Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The differential effect of value structure upon susceptibility to influence Auger, Jeanette A. 1977

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A8 A83.pdf [ 5.33MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094083.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094083-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094083-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094083-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094083-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094083-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094083-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094083-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094083.ris

Full Text

THE DIFFERENTIAL EFFECT OF VALUE STRUCTURE UPON SUSCEPTIBILITY TO INFLUENCE by JEANETTE A. AUGER B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1975 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Anthropology and Sociology) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1977 c) Jeanette A. Auger, 1977 In p resent ing t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the requirements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e fo r reference and study. I f u r t h e r agree t h a t permiss ion fo r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l ga in s h a l l not be a l lowed without my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department of Anthropology/Sociology The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date 3/QCJ- 1/^77 ABSTRACT Statement of Problem The two main t h e o r e t i c a l questions being asked are« 1) Does the degree of articulatedness of value structure d i f f e r e n t i a t e s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence? 2) Can we determine the degree of articulatedness of value structure and thereby predict s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence? Methods U t i l i z i n g the working theory proposed by Dr. R.A.H. Robson, a hypothesis was formulated and tested through the use of a questionnaire and a set of small group laboratory experiments. The theory suggests the followingj Uncertainty i s seen by some people as a negative t r a i t and therefore as something to be avoided. Therefore, such persons w i l l act i n ways which minimize uncertainty. Giving up previously-held positions or values i s one cause of uncertainty. Therefore, rather than r i s k uncertainty, such persons w i l l maintain previously-held positions or values as much as possible. Thus, given a si m i l a r amount of pressure to change, those persons who have to give up fewer positions w i l l be more susceptible to influence than those i i persons who have to give up more positions. In order to t e s t the u t i l i t y of the theory, a hypothesis was formulated which predicted that persons with a more well - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure would be l e s s susceptible to influence than persons with a l e s s w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure. In order to t e s t the hypothesis, a series of laboratory experiments were designed i n which pressure to change t h e i r opinions was directed towards naive subjects by three confederates. Conclusions The r e s u l t s of the experiments suggest that persons who hold more well-articulated value structures are less susceptible to influence than those persons who hold l e s s w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structures, with respect to s p e c i f i c topics of discussion i n which pressure to change t h e i r opinions i s directed towards them. Dr. Martha Foschi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract i i Table of Contents i v L i s t of Tables v Acknowledgement v i Chapter I Introduction and Review of Related L i t e r a t u r e . . . 1 II Theory and Hypothesis. Ik III Research Design 20 IV Results ^2 V Conclusion . 56 Bibliography 72 Appendices A Questionnaire . . 77 B Predicted Relationships Between S p e c i f i c Issues and P r i n c i p l e s . . . .,. . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 C Diagram of the Physical Lay-Out of the Laboratory Experiment 8° D Mean Scores based on Group, Subjects W i l l i n g to Participate, Subjects A c t u a l l y P a r t i c i p a t i n g . . 87 E Types of Respondents' Qualifying Comments 89 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page I 1 Assumed R e l a t i o n s h i p s Between P r i n c i p l e s and Issues 26 2 Scores of A l l Subests Who Completed the Questionnaire, According t o Group. . . ............. 31 3 Groups Represented i n the Laboratory Experiments. . 4-0 4 Rankings of Subjects Who Scored "High" and "Low" on the Questionnaire 44 5 R e s u l t s of the Laboratory Experiments 46 6 Mean Scores f o r A l l Subjects Who Completed the Questionnaire, According t o Group 53 7 T o t a l Number of Responses D i f f e r i n g from Those We Had Expected 63 v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This thesis was completed under the d i r e c t i o n of Dr. R.A.H. Robson at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. I wish to thank Dr. Robson, not only f o r his moral and i n t e l l e c t u a l support throughout the preparation of t h i s thesis, but also f o r stimulating my int e r e s t i n the area of small groups research i n my f i r s t year as an undergraduate. I wish to thank the other members of my thesis,committee who have had s i g n i f i c a n t influence on my academic perspective, namely, Dr. Helga Jacobson, Dr. E l v i Whittaker, and Dr. Martha Foschi. I would also l i k e to express appreciation to the U.B.C. graduate students i n Sociology 513 (1976-77) who were also involved i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r area of research. In t h i s regard, I e s p e c i a l l y wish to thank Terry P i c k e r a l l f o r his encouragement and guidance. I would e s p e c i a l l y l i k e to thank Fran Isaacs, who not only typed the dra f t s of t h i s thesis, but. who also acted as a confederate i n some of the experiments. F i n a l l y , Nancy Horseman of the Dean of Women's Office at U.B.C. was a constant source of support and encouragement throughout the entire process of the research and i t s conclusions. I would l i k e to express my gra t e f u l thanks to her. v i CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE The concept of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence i s one which has intrigued s o c i a l psychologists f o r many years. In order to understand the process of influence, i n t h i s case generally defined as the a b i l i t y of one person or group of persons to induce change i n the behaviour of another person or group of persons, s o c i a l psychologists have chosen to examine th i s concept i n a v a r i e t y of ways, i n order.to establish a context from which to view the current research i n t h i s area, we w i l l f i r s t provide a b r i e f summary of the ways i n which the phenomenon of influence has previously been studied. The s p e c i f i c area of influence with which this research i s concerned i s that which exists within small group si t u a t i o n s . More p a r t i c u l a r l y , we are interested to know how one can account f o r the differences i n s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. In other words, we want to know what causes some people to be more influenceable than others i n c e r t a i n s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n s . In order to answer t h i s type of question, s o c i a l psychologists have formulated hypotheses and devised experiments aimed at providing some explanations f o r t h i s complex process. One such t h e o r e t i c a l framework fo r studying differences i n s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence i s that generally 1 2 known as personality theory. Personality theories predict that persons who hold s p e c i f i c personality t r a i t s , as measured by a personality test, w i l l behave i n s p e c i f i c ways i n regard to the influence process. For example, Adorno, et a l (1950), found that persons who exhibit "authoritarian" personality t r a i t s are more l i k e l y to r e s i s t influence attempts when i n t e r a c t i n g with persons with a d i f f e r e n t personality t r a i t . S i m i l a r l y , Haythorn, Couch, et a l (195*0, found that persons with "authoritarian" t r a i t s were more aggressive, more concerned with status hierarchy and s t r i v i n g f o r i n d i v i d u a l prominence, less sensitive to others and more autocratic than were persons who held "equalitarian" personality t r a i t s , i n that the l a t t e r were seen to be more s e n s i t i v e , l e s s aggressive, more submissive, less autocratic, more supportive of other group members.1 The re s u l t s obtained by Haythorn, Couch, et a l (195^), showed that persons with equalitarian personality t r a i t s were more susceptible to influence than persons with authoritarian personality t r a i t s . As might be expected, those persons exhibiting equalitarian personality t r a i t s were seen to perform group tasks more e f f e c t i v e l y i n a more equitable manner f o r a l l group members. Another personality type often studied by s o c i a l psychologists i s the person who exhibits high self-esteem, (Janus and Hovland, 1959, Crowe and Leverant, 1963). Cohen (1968) suggests that self-esteem i s the "degree of correspondence between an individual's i d e a l and actual 3 concepts of himself." In his research, Cohen (1956, 1968), found that persons with high self-esteem, measured according to subjects' responses to a self/other evaluation task,-^ were less susceptible to influence than persons with a lower self-esteem with respect to inte r a c t i o n i n a task-oriented small group laboratory s i t u a t i o n . Cohen also observed that persons with a high self-esteem made more influence attempts than did persons with a lower self-esteem and that, i n general, persons of high self-esteem were more w i l l i n g to permit t h e i r s e l f - p i c t u r e and views of the s o c i a l world to be vulnerable to influence from others. Other personality types that have been studied include the highly i n t e l l i g e n t versus less i n t e l l i g e n t person (Crutchfield, 1955* Wyer, 1967), the dogmatic personality (Foulkes and Foulkes, 1965, M i l l e r and Rokeach, 1968) and the high-status versus low-status person (Patel and Gordon, i 960 , Bandura and Huston, 1961, Berelson, et a l , 1954). Personality theories tend to be somewhat ta u t o l o g i c a l i n nature i n that they imply that one can pre d i c t a l l of the outcomes of influence attempts without taking into consideration the s p e c i f i c circumstances of each s i t u a t i o n . For example, although a person may exhibit a p a r t i c u l a r type of personality, as measured by a personality test, e.g. authoritarian, i t seems u n l i k e l y that he or she w i l l always perform with the same degree of authoritarianism i n every single one of the multitude of d i f f e r e n t possible s i t u a t i o n s . 4 Therefore, i t i s doubtful that an authoritarian personality-type would r e t a i n the same degree of authoritarianism i n every s i t u a t i o n , e s p e c i a l l y i n circumstances where i t would be more advantageous to conform rather than to r e s i s t influence attempts. S i m i l a r l y , a person of high self-esteem might appear more or less susceptible to influence, depending on whether his or her goals are seen to be achieved by appearing thus. I t seems l i k e l y that people who may express ce r t a i n personality t r a i t s i n c e r t a i n situations w i l l modify these t r a i t s i n accordance with t h e i r needs or goals at other times. In other words, persons w i l l take on a r o l e that they f e e l i s relevant to any given s i t u a t i o n . I f , however, the p a r t i c u l a r circumstances imply to them that they have chosen an i n e f f e c t i v e r o l e , they w i l l modify t h e i r behaviour i n accordance with that s i t u a t i o n . When we say that persons modify t h e i r behaviour thus, we do not mean to imply that persons are always so aware of t h e i r own behaviour that they are able to modify i t i n a l l circumstances. The notion of s i t u a t i o n a l behaviour modification i s aptly stated by Goffman (1968), who suggests i n his work on "face-saving" that an i n d i v i d u a l "by repeatedly asking the question ' i f I do or do not act i n t h i s way, w i l l I or others lose face?' decides at each moment, consciously or unconsciously, how to behave."^ Other ways i n which the d i f f e r e n t i a l process of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence has been studied are those which 5 deal with the effects on i t of i n d i v i d u a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as sex, age, b i r t h order and skin colour. These in d i v i d u a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s have been observed i n s o c i a l realms of interaction as having "marked e f f e c t s i n determining the behaviour of individuals i n a wide v a r i e t y of small group s i t u a t i o n s " . When viewed i n these " s o c i a l " s i t u a t i o n s , these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are more generally referred to as "status c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s " , i n other words, p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of an ind i v i d u a l or groups of individuals are perceived by other group members as more or less powerful, e f f e c t i v e , useful or advantageous. Therefore, in such situations, persons are seen to have more or less status i n the group. Studies that examine the differences i n s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence between males and females (Hoffman and Maier, 1961, Lutzer, 1961, Bond and Vinacke, 1961, Robson, 1971), suggest that males are more i n f l u e n t i a l than females and that women are more susceptible to influence than men. In some research on thi s topic, Sistrunk and McDavid (1971), claim that research into sex ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s and influence contains a "treatment bias" i n that "the problem has been that the research involved sex-linked topics, e.g. women were more often persuaded than men on such topics as economics and geometry, and men were more persuasive than women i n arguing that the World Bank needs a 7 change of p o l i c y " . ' With regard to s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence and the 6 personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of age, Berenda (1950), found that younger children, aged from f i v e to eleven, yielded to influence attempts more frequently than students whose ages ranged from eleven to sixteen. Tuddenham (1961), used two groups of subjects, one consisting of children aged from nine to eleven, the other of college-age adults, and prepared an experiment designed to test the differences i n y i e l d i n g to influence pressures between ages. The r e s u l t s showed that the age difference i n s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence between the two groups of subjects was only s i g n i f i c a n t among the groups of younger children who more frequently yielded to influence pressure than did the older subjects. There have been numerous studies that have attempted to predict the d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t of perceived status upon subjects' s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. These studies of status predict that "the greater the perceived status d i f f e r e n t i a l between the influencer and the person influenced, o the greater the p o s s i b i l i t y of influence taking place". The various types of research aimed at further understanding the concept of status, generally u t i l i z e the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of power as the variable by which to study status structure, the assumption being that the more powerful a person i s perceived to be, the more status he or she i s given by group members. Polansky, et a l (1950), and L i p p i t t , et a l (1952), conducted studies which showed that subjects i n boys* camps, who were rated by t h e i r peers as having higher status and 7 more power, were the ones who were more often imitated by the others, and that the perceived high-status boys were less susceptible to influence than those boys who were considered to be less powerful. Some studies which attempt to d i f f e r e n t i a t e s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence through the use of the concept of ordinal p o s i t i o n of b i r t h of s i b l i n g s , suggest that f i r s t - b o r n s are more susceptible to influence than l a t e r -boms. In t h e i r research, Schacter (1959), and Sampson and Hancock (1967), suggest that f i r s t - b o r n s have a higher need for achievement than later-boms and therefore are more susceptible to influence i n that " f i r s t - b o r n s are more a f f i l i a t i v e l y dependent, need others f o r s o c i a l support, and thus should be susceptible to a normative type of influence s i t u a t i o n " . 9 In contrast, Carrigan and J u l i e n (1966), found that whereas differences i n conformity to influence did occur in samples of males who were f i r s t - b o m s , i n that they were more susceptible to influence than later-boms, no differences were evident between females who were f i r s t or later-borns. The f i n a l example of a. personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c as a variable l i k e l y to cause d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i n s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence i s that of skin colour. In one such study, Sistrunk (1971), found that both blacks and whites were more influenced by whites than by blacks. The l i s t of other studies which attempt to explain differences i n s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence i s an extensive one which we do not intend to delve into any 8 further at t h i s point of the thes i s . We presented the previous studies so that the reader may have some idea of the v a r i e t y of the; ways i n which the phenomenon of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence has been examined. In the present research, we are also interested i n the further exploration of some of the concepts contained i n symbolic in t e r a c t i o n l i t e r a t u r e . By the term, "symbolic int e r a c t i o n " , we mean the process by which i t i s suggested that individuals observe and r e l a t e to the motives, needs and actions of others. An important aspect of this process i s the means by which persons i n t e r a c t with each other. I t i s suggested that i n order to communicate t h e i r intentions, individuals use a v a r i e t y of verbal and non-verbal signs, cues or '/symbols'*. I t i s with these processes that symbolic interactionism i s pr i m a r i l y concerned. The s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s p r i m a r i l y interested i n the concept of symbolic interaction i n the early 1900's were Charles Horton Cooley (1864-1929), George Herbert Mead (1863-1931), and Herbert Blumer (1937- ). The thoughts of Cooley, Mead, and Blumer greatly influenced the thinking of l a t e r s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s ' such as Erving Goffman whose "face-saving" process bears a resemblance to Cooley's concept of "looking-glass s e l f " , 1 0 i n the following way. Attempting to explain the development of an individual's s o c i a l s e l f , that s e l f which i s v i s i b l e and i n inte r a c t i o n with the outside, s o c i a l world as opposed to the inner, private world, Cooley proposed that the 9 human mind goes through a three-stage process i n which i t i s concerned with the following! 1) The imagination.of one's appearance to another person 2) The imagination of that other person's judgement of that appearance 3) A sense of pride or chagrin f e l t by the person-; experiencing the imaginings. 1 1 Following these stages, Cooley then went on to suggest that the mind i s responsible f o r a l l forms of communication. This was, f o r Cooley, the ultimate s o c i a l r e a l i t y and he believed that each i n d i v i d u a l was capable of three types of consciousness through which interaction with others was channelled. These three types of consciousness are: 1) Self-consciousness i what I think of myself 2) S o c i a l consciousness} what I think of other people 3) Public consciousness} a c o l l e c t i v e view of the s e l f , the s o c i a l consciousness of a l l the members of a p a r t i c u l a r group, organized and integrated into a 12 communicating or in t e r a c t i n g group. Goffman took the concepts of Cooley and others and applied them to the ways i n which a person manifests, .through non-verbal and verbal communication, the t r a i t s suggested by Cooley and others. The "looking-glass s e l f " concept was taken one step further by Goffman, who asked the question, 'what does the in d i v i d u a l do when he or she communicates these 10 conscious and unconscious thoughts?' Goffman (1968) suggests that persons use th e i r conscious and unconscious knowledge of a certain s i t u a t i o n to form "face". In other words, persons plan t h e i r behaviour i n accordance not only with what they can f e e l , hear, see, touch, and taste, but also with what they can sense and assume w i l l take place i n any given s i t u a t i o n . These plans or pre-thought-out ways of moving i n the world are what Goffman refers to as "face", the face which a person puts on to express a p a r t i c u l a r way of being. For example, when an i n d i v i d u a l applies f o r a job interview and r e a l l y wants the job, he or she i s l i k e l y to put on a "face", or behave i n a manner most consistent with what the applicant assumes, either through p r i o r knowledge, e.g. the employment ad, the type of firm, the salary range, or through a sensed 'I bet this i s what they want' i n t u i t i o n , i s the expected type of behaviour required by the employer. Goffman states t "Face may be defined as a p o s i t i v e s o c i a l value a person e f f e c t i v e l y claims f o r himself by the l i n e others assume he has taken during a p a r t i c u l a r contact." 1^ This concept of "face" i s perhaps more usually referred to as " r o l e " . However, we chose the term "face" i n agreement with Goffman's point of view because i t seems to be an adequate description of the process by which persons modify t h e i r behavi our. Goffman further suggests that an i n d i v i d u a l w i l l r e t a i n "face" i n order to designate his or her actions consistent 11 with "face". In other words, once a face has been chosen by an i n d i v i d u a l , he or she w i l l attempt to act i n ways which w i l l not d i f f e r from what he or she feels that face to be. For example, i f an i n d i v i d u a l attends a job interview and during the course of i t discovers that, i n f a c t , he or she i s either not suitable for, or interested i n the type of employment offered, he or she w i l l not give up face or change behaviour towards the interviewer because such action would be inconsistent with keeping face. However, as we suggested e a r l i e r , i t i s also l i k e l y that persons are more f l e x i b l e i n t h e i r behaviour i n that they have a greater v a r i e t y of roles or faces from which to choose than Goffman seems to imply. The concept of "face-saving" i s somewhat s i m i l a r to the process being suggested by the theory which our p a r t i c u l a r research was designed to test . The uncertainty suggested by the theory can be likened to the retention of face, previously discussed. Uncertainty and giving up face are s i m i l a r i n that persons prefer to remain consistent i n t h e i r actions rather than behave, i n ways which might confuse or contradict a previous behaviour. The main purpose of the present research was to add to the already e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e on s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence, the dimension or concept that we have chosen to c a l l "value structure". We assumed that by u t i l i z i n g the additional concept of value structure, another explanation could be offered by which to predict the d i f f e r e n t i a l of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y 12 to influence. Although some of the l i t e r a t u r e on values was consulted, e s p e c i a l l y that by Rokeach ( i 960 , 1961, 1968), Rokeach and Milton (1971), Rokeach and McLellan (1971), Driver and S t a u f f e r t (1967), and Suedfield and Epstein (1973), i t was found to be only s l i g h t l y useful i n that they were prim a r i l y concerned with the differences among values, ideas, b e l i e f s , and attitudes,, whereas the present research i s concerned with explaining the process through which persons proceed i n order to acquire value structures, and, when such a structure i s attained, how much pressure to change i s necessary to cause individuals to give up a l l or part of that structure. The task of the present study was to gain information as to whether the degree of artieulatedness of a person's value structure would cause that person to be more or less susceptible to influence. Chapter J _ Footnotes 1 Wm. Haythorn, A. Couch, A. Haefner, P. Langham, L.N. Carter, "The Behaviour of Authoritarian and Equalitarian-Personalities i n Groups", Journal of  Human Relations, 6, 1956, pp. 57-73. 2 Arthur S. Cohen, "Some Implications of Self-Esteem for So c i a l Influence", The S e l f i n S o c i a l Interaction 1 C l a s s i c and Contemporary Perspectives, v o l . 1, ed. C. Gordon, K. Gergen, New York» Wiley & Sons, 1968, PP. 383-99. 3 Ibid., p. 384. 4- I b i d . , p. 384. 5 Erving Goffman, "On Face-Workt An Analysis of R i t u a l Elementa..-in S o c i a l Interaction", The S e l f i n S o c i a l Interaction> C l a s s i c and Contemporary Perspectives, v o l . 1, pp. 307-29. 13 6 Joseph Berger,. Thomas L. Conner, M. Hamit F i s i e k , Expectation States Theoryt A Theoretical Framework, Mass . t Wmthrop, 1974, p. 9. 7 F. Sistrunk, J . McDavid, Sex Variables i n Conforming Behaviour-", Journal of Personal and S o c i a l  Psychology, 17, 1971, pp. 200-7. 8 Stephen W. King, Communication and S o c i a l Influence, Reading, Mass.t Addison-Wesley, 1975 , p.3 9 . 9 E. Sampson, F. Hancock, "An Examination of the Relationship between Ordinal Position, Personality and Conformityt An Extension, Replication, and P a r t i a l V e r i f i c a t i o n " , Journal of Personal and  S o c i a l Psychology, 4, 1967, p. 3 9 9 . 10 Charles H. Cooley, Human Nature and S o c i a l Order, New York i Scribners & Sons, 1902, p. 78. 11 Ibid., p. 242. 12 Ibid., p. 242. 13 Goffman, op_. c i t . , p. 309. CHAPTER II THEORY AND HYPOTHESIS In the present research, we are concerned with explaining the d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t of the artieulatedness of a value structure upon the phenomenon of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. Therefore, the research problems with which we are faced involve the questions t 1) Does the degree of artieulatedness of a value structure e f f e c t the degree of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence? 2) To what extent can we measure th i s degree of artieulatedness of value structure and determine i t s e f f e c t upon the degree of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence? A) Theory The theory from which a set of general propositions were deduced i s that proposed by Dr. R.A.H. Robson at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. The theory predicts that* Uncertainty i s seen by some people as a negative t r a i t and therefore as something to be avoided. Therefore, such persons w i l l act i n ways which minimize uncertainty. Giving up previously-held positions or values i s one cause of uncertainty. Therefore, rather than r i s k uncertainty, such 15 persons w i l l maintain previously-held positions or values as much as possible. Thus, given a s i m i l a r amount of pressure to change, those persons who have to give up fewer positions (less w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure) w i l l be more susceptible to influence than those persons who have to give up more positions (well-articulated value structure). Because of the inter-connectedness of values, i f one value i s given up, the entire value structure may also be threatened. With respect to the propositions suggested by the theory, i t seems l i k e l y that, i f those persons who see uncertainty as a negative t r a i t also see giving up previously-held positions or values as a cause of uncertainty, then they would rather hold on to previously-held positions or values than give them up. Therefore, i f placed i n a s i t u a t i o n where pressure to change i s directed towards them, those who have to give up fewer positions w i l l be more susceptible to influence. The conceptual framework, from which the t h e o r e t i c a l propositions of the present research were deduced, was formulated along the following l i n e s . *(This information was supplied to me by Dr. Robson, who was responsible f o r the research guidelines as followed by students i n two of his undergraduate courses. I did not have access to the research being discussed, therefore, my interpretation of i t i s based s o l e l y on my discussions with Dr. Robson.) 16 In the f i r s t instance, a research study based upon the symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n i s t perspective of reference group theory which, as stated by Sherif i s "that group whose perspective constitutes the frame of reference of the actorj thus, reference groups are those groups whose norms are used as anchoring points i n structuring the perceptual f i e l d " , . 1 led to the following propositionj When exposed to views d i f f e r e n t from t h e i r own, minority p o l i t i c a l party members w i l l r e f e r to the group positions with respect to those views. This symbolic i n t e r a c t i o n i s t framework led us to the predictions that active members of the U.B.C.-based N.D.P. group (minority p o l i t i c a l party) would a l l take the same positions with respect to a p o l i t i c a l issue, whereas, i n comparison, we assumed that the members of a control group, second year anthropology students, would each take a d i f f e r e n t p o s i t i o n . Therefore, we predicted that the members of the N.D.P. group would be less susceptible to influence on the p o l i t i c a l issue than the members of the control group. As well, we predicted that on an a p o l i t i c a l issue the N.D.P. group members would take d i f f e r e n t positions as would members of the control group, and that members of the N.D.P. group would be no more or less susceptible to influence than the members of the control group. In other words, on an a p o l i t i c a l issue, members of the N.D.P. group would be the same as members of the control group, both i n terms of the degree of 17 v a r i a t i o n o f p o s i t i o n and the degree o f s u s c e p t i b i l i t y t o i n f l u e n c e . The d a t a o b t a i n e d from t h i s r e s e a r c h , d e s i g n e d t o t e s t the p r e v i o u s l y - s t a t e d p r o p o s i t i o n , c o n f i r m e d i t w i t h r e s p e c t t o t he f i r s t i s s u e , but d i d n o t c o n f i r m i t w i t h r e s p e c t t o the second i s s u e . I n o t h e r words, the r e s u l t s o f the experiments showed t h a t members o f t h e N.D.P. group were l e s s s u s c e p t i b l e t o i n f l u e n c e r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e d i s c u s s i o n t o p i c . I n o r d e r t o e x p l a i n the r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y , w h i c h , w i t h r e s p e c t t o the second i s s u e , d i d n o t s u p p o r t the s y m b o l i c i n t e r a c t ! o n i s t r e f e r e n c e group p r e d i c t i o n s , t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o p o s i t i o n s were f o r m u l a t e d ! , Members o f a m i n o r i t y p o l i t i c a l p a r t y come more f r e q u e n t l y i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h o p p o s i n g views t h a n m a j o r i t y group members. P o l i t i c a l m i n o r i t y group members l e a r n t o defend t h e i r v i e w s n o t o n l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o p o l i t i c a l i s s u e s but a l s o w i t h r e s p e c t t o o t h e r i s s u e s . S t a t e d i n a n o t h e r way, exposure t o o p p o s i n g v i e w s l e a d s t o c o n f r o n t a t i o n , which l e a d s t o p e r s o n s l e a r n i n g t o r e s i s t i n f l u e n c e a t t e m p t s . I n an a t t e m p t t o f u r t h e r e x p l a i n t h e s e f i n d i n g s of) r . . d i f f e r e n t i a l s u s c e p t i b i l i t y t o i n f l u e n c e , j u s t d i s c u s s e d , , a n o t h e r s e t o f p r o p o s i t i o n s were f o r m u l a t e d ! I f membership ( a c t i v e member o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n ) i n one o r more o f the f o l l o w i n g g r o u p s : m i n o r i t y 18 p o l i t i c a l parties or sp e c i a l i n t e r e s t groups, causes exposure to opinions d i f f e r e n t from the member's own, which i n turn causes opposition to, argument with, and confrontation on those views, then i t leads to the a r t i c u l a t i o n of the member's own views, not only with respect to those views that r e f e r to the sp e c i a l i n t e r e s t of the member's group, but also to other views. In other words, one po s i t i o n or view i s l o g i c a l l y i n t e r -related with other views and becomes a set of values which we choose to c a l l a value structure. A person with a w e l l -a r t i c u l a t e d value structure has learned to express and defend his or her own views through confrontation on those views through frequent exposure to opposition. Such a person w i l l tend to seek support f o r those views and w i l l r e t a i n those views or positions rather than r i s k the uncertainty of giving them up, because giving up one po s i t i o n implies giving up the entire structure, as they are an i n t e r - r e l a t e d set of p r i n c i p l e s . Such a person, with a well - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure, w i l l be less susceptible to influence to give up any of those views or positions than a person with a les s w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure because the l a t t e r has less to give up. We derived the following hypothesis from the preceding propositions. B) Hypothesis 19 Persons with a more wel l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure w i l l be less susceptible to influence when int e r a c t i n g with others i n a s i t u a t i o n where pressure to change t h e i r opinions i s directed towards them. In comparison, persons with a l e s s well-articulated value structure w i l l be more susceptible to influence i n the same s i t u a t i o n . Chapter II Footnotes 1 M. Sherif, "The Concept of Reference Groups i n Human Relations", Group Relations at the Crossroads, ed., M. Sherif, M.O. Wilson, New Yorki Harper Bros., 1953, P. 205. CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN In t h i s chapter, we w i l l describe the procedures used to operationalize the independent variable of value structure and the dependent variable of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. In addition, we w i l l also discuss the methods used to obtain our data with which we tested the hypothesis. A) Hypothesis The hypothesis which we are testing predicts that persons with a well - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure w i l l be less susceptible to influence when in t e r a c t i n g with others and that persons with a le s s well-articulated value structure w i l l be more susceptible to influence when i n t e r a c t i n g with others. This hypothesis i s consistent with our theory i n the following manner. The more a r t i c u l a t e d the person's value structure, the harder i t w i l l be to change h i s or her stand on an issue, i . e . cause him or her to be susceptible to influence, because, as the theory predicts, such action w i l l necessitate the person giving up more than one stand on one issue. In order to test our hypothesis, we u t i l i z e d c e r t a i n controls i n the sel e c t i o n of our respondents. These controls w i l l be discussed i n the next section of t h i s thesis. 20 1 21 B ) Operational D e f i n i t i o n s of Variables In order to operationalize our independent variable of value structure, we chose subjects who varied with respect to the articulatedness of a value structure. In thi s way, we u t i l i z e d certain controls, as stated e a r l i e r , to ensure that we used persons with varying degrees of value structure. The d e f i n i t i o n of value structure most heavily r e l i e d upon i n this research i s that offered by Rokeach (1968), i n which he states t To say that a person has a "value" i s to say that he has an enduring b e l i e f that a s p e c i f i c mode of conduct or end?state of existence i s personally and s o c i a l l y preferable to alter n a t i v e modes of conduct and end-states of existence. Once a value i s in t e r n a l i z e d i t becomes consciously or unconsciously, a standard or c r i t e r i o n f o r guiding action, f o r developing and maintaining attitudes toward, relevant objects and sit u a t i o n s , f o r j u s t i f y i n g one's own and others' actions and attitudes, fo r morally judging s e l f and others, and f o r comparing oneself with others. 1 Therefore, we u t i l i z e d Rokeach's means and ends type of dichotomy of values to formulate a d e f i n i t i o n of value structure. Thus, we conceptualized a set of p r i n c i p l e s f o r which i t was assumed a network of relationships existed. One part of the value structure that was chosen to test our hypothesis had to do with the issue of abortion. Therefore, i t was necessary to s e l e c t subjects who, we assumed, had varying degrees of articulatedness of value structure with respect to that issue. Therefore, we selected d i f f e r e n t groups, assuming that they could be rank-ordered 22 i n terms of t h e i r degree of artieulatedness. Thus, we chose four sets of subjects who were assumed to represent varying degrees of artieulatedness of a value structure. Two of these groups, namely, Continuing University Education (C.U.E.) and the Women's Centre (W.C.), were chosen because they were spec i a l i n t e r e s t minority groups and were therefore assumed to have gone through the process described by the theory. In addition, the members of these two groups were assumed to hold we l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structures with respect to the topic of abortion. The other two sets of subjects chosen were students registered i n second-year arts courses, namely, Sociology 210 (Soc. 2 1 0 ) and Women's Studies 222 (W.S. 2 2 2 ) . These subjects were assumed to have less w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structures. In order to pursue these predictions, a further set of assumtions was formulated. These assumptions were as follows t 1 ) The members of the two U.B.C.-based groups, the Women's Centre (W.G.) and Continuing University Education (C.U.E.), because they are goal-oriented with respect to attempting to change the s i t u a t i o n of females on the U.B.C. campus, w i l l be most l i k e l y to have gone through the process as outlined i n the theory, and therefore, would be le s s susceptible to influence than the other two groups chosen to par t i c i p a t e i n the study. 2 ) The Sociology 2 1 0 (Soc. 2 1 0 ) and Women's Studies 23 (W.S. 222) groups are les s goal-oriented towards a s p e c i f i c issue, assuming that attending u n i v e r s i t y i n i t s e l f i s not a s p e c i f i c issue, therefore are less l i k e l y to have gone through the process as outlined by the theory, and therefore, will.be more susceptible to influence than the other two groups chosen to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the study. I f the following assumptions are correct*,that the personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of age bears with i t q u a n t i t a t i v e l y more l i f e experiences the older one becomesj that a l l of the women i n the C.U.E. group are over twenty-five years of age, and therefore older than most of the par t i c i p a n t s i n the other three groups i that a l l of the members of the C.U.E. group are returning u n i v e r s i t y students who have held a v a r i e t y of other roles p r i o r to returning to schoolj then the l i k e l i h o o d that they have experienced the process as outlined by the theory i s very high. I t was therefore predicted that the C.U.E. group members would have the most well - a r t i c u l a t e d value structures and would therefore be the lea s t susceptible to influence i n comparison with the other groups used i n the study. In order to operationalize our dependent variable of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence, we designed an experiment which tested the e f f e c t of the independent variable of value structure upon the dependent variable of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. In other words, we wanted to know i f , i n f a c t , 24 the possession of a w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure caused persons to be more susceptible to influence or i f , i n f a c t , t h i s was not the case. The experiment was designed to t e s t to what extent persons would give up t h e i r previously-held positions when confronted with pressure to change those views. To further operationalize our independent variable of value structure, we constructed a measuring device, a questionnaire, which was designed to indicate the various types of value structure individuals could possess. 1) Questionnaire The methodological tool used to measure the independent variable of value structure was a questionnaire which dealt with t h i r t y - s i x s p e c i f i c issues (see Appendix A). The questionnaire was designed to t e s t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s response to a v a r i e t y of i n t e r - r e l a t e d issues. These issues were assumed to represent, or be part of, a general value structure held by most people. The questionnaire, then, was the r e s u l t of various manipulations of thoughts and ideas (which w i l l be discussed further i n the next section of the chapter), through which we hoped to acquire a further understanding of what a value structure i s , whether an i n d i v i d u a l holds consistent values, and to what extent the questionnaire responses would allow us to predict persons' subsequent s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. 25 a) Value Structure In order to formulate a general structure of values from which we could work, we chose the topic of abortion as a good place to s t a r t because i t seemed to us that i t was a topic with which most people had some f a m i l i a r i t y , i n that i t was not only much discussed by a l l forms of the media, but also, i n that i t i s of to p i c a l i n t e r e s t to, many persons. In order to begin to formulate a set of issues and p r i n c i p l e s which could possibly create a value structure, we searched the l i t e r a t u r e which dealt with the s p e c i f i c topic of abortion to learn what other issues might be related to that topic. Through t h i s process of continuous conceptualizing,,we chose the f i r s t p r i n c i p l e of freedom of choice because i t , seemed to us that persons who take a pro-abortion p o s i t i o n would also hold that p r i n c i p l e as a value, e.g. i f one believes that a female should have the r i g h t to choose her l i f e experiences, then she should also have the freedom to choose not,to have a c h i l d i f she does not want to. On the other hand, persons who would take an anti-abortion stand would l i k e l y hold the p r i n c i p l e of sancti t y of l i f e i n that, i f a person believes that a l l of l i f e i s sacred, then they would perceive abortion to be destructive of l i f e . Therefore, using abortion as the key issue from which to formulate the value structure, the following table shows the connections between p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c issues that we assumed existed. i 26 TABLE 1 ASSUMED RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PRINCIPLES AND ISSUES Issue (and questionnaire no.) 1. Abortion (17) 2. Drug use (12) 3. Pornography (29) 4. Homosexuality (27). . . . 5. Alcohol (6) 6. Seat b e l t s (9) 7. Suicide (1) 8. Euthanasia (22) 9. Contraceptives (7). . . . 10. Contraceptive i n f o . (16). 11. Immigration (14) 12. Relocation (10) 13. S t e r i l i z a t i o n (18). . . . 14. Child's rig h t s (24) . . . 15. Treatment of fetus (28) . 16. "Morning a f t e r " p i l l (30) 17. Family allowance (20) . . 18. Day care (33) . • . <. •'•. • 19. Pension plan/wives (31) . 20. Medicare (15) 21. Education (13) 22. Capital punishment (34) . 23. Attitudes to C.O.'s (3) . 24. Sex education (35). . • . 25. Penology programs (19). . 26. Innovative education (32) 27. Common law marriage (21). 28. School meals (5) No. of Relationships O CD CD O — 3 o (D CO m c (0 o V C H H l-l P> ct H> ro 3 o o 3 o (D ct § 3 t-" co i -— N C H 0 \ VJJ H - < w e t «< H , 5 a> o ct ^ ^ H - •< o H> ct o H> M W 3 O 3 O O H« •< <! P H • M —' X s CD CD JB 3 H» H c t < ! O ct $» M H M N> pr ON<< H * O < H fa (—1 (D (C CQ ct H» O 3 3 P> H -IS 27 The seven p r i n c i p l e s were i d e n t i f i e d by the questions numbered t 25 freedom of choice 14 issues 2 population pressures 10 issues 8 i n d i v i d u a l from conception 4 issues 23 equity 15 issues 11 sanctity of l i f e 10 issues 4 s o c i a l innovations 19 issues 26 mental and physical health 10 issues When constructing our p r i n c i p l e s and t h e i r related issues, we made certa i n assumptions as to how people would respond to the questionnaire, which would determine the artieulatedness of t h e i r value structure (see Appendix B). We assumed that i f an i n d i v i d u a l agreed with the f i r s t p r i n c i p l e , freedom of choice, they would also agree with issues 1, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 14, which were a l l questions dealing with an indi v i d u a l ' s r i g h t to choosej s i m i l a r l y , they would disagree with issues 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, and 13, which i n h i b i t an in d i v i d u a l ' s r i g h t to choose. These assumed rela t i o n s h i p s are i l l u s t r a t e d i n Appendix B. The p r i n c i p l e s and t h e i r related issues were then translated into the questions that can be found i n Appendix A. Question 36 was included i n order to provide us with some measure of each respondent's stand on the issue of abortion because, as we stated e a r l i e r , t h i s p a r t i c u l a r topic was chosen as the basis f o r our value structure. We further assumed that some persons hold a v a r i e t y of 28 values which they tend to hold f a i r l y constant i f they have gone through the process as outlined by the theory. I f they have not gone through the process which the theory suggests, i t was assumed that no consistent pattern or structure of values would emerge. The concept of values i s a vague one i n that i t tends to be d i f f e r e n t i a l l y defined by d i f f e r e n t people. Therefore, we f i n d that 'values' are sometimes taken to mean attitudes, b e l i e f s , opinions, i n c l i n a t i o n s , ; dispositions, and a v a r i e t y of s i m i l a r items. In our research, the term 'values' was defined as those thoughts or opinions held to be 'valuable', desirable, and of worth. I t was assumed that a value structure might represent the way a person's thoughts become actions. We envisioned the p r i n c i p l e s as fundamental, valued guides to action. That i s to say that persons would, perceive that, for example, the p r i n c i p l e of freedom of choice would or would not contain an i n d i v i d u a l ' s r i g h t to think, f e e l , and behave i n any way she or he feels f i t , as long as to do so does not cause harm to others. Therefore, the p r i n c i p l e s were seen to be general statements or propositions under which one's position on various s p e c i f i c issues would f a l l or from which they could be deduced. The names we assigned the seven p r i n c i p l e s were« 1) I Freedom of Choice 2) II Population Pressures 3) III Individual from Conception 29 4) IV Equity 5) V Sanctity of L i f e 6) VI S o c i a l Innovations 7) VII Mental and Physical Health For each of the p r i n c i p l e s , we assumed a v a r i e t y of s p e c i f i c issues would e x i s t (see Table 1). We also assumed that some p r i n c i p l e s would overlap and that therefore, some issues would be relevant f o r more than one p r i n c i p l e . For example, p r i n c i p l e I, Freedom of Choice, not only suggests that a person should (or should not, depending.1 upon'an indiv i d u a l ' s opinion) be allowed to choose his,o r her own way of l i f e , i t also suggests that a l l persons should be considered equal, p r i n c i p l e IV, Equity. Therefore, s p e c i f i c issues could be subsumed under more than one p r i n c i p l e and more than one p r i n c i p l e could contain s p e c i f i c issues, which could be perceived by respondents as either pro or con. The p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c issues then, were seen,to be connected in a v a r i e t y of ways, as outlined by Table 1. The t o t a l number of assumed relationships between the seven p r i n c i p l e s , represented by twenty-eight s p e c i f i c issues, was eighty-three. b) Coding and Scoring of the Questionnaire The coding of questionnaires was prepared according to the respondents' answers to the questions, i n the categories of "yes", "no", "don't know", and "no answer". In some eases, respondents chose to add comments by way of q u a l i f y i n g some 30 of the questions. Scores were based upon an i n d i v i d u a l ' s response to each p r i n c i p l e and i t s related issues. For example, i n the case of p r i n c i p l e I, Freedom of Choice, which had fourteen related issues, an i n d i v i d u a l could receive a score out of f i f t e e n . In order to give a score to those questions which respondents answered by adding, q u a l i f y i n g comments, we decided to place the responses i n a "yes", "no", or "don't know" category. For example, i n the case of question 12, "The use of i l l i c i t drugs should be a crime", a, respondent q u a l i f i e d her answer by saying, "I do not know what i l l i c i t means, but I do not think that the use of marijuanai or such l i k e drugs should be i l l e g a l " . Therefore, we placed!the answer in the "no" category of response to the question rather than i n the "don't know" category. In another case, a respondent answered question 17, "Abortion should be available on demand", by saying "as long as i t doesn't become a form of b i r t h -c ontrol". In t h i s instance, we placed the response i n the "yes" category because i t seemed that the respondent was more in agreement with the issue than i n disagreement. Because Respondents did not receive a score f o r a "don't know" answer, we t r i e d , where possible, to place them i n t o a "yes" or "no" category. The following table provides the score of ; each subject, according to the group represented, as well as the mean score f o r each group. 31 TABLE 2 SCORES OF ALL SUBJECTS WHO COMPLETED THE QUESTIONNAIRE, ACCORDING TO GROUP GROUP: C.U.E. W.C. Soc. 210 W.S. 222 Q U E S T I 39 0 40 N 41 N 42 A 43 1 44 R E 46 S 48 48 C 0 50 50 R 51 51 (4) E 52 S 54 56 57 57 29 29 30 (2) 31 33 33 35 39 39 41 (3) 42 43 (3) 44 (4) 44 45 45 (2) 46 (2) 46 (2) 47 47 (3) 48 (2) 48 (4) 49 (3) 49 (3) 50 (2) 50 (2) 51 51 (2) 52 (2) 53 54 55 59 Total Group Score 480 542 1360 1249 To"fcsiX Responses 10 11 31 27 Group Mean Score 48.0 49.3 43.9 46.3 (Please note that numbers appearing i n parentheses indicate more than one person with the same score.) 32 » . • Therefore, each person received a score out of a possible eighty-three, which was the number of s p e c i f i c relationships between the seven p r i n c i p l e s and the twenty-eight s p e c i f i c issues. A l l scores were recorded by the use of a computer. Scores obtained ranged from twenty-nine to f i f t y - n i n e , out of a possible eighty^three. A f t e r a l l the questionnaires had been coded and scored, they were matched up with their f i r s t page upon which had been provided the names and telephone numbers of those persons who had volunteered to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the laboratory experiments. Of the t o t a l of forty-one persons who were w i l l i n g to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the experiments, twenty-three f e l l i n to a range which represented both the highest and lowest scores, i . e . twelve persons f e l l within the lower score of 29-44 i n c l u s i v e , eleven persons f e l l within the higher range of 50-57 i n c l u s i v e . Of the twenty-seven persons e l i g i b l e to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the laboratory experiments, a f i n a l t o t a l of eighteen a c t u a l l y did so. This group represented nine persons with a more wel l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure and nine with a l e s s w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure. . c) Administration of the Questionnaire The questionnaire (see Appendix A) was administered to a t o t a l of eighty-three persons. Although a l l of the *(The author wishes to thank a l l of the persons who completed the questionnaire.) 33 questionnaires were returned, only seventy-nine were received i n time to be coded and scored f o r the computer program. The four groups of subjects that were chosen to complete the questionnaire were a l l based on the U.B.C. campus and were selected, as stated e a r l i e r , because i t was thought, that they would provide us with a broad range of articulatedness of value structure required to tes t the hypothesis. The questionnaires were administered a f t e r we had made arrangements to, speak to the groups concerned. We usually discussed, the project b r i e f l y , without going into great d e t a i l as to i t s nature, so as not to influence the responses of those whoiswould l a t e r be chosen to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the laboratory experiments. The project was introduced as a study of d i f f e r e n t types of values. Questionnaires were then given to a l l those persons who requested them and were usually returned to us that day. In a few cases, questionnaires were returned at a l a t e r date. A l l questionnaires were numbered f o r future reference, although subjects did not provide t h e i r name or telephone numbers unless they were w i l l i n g to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the laboratory experiments. A t o t a l of forty-one persons volunteered to p a r t i c i p a t e ihsthe experiments. In order to ensure anonymity, the top copy of each questionnaire, that part which contained subjects' names and telephone numbers, was removed p r i o r to coding and scoring of responses, i n order to avoid the p o s s i b i l i t y of bias i n t h i s procedure. 34 When the coding and scoring was completed, those questionnaires which were chosen to provide subjects who would be asked to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the laboratory experiments were matched up with t h e i r corresponding number of the top copy. Both questionnaires and the top copies were kept i n separate f i l e s . 2) Laboratory Experiment As we stated e a r l i e r , our dependent variable of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence was measured by the laboratory experiment. This laboratory experiment consisted of a task-oriented s i t u a t i o n which required that subjects would discuss two topics with three other persons. These discussions took place i n the Anthropology/Sociology small groups laboratory and were video-taped with the p r i o r knowledge of the subject. a) S u s c e p t i b i l i t y to Influence Our task i n the laboratory experiments was to see i f , as our hypothesis predicted, persons with a well-articulated value structure would be less susceptible to influence than those with a less well-articulated value structure. Therefore, although there were four persons i n each experiment, only one, the naive subject, was t r u l y behaving according to her own b e l i e f s and f e e l i n g s . The other three subjects were confederates and acted according to previous in s t r u c t i o n s . 3 5 The point of the experiment was to test the s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence of the naive subjects, when pressure to change was directed towards them from the other three persons, the confederates. b) Physical Set-Up of the Laboratory Experiment (see Appendix C) Prior to the experiments, subjects were telephoned and asked to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the laboratory experiments. They were not told i t s nature, merely that i t involved th e i r having a discussion with some other women. A schedule of twenty experiments was prepared, although two people subsequently could not attend. A t o t a l of eighteen experiments were thus conducted. P r i o r to the experiments, we met with the confederates in order to rehearse the experiments. Although some Confederates were well-rehearsed, others were not, due to, lack of time. (For a further discussion of some of the problems encountered i n the research design, please see Chapter V.) Some confederates were already acquainted with each otherj others were not. In about three cases, one confederate, not the same one each time, had been acquainted b r i e f l y with the naive subject, although t h i s was avoided whenever possible so as not to influence the res u l t s of the experiments. When subjects came into the laboratory reception area, they were asked whether they had come to pa r t i c i p a t e i n an 36 i experiment, and were b r i e f l y introduced to the other three "subjects" (confederates) i f they were a l l there at the same time. Some confederates came into the area a f t e r the naive subject} others were there when she arrived. This procedure was u t i l i z e d to ensure that the naive subject would not suspect that the others might have p r i o r knowledge of the s i t u a t i o n . When a l l four persons had arrived, they were taken into one of the a c t i v i t y rooms and asked to s i t around a table with only four chairs surrounding i t . The naive subject was always seated to the d i r e c t l e f t of the experimenter. This seating arrangement allowed us to control the subsequent events by ensuring that the naive subject always sat i n the same place, that she was always observed by at least,one camera, and that the discussions would always begin with the naive subject. In t h i s way, the experimenter could always say, "you are on my l e f t y (names naive subject), why don't you, begin t h i s discussion". The confederates would then respond to the naive subject i n accordance with t h e i r scripted i n s t r u c t i o n s . Although we always began the f i r s t discussion topic with the naive subject, we always began the second topic with confederate #1, so as to avoid the naive subject becoming suspicious, i f she were to be c a l l e d upon each time to begin. Subjects were always informed that a one-way mirror i n the room enabled the experimenter to observe the discussions, 37 • i and that video cameras were also i n the room. Naive subjects were always seated d i r e c t l y i n front of the table microphone and t o l d something to the ef f e c t of *they had the quietest voice that might not be picked up on the tape recorder.' Once i n the a c t i v i t y room of the laboratory, the sequence of explaining the task to the subjects was the same i n a l l cases. c) Research Procedures As stated previously, the laboratory experiments were held i n the U.B.C. Anthropology/Sociology small groups laboratory. This location for t e s t i n g the hypothesis was chosen because i t allowed for the utmost control of the environment i n which the subjects would be engaged i n face-to-face i n t e r a c t i o n . These controls included! , i ) the positioning of subjects i n such a way that t h e i r behaviour could be observed and filmed on video-tape i i ) the use of the three confederates to pressure the naive subject to change her opinion. The choice of using the three confederates, and not more,or l e s s , was based upon Soloman Asch's (1955) experiments which indicated that "further increases in the size of the majority apparently did not increase the weight of the pressure s u b s t a n t i a l l y . C l e a r l y the siz e of the opposition i s important only up to a point." 38 i i i ) the number of times each confederate spoke to another confederate or the naive subject, i n order to avoid any one person from seeming to control the communication iv ) the length of time each experiment would continue, e<. no more than f i f t e e n minutes per topic v) the date, time and place of each experiment These, then, were some Of the controls used to create an environment i n which the hypothesis could be tested under the most ideal conditions. In other words, i t was necessary to control the experiments i n such a way as to ensure that pressure to change was exerted and that i t was possible for d i f f e r e n t i a l amounts of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence to occur. The two topics werei i ) Should women have the r i g h t to terminate unwanted pregnancies at t h e i r own choice? ; i i ) Should the government expand the medicare program and make i t free to those who cannot afford i t ? These two topics were chosen because they had both been represented under one or more of the p r i n c i p l e s and because the subject matter had been raised, although not i n the same way, by the questionnaire. Therefore, we had some p r i o r knowledge of each subject's general response to each of the two topics. We were thus able to u t i l i z e t h i s information when providing instructions to the confederates on how to behave i n the experiments. In Chapter IV, Results, we w i l l 39 discuss i n more d e t a i l the d i f f e r e n t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between subjects' responses to the two topics p r i o r to, during, and a f t e r the experiments. ( Although we chose subjects f o r which we had ,some p r i o r i n d i c a t i o n of response, we did not want the topics to seem too s i m i l a r to the respondents. Therefore, although the f i r s t topic was concerned with the issue of abortion, i t was not so c l e a r l y stated as question 17 of the questionnaire. The second topic was chosen because i t seemed unrelated to the f i r s t . Therefore, i n l i n e with the process suggested by the theory, we wanted to t e s t whether persons with d i f f e r e n t degrees of articulatedness of value structure would be susceptible to influence with respect to either topic. I t w i l l be remembered from our previous discussion i n t h i s chapter that we assumed that the two groups, C.U.E. and W.C., would hold higher degrees of articulatedness with respect to the issue of abortion than the other two groups, Soc. 210 and W.S. 222. In addition, we predicted that the higher the l e v e l of articulatedness, the l e s s susceptible to influence persons would be, regardless of the discussion topic. Therefore, i n order to e f f e c t i v e l y test the hypothesis i n regard to the u t i l i t y of the theory, as a means to explain the process of articulatedness of value structure and i t s e f f e c t on s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence, i t was necessary that we included i n our research design, the two seemingly unrelated topics. 40 With respect to the assumptions stated e a r l i e r i n t h i s chapter, a set of seven questions was asked of each naive subject a f t e r the experiments were concluded. In order to gain further information as to the usefulness and v a l i d i t y of the assumptions, the following questions were asked i i ) age i i ) marital atatus i i i ) number of children ( i f any) iv) occupation ( i f other than, or as well as student) v) year of school v i ) major and year of studies v i i ) f a culty The four groups that were chosen to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the research were represented i n the following manner (Table 3)* TABLE 3 GROUPS REPRESENTED IN THE LABORATORY EXPERIMENT Group completed questionnaire w i l l i n g to par t i c i p a t e a c t u a l l y participated C.U.E. 10 7 4 W. C. 11 + 4 = 15* 9 7 Soc. 210 31 14 5 W.S. 222 27 11 2 Total 79 + k = 83 41 18 Although a t o t a l of f i f t e e n questionnaires were completed by t h i s group, only eleven were received i n time to be coded and scored for use i n the subsequent experiments. i 41 As previously stated, subjects were chosen according to t h e i r o v e r a l l score on the questionnaire as well as on t h e i r a v a i l a b i l i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the experiments during the two week period from March 31 to A p r i l 15$ 1977. Chapter III Footnotes 1 Milton Rokeach, B e l i e f s , Attitudes and Values, San Franciscoj Jossey-Bass, 19&8, p. 160. 2 Soloman E. Asch, "Opinions and S o c i a l Pressure?, Small Groups Studies i n S o c i a l Interaction, ed., Paul A. Hare, Edgar F. Borgatta, Robert F. Bales, New Yorki A l f r e d A. Knopf, 1965, p. 320. CHAPTER IV RESULTS Our intentions i n the presentation of the r e s u l t s of our experiments are two-fold. In the f i r s t instance, we want to use the r e s u l t s , c o l l e c t e d from the laboratory experiments, to test the hypothesis discussed i n Chapter II of t h i s thesis. In the second instance, we want to discuss the r e s u l t s of the questionnaire responses and t h e i r implications for a further understanding of the concept of value structure. The l a t t e r w i l l be discussed only b r i e f l y i n t h i s chapter of the thesis. The reason f o r t h i s i s that although the analysis of the data, with respect to the actual scores, was completed p r i o r to the laboratory experiments i n order that subjects could be chosen to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the experiments, our analysis of the questionnaire data has been an on-going process which has continued up to the present %ime and which was begun subsequent to the laboratory experiments. I t would seem more appropriate therefore, that the questionnaire r e s u l t s be discussed i n more d e t a i l i n the concluding chapter of t h i s t h e s i s . A) Process by Which Subjects Were Chosen to P a r t i c i p a t e i n the Laboratory Experiments As stated previously, subjects who participated i n the laboratory experiments were chosen on the basis oft 42 43 1) t h e i r score on the questionnaire 2) t h e i r willingness to p a r t i c i p a t e 3) t h e i r a v a i l a b i l i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e during the time span, March 31 to A p r i l 15, 1977. The set of tables, which can be found i n Appendix D, provides the score of each subject according to which group each represented, as well as the mean score f o r each group. These tables, then, provide the scores df a l l subjects according to the groups represented. I t was from such a scoring table that the eighteen subjects used i n the laboratory experiments were chosen. In order to test the hypothesis, i t was necessary to choose subjects who would most suitable represent the extremes of articulatedness of value structure. Therefore, fo r a more wel l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure, a high score was designated, according to the overa l l scores, to be between 50 and 57. The high score was o r i g i n a l l y designated to be between 50 and 59, hut the person with the l a t t e r score was unable to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the experiments. A less well-a r t i c u l a t e d value structure, represented by a low score, was designated, according to the o v e r a l l scores, to be between 29 and 44. Table 4 provides the rank-ordering of each subject, i n terms of score, and shows where the l i n e s f e l l between high and low. 44 TABLE 4 RANKINGS OF SUBJECTS WHO SCORED "HIGH" AND "LOW" ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE GROUP i C.U.E. w . c . Soc. 210 W.S. 222 29 29 30 (2) 31 LOW 33 33 35 Q SCORES 39 39 39 U 29-44 40 41 41 (3) E S 42 42 T 43 43 (3) I 44 44 (4) 44 0 N N-A I R E S C 0 R E S 46 48 48 45 46 (2) 47 48 (2) 49 (3) 45 46 47 48 49 (2) (2) (3) (4) (3) HIGH SCORES 50-59* 50 51 52 56 57 50 51 (4) 54 57 50 (2) 51 53 54 55 50 (2) 51 (2) 52 (2) 59 (Please note that numbers appearing i n parentheses indicate more than one person with the same score.) For the experiments, high scores were designated to be between 50 and 57, due to the u n a v a i l a b i l i t y of the subject with the score of 59. 45 Thus, having chosen the subjects to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the experiments, our next task was to conduct the experiments and to analyze the data i n the l i g h t of our hypothesis. B) Results Obtained from the Laboratory Experiments ? I t w i l l be r e c a l l e d from Chapter II that the hypothesis being tested was the following. Persons with a more wel l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure (high, as measured by responses to the questionnaire) w i l l be less susceptible to influence when int e r a c t i n g with others. Persons with a less well-a r t i c u l a t e d value structure (low, as measured by responses to the questionnaire) w i l l be more susceptible to influence when in t e r a c t i n g with others. I t w i l l be remembered that, i n order to t e s t the hypothesis, a series of eighteen laboratory experiments were conducted i n which subjects were asked to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the discussion of two topics. During the discussions, pressure to change th e i r opinions was exerted by the confederates upon the naive subjects without t h e i r knowledge of the c o n t r o l , s i t u a t i o n . The results of the experiments were as follows (Table 5) * 46 TABLE 5 RESULTS OF THE LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS Score Quest. Lab. Lab. Susceptible Subject's response response response to Influence Group p r i o r to p r i o r to a f t e r Exp. on Exp. on Exp. on Topic Topic Topic #1 #2 #1 #2 #1 #2 Low 29 DK A D A A D yes, #1. #2 Soc. 210 33 DK D A A D D yes, #1. #2 W.S. 222 39 DK A A D D A yes, #1. #2 Soc. 210 39 A A A A A A no, #1, #2 C.U.E. 42 A A A A A A no, #1, #2 w.c. 43 DK DK A A A D no, #1, yes, #2, Soc. 210 43 A A A A A - A no, #1. #2 w.c. 43 D A D A D A no, #1. #2 Soc. 210 44 A A A A A A no, #1, #2 Soc. 210 High 50 A A A A A A no, #1. #2 w.c. 50 A A A A A A no, #1, #2 W.S. 222 51 A A A A A A no, #1, #2 W.C. 51 A A A A A A no, #1. #2 W.C. 51 A A A A A A no, #1. #2 W.C. 52 A A A A A A no, #1. #2 C.U.E. 56 A A r A A A A no. #1. #2 C.U.E. 57 A A A A A A no, #1. #2 W.C. 57 A A A A A A no, #1. #2 C.U.E. Please notet the following abbreviations are used i n Table %% Quest, f o r questionnaire A f o r agree Lab. f o r laboratory D f o r disagree Exp. f o r experiment DK fo r don't know 47 1) S p e c i f i c Predictions As can be seen from Table 5, our hypothesis i s confirmed i n fourteen out of eighteen cases. That i s to say, i n a l l nine cases where subjects had a high score on the questionnaire and therefore a we l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure, according to our d e f i n i t i o n , they were not susceptible to influence when in t e r a c t i n g with others. On the other hand, i n the nine cases where parti c i p a n t s had a low score and therefore a les s w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure, according to our d e f i n i t i o n , our hypothesis was not confirmed, i n that f i v e out of the nine cases were not susceptible to influence. I t w i l l be remembered that our hypothesis predicted that persons with a les s w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure would be more susceptible to influence, but, i n fact, only four out of nine cases were seen to be so. Although our hypothesis was refuted i n f i v e out of eighteen cases, i t was supported by our data i n fourteen out of eighteen.cases, thereby providing support for our theory as a useful instrument by which to explain the phenomenon of v a r i a t i o n i n s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. 2) Analysis of the Data Collected from the Laboratory  Experiments Our task i n the analysis of our r e s u l t s c o l l e c t e d from the laboratory experiments i s to attempt to account f o r the discrepancies between the res u l t s we a c t u a l l y obtained and 48 those predicted by our hypothesis. I t should be noted that our attempts to explain the inconsistent findings are based upon speculation at t h i s point and not upon empirical evidence. As can be seen from Table 5, a high l e v e l of consistency occurred among most subjects i n regard to t h e i r responses to the discussion topics, both on the questionnaire and immediately p r i o r to the experiments. In other words, thirteen subjects were consistent i n t h e i r responses, regardless of whether to the questionnaire or just p r i o r to the laboratory experiment. Among the nine cases with a less well-articulated value structure are the four cases which confirmed our hypothesis. These four cases did not seem to have a consistent structure of values i n regard to the two discussion topics. The other f i v e cases with less w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structures, who were not susceptible to influence, seemed to hold consistent views i n regard to the two discussion topics. They also seemed to r e t a i n these views over a period of time, from t h e i r response to the questionnaire to t h e i r involvement i n the laboratory experiments. The four persons who changed t h e i r views appeared to do so over t h i s same period of time, i . e . approximately four weeks. Please see Table 5. We predicted that none °f those persons with a w e l l -a r t i c u l a t e d value structure, i . e . the high scores, would change t h e i r views and, i n fact, none of them did so. Therefore, i n t h i s instance, our hypothesis was confirmed. 49 We also predicted that a l l of those persons with a l e s s w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure, i . e . the low scores, would, i n f a c t , change t h e i r views, hut i n t h i s instance, only four out of the nine did so. In t h i s second instance, our hypothesis was not confirmed. However, although we chose the highest and lowest scoring subjects to p a r t i c i p a t e i n our laboratory experiment, we cannot be sure of the precision of our new instrument and therefore, that the l i n e we drew between the highest and lowest scores i s the r i g h t one which would predict s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. In these circumstances, i t i s nevertheless somewhat impressive that the three persons who did change t h e i r opinion on both issues received the lowest scores, and that the person who changed on only one topic also received a reasonably low score. I t must also be remembered that we exerted influence f o r only f i f t e e n minutes instead of the usual t h i r t y minutes. This may mean that only those with very low scores would be susceptible to influence i n those circumstances. I t i s also possible that had we t r i e d to exert influence over a longer period of time, perhaps those with s l i g h t l y higher scores, implying a higher degree of artieulatedness of value structure, would also have been susceptible to influence. I f we examine the four cases which confirmed our; hypothesis, those subjects with low scores who were susceptible to influence, we f i n d that the subjects represent 50 the two groups which the theory and the previously-mentioned assumptions predicted would toe more susceptible to influence. S i m i l a r l y , we see that the f i v e cases which did not support the hypothesis represent mostly those groups which the theory and assumptions predict would be l e s s susceptible to influence. Another possible cause fo r the d i f f e r i n g responses i n regard to our hypothesis may have been that our questionnaire was not an adequate measuring instrument f o r inconsistency i n value structure. Stated i n another way, the questionnaire was designed,to t e s t the consistency between answers to p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c issues; i t did not include a set of seemingly inconsistent issues or p r i n c i p l e s . Naturally, i f answers were not consistent, they were inconsistent, the point being that we did not provide a category on the questionnaire f o r respondents' comments on the general notion of value structure. The r e s u l t i s that, although we do have some cle a r i n d i c a t i o n of what a value structure might be, we s t i l l require more information as to what a value structure might not be. I f we apply these comments to our f i v e inconsistent cases, i t i s , l i k e l y that these subjects held, or did not hold, value structures based upon a set of s p e c i f i c issues and p r i n c i p l e s d i f f e r e n t from those we gave on the questionnaire. Other possible reasons for our inconsistent data are. , a) Discussion Topics Although we assumed that the two topics chosen, namelyi 51 i ) should women have the r i g h t to terminate unwanted pregnancies of t h e i r own choice? i i ) should the government expand the medicare :program and make i t free to those who cannot afford i t ? were f a m i l i a r to most of the persons who completed the questionnaire, i t i s l i k e l y that i n the f i v e cases which did not conform to the hypothesis, the subject matter of the discussion topics was not as f a m i l i a r , or of as much i n t e r e s t , as we had assumed. On the other hand, i t i s also possible that these f i v e subjects knew more about the two topics than we did, and therefore, our confederates were not as a r t i c u l a t e on the topics as the naive subjects. In f a c t , t h i s seemed to be so i n three cases, (C.U.E., score 39, W.C., score 42, W.C., score 43), where the naive subjects were very a r t i c u l a t e on the topics, e s p e c i a l l y i n regard to the f i r s t topic of abortion which, i t would be natural to assume, would be much discussed by the two groups of G.U.E. and W.C, b) Better Training of Confederates Due to the lack of time and the f a c t that the school term was drawing to an end, i t was d i f f i c u l t to f i n d people who were w i l l i n g to devote several hours as confederates i n the laboratory experiments. Therefore, several people, fe (The author would l i k e to thank the following people who gave a great deal of t h e i r time to the experiments: Linda Bailey, Noga Gayle, Verna H a l l , Fran Isaacs, Ruby Kalmakoff, Debbie Pearse, J i l l Thomas, and Ginette Vogel.) 52 thirteen i n number, were used as confederates. Some of them performed only once, while other participated frequently, i n some cases, as much as twelve hours. The r e s u l t of the uneven d i s t r i b u t i o n of rehearsal time f o r confederates was that some were more e f f e c t i v e than others at performing t h e i r task, , which was to exert influence on the naive subject. These, then, are a few of the possible reasons why the hypothesis was confirmed i n only fourteen out of the eighteen cases. In order to see what, i f any, v a l i d i t y can be given to these explanations, we intend to re-administer our changed questionnaire, bearing i n mind inconsistencies i n the data. The re-administration of the questionnaire, as well as changes i n i t s format, w i l l be discussed i n the f i n a l chapter of t h i s t h e s i s . C) The Implications of the Results f o r Our Assumptions Our assumptions stated that the two groups, C.U.E. and W.C., as compared to the other two groups, Soc. 210 and W.S. 222, would have more frequently confronted opposing views on the question of abortion, and therefore, would have developed more well-articulated value structures i n that p a r t i c u l a r regard than the members of the other two groups u t i l i z e d i n the experiments. Our assumptions also stated that the,C.U.E. (The assumptions were stated somewhat d i f f e r e n t l y i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l form on pp. 22 and 23 of t h i s t h e s i s . The way they are stated here does not a l t e r t h e i r content, but does put them i n a more succinct and cohesive form.) i 53 group members, compared to the other three groups, would hold more well-articulated value structures than any other group because they had experienced more confrontation and opposition to t h e i r views over a longer period of time than any other group members. As can be seen from Table 6, the assumptions were correct i n that the C.U.E. and W.C. groups both received a higher mean score than the other two groups u t i l i z e d i n the study. The assumption that stated that the C.U.E. groupswould hold the most well-articulated value structure was not wholly supported by our dataj t h i s group's mean score was 48.0, whereas the group with the highest mean score of 49.3.was W.C. TABLE 6 MEAN SCORES FOR ALL SUBJECTS WHO COMPLETED THE QUESTIONNAIRE, ACCORDING TO GROUP Group Total Group Score Total Respondents Group Mean Score C.U.E. 480 10 48.0 W.C. 542 11 49.3 Soc. 210 1360 31 43.9 W.S. 222 1249 27 46.3 A l l Respondents 3629 79 45.9 (Group mean scores were obtained by adding a l l the scores of group members and d i v i d i n g that t o t a l by the number of group members. The group mean score f o r the entire study was obtained by adding a l l the t o t a l group scores and d i v i d i n g by the sum of the t o t a l number of participants.) 54 D) Summary The data that have been analyzed i n t h i s chapter show support f o r our hypothesis i n fourteen out of eighteen cases i n which i t was tested. That i s . those persons who held a we l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure were not as susceptible to influence when in t e r a c t i n g with others as were those persons with a less w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure. The r e s u l t s of our data also show that those subjects with a we l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure were more consistent i n regard to the views on the two topics, regardless of whether i n r e l a t i o n to the questionnaire or immediately p r i o r to and following the laboratory experiments. That i s , a l l of those who were susceptible to influence i n our experiments had the lowest scores on the questionnaire and therefore had the l e a s t well-a r t i c u l a t e d value structures. On the other hand, a l l of those who re s i s t e d attempts to influence them had higher scores on the questionnaire and therefore had more wel l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structures (with only one exception where the score was 39J please see Table 5 ) . However, we did not obtain a very high rate of influence i n our experiments. We had anticipated that a large number of those with r e l a t i v e l y low scores, and thus less w e l l -a r t i c u l a t e d value structures, would have been more influenced than i n f a c t were. This meant that, of the nine cases with r e l a t i v e l y low scores, only four cases were susceptible to influence. 55 We discussed our data with respect to our assumptions and found that the C.U.E. and W.C. groups were, i n f a c t , l e s s susceptible to influence than the Soc. 210 or W.S. 222 groups, thus confirming our assumption. In analyzing our data, we can see that our hypothesis provides support f o r our theory i n a t o t a l of fourteen out of eighteen cases. CHAPTER V CONCLUSION In t h i s chapter of the thesis, we are concerned with bringing together a l l the points discussed i n the preceding chapters, with respect to the concepts of value structure and s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. In addition, we want to discuss the questionnaire r e s u l t s , some future implications fo r t h i s type of research, and some of the weaknesses that can be found i n the present research. The content of t h i s f i n a l chapter, then, w i l l be as follows i A) summary of the th e o r e t i c a l task of the present research study B) discussion of the questionnaire r e s u l t s C) presentation of some of the weaknesses of the present research and a discussion of some of the work currently being undertaken to increase the effectiveness of the questionnaire D) discussion of the implications suggested by the research E) concluding remarks A) Summary of the Theoretical Task of the Present Research  Study In the preceding chapters, we presented a th e o r e t i c a l framework from which we derived our hypothesis. This 56 57 th e o r e t i c a l framework includes the propositions that persons hold d i f f e r i n g degrees of artieulatedness of value structure depending upon to what extent they have gone through a process i n which they come into contact with views d i f f e r e n t from t h e i r own which leads them to confrontation, argument, opposition, and f i n a l l y , a r t i c u l a t i o n of t h e i r own views. Our hypothesis states that persons with a we l l -a r t i c u l a t e d value structure w i l l be les s susceptible to influence than persons with a l e s s well-articulated value structure. In order to obtain some measure of the varying degrees of the artieulatedness of a value structure atperson might hold, we designed a questionnaire. The questionnaire was constructed a f t e r a set of p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c issues had been selected, f o r which a v a r i e t y of l o g i c a l r e lationships were assumed to exi s t . The questionnaires were then administered to groups who, we assumed, would represent a va r i e t y of artieulatedness i n value structure, e s p e c i a l l y with respect to the topic of abortion. From the questionnaire, persons were then selected, on the basis of t h e i r d i f f e r i n g scores, to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the laboratory experiments where pressure to change t h e i r opinions was exerted towards them from three other persons (confederates). In t h i s s i t u a t i o n , the experiments tested the hypothesis. By u t i l i z i n g subjects we assumed had well and les s w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structures, we could then attempt to determine t h e i r degrees of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. 58 The r e s u l t s of our experiments confirmed our hypothesis with respect to those persons who received higher scores on the questionnaire, and therefore, according to our d e f i n i t i o n , were assumed to hold w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structures, who were subsequently l e s s susceptible to influence. In addition, those persons who received lower scores on the questionnaire, and therefore, according to our d e f i n i t i o n , were assumed to hold less well-articulated value structures, subsequently were more susceptible to influence, i n the s i t u a t i o n of our laboratory experiments. B) Discussion of the Questionnaire Results When we designed our questionnaire, we assumed that s p e c i f i c issues were related to each other and to general p r i n c i p l e s t we posed these as questions on our questionnaire. That i s to say, we assumed that these relationships represented a set of l o g i c a l l y i n t e r - r e l a t e d opinions or views which we chose to c a l l a value structure. We devised the questionnaires with a set of p r i n c i p l e s and issues,which we previously assumed were related to each other i n c e r t a i n ways. However, the individuals who answered the questionnaire, gave responses that were d i f f e r e n t from the ones we had expected to receive; t h i s occurred i n some, not a l l cases. The questionnaire sometimes e l i c i t e d responses that were not necessarily i n accord with the rela t i o n s h i p s we assumed existed between the p r i n c i p l e s and the s p e c i f i c issues. 59 The d i f f e r i n g responses were more evident under some p r i n c i p l e s than under others. For example, the p r i n c i p l e s , Sanctity of L i f e , V, and S o c i a l Innovations, VI, yielded more responses d i f f e r e n t from the ones we had expected than did p r i n c i p l e I, Freedom of Choice, or any of the other four p r i n c i p l e s . We also found that the s p e c i f i c issues of abortion, drug use, seat b e l t s , alcohol, suicide, euthanasia, immigration, rel o c a t i o n , c h i l d ' s r i g h t s , treatment of fetus, "morning a f t e r " p i l l , family allowance, day-care, and school meals caused more d i f f e r i n g responses than the other issues. In addition, the s p e c i f i c issues of immigration, relocation, and treatment of fetus e l i c i t e d more d i f f e r i n g responses under more p r i n c i p l e s than any other issues. I t might be specualted that one of the reasons f o r the responses being d i f f e r e n t from what we had expected them to be, i s . t h a t those respondents' value structures or set of relationships were d i f f e r e n t from ours. Or, i t might be that t h e i r degree of artieulatedness of value structure was such that they did not perceive the relationships between the s p e c i f i c issues and p r i n c i p l e s , i . e . that such persons would hold l e s s , w e l l -a r t i c u l a t e d value structures. What we had hoped would emerge from the questionnaire responses was that persons would be more or less consistent i n t h e i r answers i n terms of the relationships between p r i n c i p l e s and issues, which would point to the degree of artieulatedness of value structure. Therefore, we assumed 6© that i f persons consistently held opinions or consistently did not hold them, we could then predict t h e i r subsequent s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. In order to account f o r some of the differences i n our assumed responses and the actual responses, we analyzed the data i n terms of attempting to explain some of the possible causes. I t seems l i k e l y that the following problems may have beeny. i n part, responsible. 1) The Wording of the Questionnaire , In order to decide whether the wording of some of the questions was ambiguous or unclear, we examined each questionnaire response with regard to the types of q u a l i f y i n g comments offered by the respondents i n t h e i r chosen answer to the question. In other words, we wanted to know what the respondent needed to add or subtract from the question before she or he could answer i t , and, to what extent agreement existed among respondents i n terms of needing to add the q u a l i f y i n g comments to questions. Appendix E shows < the number and types of the q u a l i f y i n g comments given by respondents to the questions. I t w i l l be seen from.this appendix that, although there were f i f t e e n questions that respondents f e l t they needed to q u a l i f y , only s i x of these were consistently q u a l i f i e d i n the same manner, whereas the other nine questions e l i c i t e d varying types of q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . Nonetheless, whatever the q u a l i f i c a t i o n , i t does seem l i k e l y that, i n some cases, respondents did not answer as we assumed 61 they would (see Appendix B), because the questions;possibly were not always worded i n a c l e a r manner that they could understand. Incidentally, we should add that a q u a l i f i c a t i o n to a question did not always cause the respondent to answer that question d i f f e r e n t l y from our previous assumption as to how they would answer, although, i n f i f t e e n cases where, q u a l i f i c a t i o n s were provided, there was a v a r i e t y of d i f f e r e n t answers. I f i t was that persons merely did not understand the questions, and thereby provided q u a l i f i c a t i o n s on the possible meaning of the questions, i t would be important to reword those questions that were taken to be ambiguous or unclear. 2) The Assumed Relationships between P r i n c i p l e s and S p e c i f i c  Issues In our questionnaire, we assumed that s p e c i f i c issues, about which people held opinions, could be generally stated. These general statements, which we termed p r i n c i p l e s , could be used to describe more than one s p e c i f i c issue. For example, p r i n c i p l e I, Freedom of Choice, was thought to be an "umbrella" under which would gather several s p e c i f i c and related issues relevant to t h i s p r i n c i p l e . I t w i l l be remembered from Appendix B that we assumed that c e r t a i n s p e c i f i c issues would f a l l under certain p r i n c i p l e s . For example, we assumed that the issue of family allowance, question 20, would be subsumed under p r i n c i p l e s I I , Population Pressure, IV, Equity, and VII, Mental and Physical Health. 62 That i s to say, we scored the answers to question 20 i n accordance with t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p to the three p r i n c i p l e s . However, i t i s possible that either the s p e c i f i c issue of family allowance was not seen to be related to p r i n c i p l e s I I , IV, and VII by a l l respondents, that they did not see a connection between the p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c , or that the s p e c i f i c issue was, i n f a c t , seen by the respondents toi be subsumed under p r i n c i p l e s d i f f e r e n t from the ones we had chosen. For example, i f question 20, "the size of the family allowance should be increased f o r those parents with low incomes", had been included under another p r i n c i p l e , e.g. S o c i a l Innovations, VI, i t i s possible that a lower rate of d i f f e r i n g responses would have occurred with respect to; that issue. The p r i n c i p l e that yielded the highest number of responses d i f f e r e n t from those we had expected, was S o c i a l Innovations, p r i n c i p l e VI. This p a r t i c u l a r p r i n c i p l e also included nineteen s p e c i f i c questions to which respondents chose to add q u a l i f y i n g comments. Of the nineteen s p e c i f i c issues contained i n t h i s p r i n c i p l e , a t o t a l of nine questions were subsequently q u a l i f i e d before a response was supplied. I t should be added here that a l l of the s p e c i f i c issues assumed to be related to p r i n c i p l e VI are also subsumed under one or more of the other s i x p r i n c i p l e s , with the, exception of question 1.9, penology programs, and question 32, innovative education. Neither of these two questions e l i c i t e d 63 a very high rate of d i f f e r i n g answersi question 19, sixteen answers d i f f e r e n t from those we had expected and eight "don't know" 'S{ question 32 , ten d i f f e r i n g answers and four "don't know"'s. I t seems l i k e l y that p r i n c i p l e IV, S o c i a l Innovations, which i s stated i n the questionnaire i n the following wayj "Generally speaking, governments should employ innovative and novel programmes to solve s o c i a l , problems, rather than orthodox and t r a d i t i o n a l types of schemes", i s not s u f f i c i e n t l y defined i n terms of i t s o v e r a l l meaning. To e l i c i t the type of responses we predicted would occur, the question more generally stated would be* 'It i s better to attempt change than not to attempt change'. TABLE 7 TOTAL NUMBER OF RESPONSES DIFFERING FROM THOSE WE HAD EXPECTED Total Issues Total Total Possible Respondents Responses 82 x 79 • 6478 D i f f e r i n g Total Total D i f f e r i n g Responses "Don't Know" Responses Responses 1642 + 586 • 2232 Total D i f f e r i n g Responses = 6478 x 100 = 34.5# rate Total 2232 ~ i ~ Possible Responses 64 Although the number of responses which d i f f e r e d from what we had expected was f a i r l y high, as can he seen from Table 7. the remaining number of responses consistent with our assumptions, 4246, represents 65.5$ of the t o t a l responses. Therefore, these figures indicate that, although not t o t a l l y accurate, our measuring instrument, the questionnaire, did y i e l d a high enough l e v e l of responses i n accord with our assumptions so as to support some of our assumptions about the relationships between p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c issues. C) Presentation of Some of the Weaknesses of the Study,, and a Discussion of Some of the Work being Undertaken to  Increase the EffectTveness~bf the Questionnaire Apart from the problems just discussed with respect to the d i f f e r i n g responses to our questionnaire, other weaknesses i n the study were: 1) inadequate t r a i n i n g of confederates 2) i n s u f f i c i e n t amounts of time allowed for the confederates to influence the naive subject during the laboratory experiments. In the f i r s t instance, with respect to the d i f f e r i n g responses to the questionnaire, a revised questionnaire i s currently being prepared that w i l l re-state some of the questions that were unclear or needed further d e f i n i t i o n . We intend to use a d i f f e r e n t type of administration with the revised questionnaire. In the future, we w i l l t a l k with respondents, i n an interview type of s i t u a t i o n , a f t e r they have completed 65 the questionnaire, i n order that we might obtain further information or comments about the u t i l i t y of the questionnaire as a measure of value structure. In other words, we intend to question the respondents i n d e t a i l about the way they defend t h e i r positions on s p e c i f i c issues to see whether the p a r t i c u l a r value structure appears to be a reasonable representation of the respondent's system of b e l i e f s . In the cases where i t i s not, we s h a l l see i f we can determine from our questioning, the alternative that they use, i f they do. We want to know what the connection i s between the holding of a p a r t i c u l a r set of values and varying degrees of s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. In.order to make our questionnaire more clear and more useful i n determining value structure, we have been engaged in a process of r e l a t i n g p r i n c i p l e s to s p e c i f i c issues i n ways other than at f i r s t assumed. In analyzing our questionnaire r e s u l t s , we found that some s p e c i f i c issues were not answered as we had predicted (see Appendix B). For example, i f we examine th i s appendix, we see that under the f i f t h p r i n c i p l e , Sanctity of L i f e , i t was assumed that the s p e c i f i c issue of aleohol, question 6, would be subsumed. Upon further examination, i t seemed that, judging from our data, the question of alcohol does not necessarily come under the p r i n c i p l e as stated, because alcohol i s not necessarily injurious to l i f e . In other words, we found that some relationships between p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c issues no 66 longer seemed as l i k e l y as we f i r s t had assumed them to be. Our work on the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p r i n c i p l e s and s p e c i f i c issues w i l l be continued as we proceed to administer the revised questionnaire to both those persons who we assume have well-articulated value structures and those-persons who we assume have less w e l l - a r t i c u l a t e d value structures. Our future administration of the questionnaire w i l l be l i m i t e d to our attempts.to learn more about the value structure, what i t might be, how i t occurs, and how i t manifests i t s e l f to others. We do not intend to conduct further laboratory experiments u n t i l we have perfected our questionnaire, so that i t can become a more useful t o o l i n predicting s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. 1) I n s u f f i c i e n t Training of Confederates As stated i n the previous chapter, our confederates were not always well-trained and many did not rehearse t h e i r s c r i p t s p r i o r to the laboratory experiments. Because of the lack of time involved, i t was not always possible to t r a i n confederates e f f e c t i v e l y , because a l l of the confederates, with the exception of two, were un i v e r s i t y students, who had a great deal of work to do before t h e i r courses ended. As a r e s u l t , i t i s possible that pressure to change exerted on the naive subjects would have been more e f f e c t i v e had the confederates received adequate t r a i n i n g . In addition, with regard to the preparation of a s c r i p t f o r confederates to 67 use when p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the experiments, s c r i p t s were only supplied f o r arguments against or i n opposition to the two topics because i t was found, from discussions with the confederates, that they a l l agreed to both topics. Therefore, i t would be more e f f e c t i v e i f the confederates used t h e i r own arguments to defend the topics. Although only three naive subjects took a negative stand on either of the two topics, i t i s l i k e l y that, had the confederates been better scripted i n arguments f o r a p o s i t i v e stand on the topics, they would have been generally better rehearsed f o r t h e i r presentation and more successful i n the influence attempts that they made. 2) I n s u f f i c i e n t Amounts of Time Allowed f o r each Discussion  Topic during the Laboratory Experiments I t w i l l be remembered that the time allowed f o r each discussion topic during the laboratory experiments was f i f t e e n minutes. In most of the experiments of t h i s nature, e.g. those which attempt to cause s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence of one person by others, the usual time a l l o t t e d i s t h i r t y minutes per discussion topic. Had the standard thirty-minute time period been applied i n t h i s case, i t i s possible that more persons would have been susceptible to influence. D) Discussion of the Implications Suggested by the Research I f we assume, even i n the l i g h t of the previously-discussed weaknesses of the study, that our data are f a i r l y 68 r e l i a b l e , then they imply the following! 1) General Implications In support of the propositions suggested by our theory, our data imply« a) that persons who are members of a minority group go through a process i n which they come into contact with views and opinions d i f f e r e n t from t h e i r ownj •. also, that they are exposed to opinions which c o n f l i c t with t h e i r own and are involved i n confrontation with others regarding those views. The r e s u l t of t h i s process causes persons to develop a more well - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure than that held by others who are not members of such groups. b) that persons do hold a va r i e t y of opinions, attitudes, or values, which tend to be l o g i c a l l y related, both to each other and to a set of major p r i n c i p l e s . Our data also indicate that thos persons who hold higher degrees of articulatedness of t h e i r structure of values w i l l be less susceptible to influence than those who hold l e s s e r degrees of articulatedness of value structure. Our data therefore supported our assumptions with regard to that part of a value structure that we chose to examine, namely abortion. That i s to say that we could not examine an entire value structure, so we chose to examine part of i t , 69 i . e . that part represented under the p r i n c i p l e of Freedom of Choice, the s p e c i f i c issue of abortion. Our data supported the hypothesis which was derived from the t h e o r e t i c a l propositions which attempt to account f o r the differences i n s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. That i s , they allow us to predict who w i l l and who w i l l not be susceptible to influence. 2) S p e c i f i c Implications The s p e c i f i c implications of this research are important i n the l i g h t of the groups, C .U.E. and W.C, i n that both of these two groups share the goal which i s to change the s i t u a t i o n of female students, f a c u l t y , and s t a f f on the U.B.C. campus, so that they are more equal with :males. Part of the process of attempting change involves argument f o r one's own views. In other words, the process as outlined by our theory i s applicable to the two groups, C .U.E. and W.C. In order f o r these two groups to obtain t h e i r previously-stated goal, i t i s necessary that they not be susceptible to influence, or seem to be uncertain as regards issues relevant to the equality of women, i f they are to be successful. Therefore, the f a c t that none of the elven subjects who belonged to these two groups was susceptible to influence when pressure to change t h e i r opinions was directed towards, them from others, indicates that these group members w i l l r e s i s t influence attempts. In other words, our data tend to imply that the group goals are being achieved. Had our 70 data not f a l l e n i n the way that they did, these two groups might have had to reorganize t h e i r strategy i n regard to t h e i r attempts to make changes on the U.B.C. campus, E) Concluding Remarks Although t h i s p a r t i c u l a r study u t i l i z e d the small groups laboratory at U.B.C. to test our hypothesis, and although ce r t a i n controls were placed upon the subjects i n the experiments, i t seems l i k e l y that s i m i l a r circumstances could occur i n the "outside" world, i t i s common f o r women's groups to challenge or be challenged by other persons or groups who do not share the goals and opinions of women's groups. Of course, t h i s process i s not only true of women's groups, but i s also true for a l l minority or special i n t e r e s t groups. I f such groups are going to change those aspects of society with which they are d i s s a t i s f i e d , i t i s important that they be aware of t h e i r ways of in t e r a c t i n g with others who are i n opposition to t h e i r views. The small groups laboratory experiments allows those p a r t i c u l a r groups to see that t h e i r behaviour towards other women, who seem to hold opposing views, i s consistent i n regard to t h e i r group objectives. In thi s way, the laboratory experiment presents a microcosmic view of how such circumstances might occur i n a larger, more complex s i t u a t i o n outside of the laboratory. Further implications suggested by our data have to do 71 with ways i n which persons might be caused to be more or less susceptible to influence. For example, our data suggests that the more persons learn to defend and a r t i c u l a t e t h e i r own views, the l e s s susceptible to influence they are l i k e l y to become. As well, persons can develop a more well - a r t i c u l a t e d value structure through p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a process of confrontation and exposure to views d i f f e r e n t from t h e i r own. This process can r e s u l t i n the formulation of a we l l -a r t i c u l a t e d value structure which causes low s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to influence. Another implication of our data, based upon the predictions of our theory, suggests that i f one wants to influence others, one should argue on various i n t e r - r e l a t e d issues rather than on one single issue because such behaviour i s conducive to influencing others. For example, i f a pro-abortionist wants to cause an a n t i - a b o r t i o n i s t to change his or her opinion on that subject, or vice versa, the pro-abor t i o n i s t should argue f o r not only abortion but f©r„other issues-relevant to i t , because, as our theory suggests, values are i n t e r - r e l a t e d , and argument on one issue, e.g. abortion, threatens the entire set of issues or values. Therefore, i t i s possible that, i f a person i s made to question t h e i r entire value structure, they could be caused to be more susceptible to influence on that one issue and perhaps others. 72 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Aronson, E l l i o t t . The S o c i a l Animal. New York. Viking Press, 1972. Asch, S.E. S o c i a l Psychology. New Jerseyt Prentice-Hall, 1952. Berelson, B., L a z e r f i e l d , P.F., McPhee, W.W. Voting> A Study of Opinion Function During a P r e s i d e n t i a l Campaign. CTTicagoi Univ. of Chicago Press, 1954. Berenda, R.W. The Influence of the Group on the Judgements of  Small Children. New Yorkt King's Grown Press, 1950. Berger, Joseph, Conner, Thomas L. f F i s i e k , M. Hamit. f i * ^ Expectation States Theory i A Theoretical Framework. Mass.t Wmthrop Publishers, i97%~. Burgoon, M., Heston, J., McGroskey, J. Small Group Communicationi A Functional Approach. New Yorki Holt, Rhinehart and Winston, 1974. Caplow, Theodore. Two Against One. C o a l i t i o n s i n the Triad. New Jerseyi Prentice H a l l , 1968. Cartwright, D., Zander, A. Group Dynamics. New York! Peterson, Row, 1953. C h r i s t i e , R., Geis, F.L. Studies i n Machiavellianism. New Yorki The Academic Press, 1^70. Cooley, Charles H. Human Nature and S o c i a l Order. New York: Scribner & Sons, 1902. . . S o c i a l Process. I l l i n o i s ! Southern I l l i n o i s Univ. Press, 1966. Crosbie, Paul V. Interactions i n Small Groups. New Yorki MacMillan, 1975. Gordon, Chad, Gergen, Kenneth. The S e l f i n S o c i a l Interaction. New Yorki Wiley & Sons,"T9"6BT Hare, Paul A. Handbook of Small GroupfResearch. New Yorki Free Press of GTehcoe, 1962. Hare, Paul A., Borgatta, E.F., Bales, R.F. Small Groupst Studies i n Interaction. New Yorki A l f r e d Knopf, 1955. 73 Hempel, C a r l G. Aspects of S c i e n t i f i c Explanation, New Yorkj Free Press, 1965. Hopkins, Terence. The Exercise of Influence i n Small Groups. New Jerseyi The Bedminster Press, 19oT+. Hovland, Carl I., Janis, I.L. (eds.). Personality and P e r s u a s i b i l i t y . New Havens Yale Univ. Press, 1959. Keis l e r , Sara B., Ke i s l e r , Charles A, Conformity. Reading, Mass .t Addison-Wesley, 1969. King, Stephen W. Communication and S o c i a l Influence. Reading, Mass. t Addison-Wesley, T 9 T 5 . Maccoby, Eleanor E., Newcomb, Theodore M., Hartley, Eugene L., (eds.). Readings i n S o c i a l Psychology. New Yorki Henry Holt, 1958. M i l l s , Theodore M. The Sociology of Small Groups. New Jersey« Prentice -HaH7 19&7. Rokeach, Milton. The Open and Closed Mind. New York* Basic Book, i 960 . . B e l i e f s , Attitudes and Values. San Francisco t Jossey-Bass, 196b. Schroder, H.M., Driver, H.J., Streufert, S, Human Information  Processing. New York» Holt, Rhinehart, Winston, 1967. Stiaehcombe^ Arthur. Constructing S o c i a l Theories. New Yorki Harcourt, Brace, World, 196157, Zander, A l v i n . Motives and Goals i n Groups. New Yorkj Academic Press, 1971. A r t i c l e s Asch, S.E."Effects of Groups Pressure upon the Modification and D i s t o r t i o n of Judgements". Readings i n S o c i a l  Psychology. New Yorki Henry Holt, 1958 » pp. 174-182. Bandura, A., Huston, A.C. " I d e n t i f i c a t i o n as a Process of Incidental Learning". Journal of Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology. 63, 196l, pp. 311-318. Bond, J.R.,.Vinacke,W.E. "Coalitions i n the Mixed-Sex T r i a d " . Sociometry. 24, I96 I, p p . 61-75. 74 Burgoon, M. "The Relationship between Willingness to Manipulate Others and Success i n Two D i f f e r e n t Types of Basic Speech Communication Courses". The Speech Teacher. 20, 1972, pp. 178-183. Carrigan, H.R., Ju l i e n , J.W. "Sex and Bi r t h Order Differences i n Conformity as a Function of Need A f f i l i a t i o n Arousal". Journal of Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology. 51, 1955. pp. 62$-5J6": Cohen, Arthur R. "Some Implications of Self-Esteem f o r S o c i a l Influence". The S e l f i n S o c i a l Interaction. New York: Wiley & Sons7~T9o"BT"ppT 3B3-398T Cloyd, Jerry S. "Small Group as S o c i a l I n s t i t u t i o n " . American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review. 30, 1965, pp. 394-402. Cru t c h f i e l d , R.S. "Conformity and Character". American  Psychologist. 10, 1955, pp. 191-198. Exline, Ralph V. "Effects of Need f o r A f f i l i a t i o n , Sex and the Sight of Others upon I n i t i a l Communications i n Problem-Solving Groups". Journal of Personality. 30, 1962, pp. 541-556. Foulkes, D., Foulkes, S.H. "Self-Concept, Dogmatism, and Tolerance of T r a i t Inconsistency". Journal of  Personal and S o c i a l Psychology. 2, 1965, pp. 104-111. Goffman, Erving. "On Faee-Workj An Analysis of R i t u a l Elements i n S o c i a l Interaction". The S e l f i n S o c i a l Interaction. New Yorkt Wiley & Sons, T$6"8, pp.307-329. Haythorn, Wm., Couch, A., Haefner, M.D., Langham, P. "The Behaviour of Authoritarian and Equ a l i t a r i a n Personalities i n Groups". Human Relations. 6, 1956, pp. 57-73. Hoffman, L., Maier, J. "Sex Differences, Sex Composition and Group Problem Solving". Journal of Abnormal and  S o c i a l Psychology. 63, 1961, pp."4*53-456. L i p p i t t , R., Polansky, N., Rosem, S. "The Dynamics of Powert A F i e l d Study of S o c i a l Influence i n Groups of Children". Human Relations. 5, 1952, pp. 37-64. Lutzker, D.R. "Sex Role, Co-Operation and Competition i n a Tow-Person Non Zero Sum Game". Journal of C o n f l i c t  Resolution. 4, 1961, pp. 386-388~" M i l l e r , G.R., Rokeach, Milton. "Individual Differences and Tolerance f o r Inconsistency". Theories of Cognitive  Consistency. Chicagot Rand-McNalley, 1961T, pp. 624-632. 75 P a t e l , A.A., Gordon, J.E. "Some Personal and S i t u a t i o n a l Determinants of Y i e l d i n g to I n f l u e n c e " . P u b l i c  Opinion Q u a r t e r l y . 27, 1963, pp. 37-62. Polansky, N., L i p p i t t , R., Red l , F. "An I n v e s t i g a t i o n of Behavioural Contagion i n Groups". Human R e l a t i o n s . 3, 1950, pp. 319-348. Robson, R.A.H. "The E f f e c t s of D i f f e r e n t Group Sex Compositions on Support Rates and C o a l i t i o n Formation". The Canadian Review of So c i o l o g y arid Anthropology. F7~1971, pp. 244-262. Rokeach, M i l t o r i . " A u t h o r i t y , A u t h o r i t a r i a n i s m and Conformity". Conformity and D e v i a t i o n . New York. Harper and Row, 1961, pp. 230^237: Rokeach, M i l t o n , McLellan, D a n i e l D. "Feedback of Information about the Values and A t t i t u d e s of S e l f and Others as Determinants of Long-Term C o g n i t i v e and Behavioural Change". Journal of A p p l i e d S o c i a l Psychology, v o l . 1-2, 1971, PP. 236^ 23^  * Sampson, Edward E., Hancock, Francena T. "An Examination of the R e l a t i o n s h i p between O r d i n a l P o s i t i o n , P e r s o n a l i t y , and Conformity". J o u r n a l of B e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l  Psychology. 5-4, 1967, pp. 398-407. S h e r i f , M. "The Coneept of Reference Groups i n Human R e l a t i o n s " . Group R e l a t i o n s a t the Crossroads. New York: Harper and Row, 1953, PP. 703-73T. S i s t r u n k , Frances. "Negro-White Comparisons i n S o c i a l Conformity". J o u r n a l of S o c i a l Psychology. 85, 1971, pp. 77-85. S i s t r u n k , Frances, McDavid, J . "Sex V a r i a b l e s i n Conforming Behaviour". J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l  Psychology. 17, 1971, pp. 200-207. Strodtbeck, F.L., Mann, R.D. "Sex Role D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i n Jury D e l i b e r a t i o n s " . Sociometry. 19, 1956, pp. 3-11. S u e d f i e l d , Peter. " A t t i t u d e Manipulation i n R e s t r i c t e d Environments: 1. Conceptual S t r u c t u r e and Response to Propoganda". J o u r n a l of Abnormal and S o c i a l  Psychology. 68, 1964, pp. 242-246. S u e d f i e l d , P eter, E p s t e i n , Yakov M. " A t t i t u d e s , Values and A s c r i p t i o n of R e s p o n s i b i l i t y : The C a l l e y Case". Journal of S o c i a l Issues. 29, 4, 1973, pp. 63-71. 76 Suedfield, Peter, Rank, Denis A. "Revolutionary. Leaders» Long Term Success as a Function of Changes i n Conceptual Complexity''. Journal of Personality and  S o c i a l Psychology, 34, 2, 1976, pp. 169-178. Wyer, R.S. J r . "Behavioural Correlates of Academic Achievement: Conformity under Achievement and A f f i l i a t i o n - I n c e n t i v e Conditions". Journal of  Personality and S o c i a l Psychology. 6, 1967, pp. 255-268. Zeld i t c h , Morris J r . , Hopkins, Terence K. "Laboratory Experiments with Organizations", A S o c i o l o g i c a l  Reader of Complex Organizations. New Yorki Holt, Rhine-hart," Winston, 1961, pp. 464-479. 77 APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE This questionnaire i s designed to obtain your opinions on a v a r i e t y of issues. There are no r i g h t or wrong answers« we are interested i n your opinions, your attitudes on these questions.~ Please think about your answers c a r e f u l l y before completing each question: we are very anxious to obtain your considered opinion: Unclear Questions: I f you do not understand a question c l e a r l y , please ask the person administering t h i s questionnaire to explain i t to you. In addition, the questions do not r e f e r to what the present s i t u a t i o n i s , or what the law i s at the present time: they are designed to secure your opinions as to what the present s i t u a t i o n should be, or what the law should be. Inadequate Response Categories: I f you do not have an opinion or i f you are very unsure what your attitude i s on any question, please check the right-hand column: we r e a l i s e that for everyone, there are issues upon which they do not have opinions or have not given s u f f i c i e n t consideration i n order to have a firm opinion. In addition, i f you "agree" or "disagree" with the statement i n the question, but only under ce r t a i n conditions, or except i n ce r t a i n circumstances, please indicate these q u a l i f i c a t i o n s i n the appropriate space a f t e r the question. e.g. Everyone over 18 should be allowed to vote. Except i f they are found to be mentally Agree Disagree Don't Know/ Unsure incompetent. V Anonymity: We may wish to contact you again when we begin with the second phase of t h i s research. I f you are agreeable to t h i s , please complete the form at the bottom of t h i s page and we can then connect your numbered questionnaire with the name that you have provided. I f you do not wish to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the second phase, just do not complete the form and we w i l l have no way of connecting your questionnaire with your name. Name: Tel. No. 78 1. Attempted suicide should be a crime. Agree Disagree! Don't Know/ 1 Unsure 2. The s o c i a l problems r e s u l t i n g from the r a p i d l y increasing population of the world w i l l become catastrophic i n t h e i r proportions i n the next twenty-five years. 3 . During war-time, people should not be allowed to escape m i l i t a r y service by claiming the status of conscientious objector. 4 . Generally speaking, governments should employ innovative and novel programmes to solve s o c i a l problems, rather than orthodox and t r a d i t i o n a l types of schemes. 5 . Authorities should provide nu-t r i t i o u s school meals f o r children. 6. There should be a law requi r i n g a l c o h o l i c s to undergo treatment fo r i t . 7 . The law should not r e s t r i c t the a v a i l a b i l i t y of contraceptives to adults. 8 . A person should be considered l e g a l l y an i n d i v i d u a l from the moment of conception, rather than from b i r t h . 9 . The use of seat belts i n auto-mobiles should be mandatory. 1 0 . In view of the serious shortage of some professions and occu-pations i n r u r a l areas, the government should require per-sons q u a l i f i e d f o r such work to take up residence i n these -regiehs^for a certain period of time. i i 79 11. The taking of a human l i f e by another human being i s almost never j u s t i f i e d . Agree Disagree Don't Know/ Unsure 12. The use of i l l i c i t drugs f o r non-medical purposes should be a crime. 13. There should be adequate finan-c i a l help provided to those who want to, and have the a b i l i t y to go to university, but who cannot afford to go. 14. In order to a l l e v i a t e population pressures i n some countries, Canada and other countries that have large undeveloped t r a c t s of land should plan for a substan* t i a l and orderly increase i n immigration. 15. Governments should expand the medicare programme and make i t free to those who cannot afford i t . 16. High schools should provide information to senior students regarding contraceptives. 17. Abortion should be available on demand. 18. C i t i z e n s should be encouraged by the government to undergo s t e r i l -i z a t i o n as a means of b i r t h - — control . 19. The solution to the problems i n our prisons l i e s i n the develop-ment and implementation of new experimental programmes, rather than i n the more t r a d i t i o n a l approach of being more punitive towards criminals. 20. The size of the Family Allowance should be increased f o r those parents with low incomes. 80 21. A f t e r a suitable length of time partners i n common-law marriages should have the same l e g a l rights as those i n l e g a l marriages. Agree Disagree Don't Know/ Unsure 22. Those s u f f e r i n g from incurable diseases should have the l e g a l r i g h t to have t h e i r l i f e termin-ated i f they wish. 23 . An important function of govern-ment i s to ensure that people have equal opportunity f o r the important and basic things i n l i f e ( l i k e food, clothing, shel-t e r , education, employment and good health. 24. A c h i l d should have the ri g h t to sue parents for damage that he or she suffers as the r e s u l t of the parents* negligence during the pregnancy. 25. Unless a person's behaviour i s harmful to others i n society, i t should not be prohibited by law. 26. An important r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the government i s to provide f o r the mental and physical health of the people, rather than leav-ing i t up to each i n d i v i d u a l c i t i z e n . 27. There should be laws making homosexuality a crime. 28. i f the health of an unborn fetus i s seriously threatened the mother should be obligated by lav to accept medical treatment when prescribed as essential by her doctors. 29 . S e l l i n g pornographic material to adults should be i l l e g a l . 81 30. When a "morning-after" contra-ceptive- p i l l has been success-f u l l y tested, i t should be f r e e l j a vailable to adults. Agree Disagree Don't Know/ Unsure 31. Housewives should be covered by the Canada PensionPlan i n the same way employed people are. 32. School Boards should encourage the introduction of innovative and experimental teaching pro-grammes i n schools, rather than returning to more t r a d i t i o n a l authoritarian methods. 33. The government should make more day-care available for the c h i l -dren of low income persons. 34. C a p i t a l Punishment should be re-introduced. 35. Sex education should be taught i n high schools. 36. We are aware that the strength of people's attitudes on an issue may vary, Please re f e r back to the answer you have given to question 17 ('Abortion should be available on demand'), and then indicate by checking the appro-p r i a t e statement below which best represents the strength of your feelings on t h i s issue: Very strongly Somewhat strongly Not at a l l strongly Don't Know 82 APPENDIX B PREDICTED RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SPECIFIC ISSUES AND PRINCIPLES P r i n c i p l e Issue Number Agree/Disagree Freedom of Choice (25) fflHx 1. Abortion 2. Drug use 3. Pornography 4. Homosexuality 5. Alcohol 6. Seat belts 7. Suicide 8. Euthanasia 9. Contraceptives 10. Contraceptive i n f o . 11. Immigration 12. Treatment of fetus 13. Attitude to C.O.'s 14. Common law marriage 17 12 m m 29 xxxxxx 27 6 mm 9 m m 1 m m 22 x f f i x x 7 H x f f l 16 x x f f i x 14 x x f f i 28 mm 3 21 m m II Population Pressures (2) 1. Abortion 17 2. Contraceptives 7 3. Contraceptive i n f o . 16 4. Immigration 14 5. Relocation 10 6. S t e r i l i z a t i o n 18 7. "Morning a f t e r " p i l l 30 8. Family allowance 20 9. Day care 33 10. Sex Education 35 mm m m m m m m m m m m Bam mm xxxxxx xxxxxx mm mm 83 P r i n c i p l e Issue Number Agree/Disagree III Individual from Conception (8) IV Equity (23) V Sanctity of L i f e (11) 1. Abortion 17 2. Child's r i g h t to sue 24 3. Treatment of fetus 28 4. "Morning a f t e r " p i l l 30 1. Abortion 17 2. Contraceptives 7 3. Contraceptive i n f o . 16 4. Immigration 14 5. Relocation 10 6. "Morning a f t e r " p i l l 30 7. Family allowance 20 8. Day care 33 9. Canada pension/wife 31 10. Medicare 15 11. Education 13 12. C a p i t a l punishment 34 13. Sex Education 35 14. Common law marriage 21 15. School meals 5 1. Abortion 17 2. Drug use 12 3. Alcohol 6 4. Euthanasia 22 5. Treatment of fetus 28 mm 3 mm mm mm mm mm mm S 8 £ mm wast mm mm was. m$H mm mm 84 Pr i n c i p l e Issue Number Agree/Disagree (V Sanctity of L i f e c ont' d.) 6. "Morning a f t e r " p i l l 30 7. Capital punishment 34 8. Attitude to C.O.'s 3 9. Suicide 1 10. Seat belts 9' mm £BS£E VI S o c i a l Innovations (4) 1. Abortion 17 2. Drug use 12 3. Pornography 29 4. Homosexuality 27 5. Alcohol 6 6. Seat belts 9 7. Suicide 1 8. Immigration 14 9. Relocation 10 10. Child's r i g h t to sue 24 11. Treatment of fetus 28 12. "Morning a f t e r " p i l l 30 13. Canada pension/wife 31 14. Medicare 15 15. Sex education 35 16. Penology Programs 19 17. Innovative education 32 18. Common law marriage 21 19. School meals 5 mm mm mm M f f i mm meet SSEfiS mm meet mm mm mm i 85 P r i n c i p l e Issue Number Agree/Disagree VII Mental and Physical Health (26) 1. Abortion 2. Drug use 3. Alcohol 4. Seat belts 5. Suicide 6. Euthanasia 7. Family allowance 8. Day care 9. Education 10. School meals 17 12 6 mm 9 mm 1 m?m 22 mm 20 33 mm 13 mm 5 x x x f f i = assumed response Explanation! The shaded areas represent the assumed responses to the s p e c i f i c issues. For example, under the p r i n c i p l e , I, Freedom of Choice, i t was assumed that i f a person agreed with the p r i n c i p l e (contained i n question 25), they would then agree with questions 17, 12, 22, 7, 16, and 21 because they are a l l questions which deal with an individual's r i g h t to choose. Likewise, i t was assumed that i f an i n d i v i d u a l agreed with the p r i n c i p l e of Freedom of Choice, they would tend to disagree with questions 29, 27, 6, 9, 1, and 28 because a l l of these questions i n f e r than an i n d i v i d u a l should not have the freedom to choose. I f an i n d i v i d u a l disagreed with the p r i n c i p l e , i t was assumed that they would answer i n the opposite manner from that just described. 86 APPENDIX C DIAGRAM OF THE PHYSICAL LAY-OUT OF THE LABORATORY EXPERIMENT* OCamera focused on the entire group Camera providing another v i e of the entire group Confederate 1 Confederate Exp eriment ef * s Npath at the \ beginning of the experiment H door Camera focused onl naive ^ N s u b j e c t < P, (D O P P. c p. o CD XA tt W > M W o o S3 door LABORATORY RECEPTION AREA (The author wishes to thank G. Keith Warriner f o r his help i n the control room) 87 APPENDIX D MEAN SCORES BASED ON GROUP, SUBJECTS WILLING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS Q GROUP i C.U.E. w.c. Soc. 210 W.S. 222 U E 29 S 33 T 39 39 I 41 0 42 42 N 43 43*(3) N 44 A 46 45* 45 I 46* 46 R 47* 47 E 48 48 48 49 (2) 49*(2) S 50 50*(2) 50 c 51 (4) 0 52 52 R 53 E 56 S 57 57 59 Total 1 1 1 1 Group 444 630 Score 339 520 Total Responses 7 9 14 11 Group Mean Score 48.4 49.3 45.0 47.3 (Numbers i n parentheses indicate more than one person with the same score.) *(denotes a male w i l l i n g to p a r t i c i p a t e , but i n e l i g i b l e f o r the study. Because there were so few males i n the ov e r a l l study, they were not used i n the f i n a l experiments.) 88 MEAN SCORES BASED ON GROUP, SUBJECTS ACTUALLY PARTICIPATING IN THE LABORATORY EXPERIMENTS Q GROUPt C.U.E. w .c. U E S T S 39 42 I C 0 0 43 N R N E 50 A S 51 (3) I 52 R 56 E 57 57 Total _____ ———— Group 204 345 Score Total Responses 4 7 Group Mean 49.3 Score 51.0 Soc. 210 29 39 43 (2) 44 198 5 39.6 W.S. 222 33 50 83 2 41.5 The group mean score, i n a l l cases, was calculated by-t o t a l l i n g the scores i n a p a r t i c u l a r group category and di v i d i n g by the number of participants i n that category. 89 APPENDIX E TYPES OF RESPONDENTS' QUALIFYING COMMENTS Issue Question Number Number of  Qu a l i f i c a t i o n s Types of Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s Suicide 1 Alcohol 6 Seat belts 9 Relocation Drug use 10 12 5 10 5 16 12 No pattern i n responses • No pattern i n responses A tendency towards re-qu i r i n g more information regarding health hazards of such a program Six cases f e l t that "incentives" should be offered, e.g. that the government should encourage rather than require, otherwise, no cle a r pattern A l l cases requested a d e f i n i t i o n of the word " i l l i c i t " Immigration 14 6 Abortion 17 21 S t e r i l i z a t i o n 18 17 Family allowance 20 13 Euthanasia 22 11 No pattern i n responses Several persons required more information as to the time of the pregnancy, otherwise, no pattern i n responses Most persons responded to the question as though i t referred to 'third world' countries, otherwise, no pattern i n responses Five persons wanted "low income" defined, others wanted to use other means of providing income, otherwise, no c l e a r pattern Most cases needed a d e f i n i t i o n of the word "incurable" 90 Issue Question  Number Child's r i g h t s 24 Number of  Qu a l i f i c a t i o n s 11 Treatment of Fetus "Morning a f t e r " p i l l Day care Ca p i t a l punishment 28 30 33 6 16 8 34 Types of Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s The question was mis-understood i n a l l cases t the word "negligence" seemed to be causing the problem No pattern i n responses Ten of the responses re-quired d e f i n i t i o n of "susccessfully tested", otherwise, no pattern i n responses Four cases said that 'there should be more day care f o r everyone', otherwise, no pattern i n responses No pattern i n responses Of the 163 q u a l i f i e d responses, each group was represented thusi C.U.E. = 28 q u a l i f y i n g comments W.C. = 12 q u a l i f y i n g comments Soc. 210 = 79 q u a l i f y i n g comments W.S. 222 = 44 q u a l i f y i n g comments 163 q u a l i f i c a t i o n s i n t o t a l 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094083/manifest

Comment

Related Items