reference to three theories of social judgement—assimilation contrast, adaptation-level, and variable perspective. It is pointed out that the study of social judgement has been dominated by the measurement technique of equal-appearing intervals, and that this domination has led to a potentially biased and restricted view of judgemental processes. In an attempt to remove such restriction an investigation is reported which extends the study of social judgement by utilizing some of the newer techniques of psychophysical scaling. \\n \\n \\n \\nA sample of students judged 18 statements with respect to statement favourability toward the church. Four scales—partition (equal-appearing intervals), confusion (based on the method of successive categories), magnitude estimation and ratio estimation—were derived from the judgemental data. When the subjects were divided into five groups on the basis of their own religious attitudes it was found that the more favourable the attitude of subjects towards the church (1) the higher are their ratings of statements expressing favourable opinions about the church and (2) the lower their ratings of statements expressing neutral or unfavourable opinions about the church. Although some differences between the partition, confusion, magnitude estimation and ratio estimation scales were found concerning the extent of these two effects, the general pattern for all four scales was similar. It is concluded that the adaptation-level and variable perspective theories are inadequate to account for the results. The third, assimilation contrast theory, is seen to fit the pattern of results reasonably well.\",\"PeriodicalId\":76614,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The British journal of social and clinical psychology\",\"volume\":\"65 1\",\"pages\":\"337-352\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1973-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The British journal of social and clinical psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.2044-8260.1973.TB00080.X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of social and clinical psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.2044-8260.1973.TB00080.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

一个人对一个问题的态度可以对与该问题有关的判断产生强有力的影响,这一经常被报道的发现是参照社会判断的三种理论——同化对比、适应水平和可变视角来讨论的。作者指出,社会判断的研究一直被等出现间隔的测量技术所主导,这种主导导致了对判断过程的潜在偏见和限制。为了消除这种限制,一项调查报告通过使用一些新的心理物理量表技术来扩展社会判断的研究。一组学生根据对教会有利的陈述来判断18个陈述。从判断数据中导出了划分(等出现区间)、混淆(基于连续分类方法)、幅度估计和比率估计四个尺度。当受试者根据他们自己的宗教态度被分成五组时,发现受试者对教会的态度越有利(1)他们对表达对教会的有利意见的陈述的评级越高(2)他们对表达对教会的中立或不利意见的陈述的评级越低。尽管划分、混淆、幅度估计和比例估计量表在这两种影响的程度上存在一些差异,但四种量表的总体模式是相似的。结论是,适应水平理论和可变视角理论不足以解释这一结果。第三种理论,同化对比理论,被认为与结果的模式相当吻合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Psychophysical Investigation of the Influence of Attitude on the Judgement of Social Stimuli
The often reported finding that a person's attitude on an issue can be a potent influence on judgements relating to that issue is discussed with reference to three theories of social judgement—assimilation contrast, adaptation-level, and variable perspective. It is pointed out that the study of social judgement has been dominated by the measurement technique of equal-appearing intervals, and that this domination has led to a potentially biased and restricted view of judgemental processes. In an attempt to remove such restriction an investigation is reported which extends the study of social judgement by utilizing some of the newer techniques of psychophysical scaling. A sample of students judged 18 statements with respect to statement favourability toward the church. Four scales—partition (equal-appearing intervals), confusion (based on the method of successive categories), magnitude estimation and ratio estimation—were derived from the judgemental data. When the subjects were divided into five groups on the basis of their own religious attitudes it was found that the more favourable the attitude of subjects towards the church (1) the higher are their ratings of statements expressing favourable opinions about the church and (2) the lower their ratings of statements expressing neutral or unfavourable opinions about the church. Although some differences between the partition, confusion, magnitude estimation and ratio estimation scales were found concerning the extent of these two effects, the general pattern for all four scales was similar. It is concluded that the adaptation-level and variable perspective theories are inadequate to account for the results. The third, assimilation contrast theory, is seen to fit the pattern of results reasonably well.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信