When a personal dispositional variable is in conflict with social pressure, the resulting behavior is hypothesized to follow a cusp catastrophe. The catastrophe model allows'for discontinuities and bimodality in behavior. Specifically, when social pressure is low, behavior is expected to be a smooth, monotonic function of disposition. When social pressure is high and disposition is low, behavior will be low; when social pressure is high and disposition is high, relevant behavior will be bimodal-some people engaging in low levels of behavior and some engaging in high levels of behavior. In dynamic terms, shifts in dispositions at high levels of social pressure will result in discontinuous, i.e., "catastrophic" changes in behavior. Increments in social pressure at high levels of disposition will result in divergence, i.e., bimodality.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ANDERSON, N. H.The problem of change-of-meaning. Tech. Rep. No. 42, Center for Human Information Processing, University of California, La Jolla, 1974.
2.
ASCH, S. E.Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs1956, 70(9, Whole No. 416).
3.
ATKINSON, J. W., & LITWIN, G. H.Achievement motive and test anxiety conceived as motive to approach success and avoid failure. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1960, 60, 52-63.
4.
BREHM, J. W.A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic Press, 1966.
5.
BREHM, J. W.Responses to loss of freedom: A theory of psychological reactance. Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press, 1972.
6.
BREHM, J. W., & SENSENIG, J.Social influence as a function of attempted and implied usurpation of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology1966, 4, 703-707.
7.
CHIDLEY, J.Catastrophe theory in consumer attitude studies. Journal of the Market Research Society1976, 18, 64-92.
8.
COWAN, T. M.Conflict hysteresis. Paper presented at Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada, 1978.
9.
DREW, G. C., COLQUHOUN, W. P., & LONG, H. A.Effect of small doses of alcohol on a skill resembling driving. Memo 38. London: Medical Research Council, 1959.
10.
DEUTSCH, M., & GERARD, H. B.A study of normative and informational influence upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1955, 51, 629-636.
11.
FESTINGER, L.A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson, 1957.
12.
FISHBEIN, M., & AJZEN, I.Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1975.
13.
FLAY, B. R.Applications of catastrophe theory in psychology. Some applications to attitudes and social behavior. Behavioral Science1978, 23, 335-350.
14.
GERARD, H. B.Deviation, conformity and commitment. In I. D. Steiner & M. Fishbein (Eds.), Current studies in social psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965.
15.
ISNARD, C. A., & ZEEMAN, E. G.Some models from catastrophe theory in the social sciences. In L. Collins (Ed.), Use of models in the social sciences. London: Tavistock, 1976. Pp. 44-100.
16.
JONES, E. E., & GERARD, H. B.Foundations of social psychology. New York: Wiley, 1967.
17.
KIESLER, C. A.The psychology of commitment. New York: Academic Press, 1971.
18.
KOLATA, G. B.Catastrophe theory: The emperior has no clothes. Science1977, 196, 350-351.
19.
LEWIS, M.A cusp catastrophe model of psychological crisis. Paper presented at Annual Convention of American Psychology Association, Toronto, Canada, 1978.
20.
MISCHEL, W.Personality and assessment. New York: Wiley, 1968.
21.
PAULOS, J.Applications of catastrophe theory to semantics, jokes and scientific revolutions. Preprint, Mathematics Department, Temple University, 1977.
RUBIN, Z.Measurement of romantic love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology1970, 16, 265-273.
24.
STEWART, I. N.Catastrophe theory. In Encyclopedia Britannica Yearbook, 1976.
25.
TESSER, A.Differential weighting and directed meaning as explanations of primacy in impression formation. Psychonomic Science1968, 11, 299-300.
26.
TESSER, A., & PAULHUS, D. L.Toward a causal model of love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology1976, 34, 1095-1105.
27.
THOM, R.StabilitW estructurelle et morphogenese. New York: Benjamin, 1972.
28.
WALSTER, E. H., & PRESTHOLDT, P.The effect of misjudging another: Overcompensation or dissonance reduction?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1966, 2, 85-97.
29.
WICKER, A. W.Attitudes versus actions: The relationship of verbal and overt behavioral responses to attitude objects. Journal of Social Issues1969, 25, 41-78.
30.
WICKLUND, R. A., & BREHM, J. W.Perspectives on cognitive dissonance. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1976.
31.
ZEEMAN, E. C.Catastrophe theory. Scientific American1976, 4, 65-70, 75-84.
32.
ZEEMAN, E. C.A mathematical model for conflicting judgements caused by stress, applied to possible misestimations of speed caused by alcohol. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 1976, 29, 19-31.
33.
ZEEMAN, E. C., HALL, C. S., HARRISON, P. J., MARRIAGE, G. H., & SHAPLAND, P. H.A model for institutional disturbances. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology1976, 29, 66-80.
