Abstract
Lassiter, Pezzo, and Apple (this issue) replicated the effect of transmitter tuning on attitude change persistence (Boninger, Brock, Cook, Gruder, & Romer, 1990) and included an additional condition as the basis for an alternative explanation. Although their independent replication is an important contribution that provides significant empirical corroboration, a superficial rendering of the interrupted-task literature (Zeigarnik, 192711938) and ambiguity in the operationalization of the additional condition appear to weaken their proposed interruption-perseveration explanation. We also summarize ancillary data from our earlier work (Boninger et at., 1990) that shed further doubt on this alternative explanation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
