College students believed that they were judges in a real cheating case (in actuality, it was fictitious) under adjudication by a student honor court. Participants recommended harsher punishment after being led to believe that they would explain their decisions in a face-to-face meeting with (a) an official from the honor court, as compared to a meeting with the student or no anticipated meeting (Experiment 1), or (b) the professor who brought the charge of cheating, as compared to a meeting with the student (Experiment 2). These effects occurred even when participants wrote their decisions after learning that the anticipated meeting was canceled. The salient audience thus seemed to induce shifts in perspective or evaluative orientation during decision making, and not simply reporting shifts designed to please the audience.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, V. L. , & Wilder, D. A. (1980). Impact of group consensus and social support on stimulus meaning: Mediation of conformity by cognitive restructuring. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1116-1124.
2.
Apsler, R. , & Sears, D. O. (1968). Warning, personal involvement, and attitude change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 162-166.
3.
Aronson, E. , Brewer, M., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1985). Experimentation in social psychology. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 441-486). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
Asch, S. E. (1940). Studies in the principles of judgments and attitudes: II. Determination of judgments by group and by ego standards. Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 433-465.
5.
Asch, S. E. (1952). Social psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
6.
Baldwin, M. W. , & Holmes, J. G. (1987). Salient private audiences and awareness of the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1087-1098.
7.
Bartko, J. J. (1966). The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psychological Reports, 19, 3-11.
8.
Bartko, J. J. (1976). On various intraclass correlation reliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 762-765.
9.
Braver, S. L. , Linder, D. E., Corwin, T. T., & Cialdini, R. B. (1977). Some conditions that affect admissions of attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 565-576.
10.
Buehler, R. , & Griffin, D. (1994). Change-of-meaning effects in conformity and dissent: Observing construal processes over time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 984-996.
11.
Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
12.
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message and cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.
13.
Cialdini, R. B. , Braver, S. L., & Lewis, S. K. (1974). Attributional bias and the easily persuaded other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 631-637.
14.
Cialdini, R. B. , Levy, A., Herman, C. P., & Evenbeck, S. (1973). Attitudinal politics: The strategy of moderation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 100-108.
15.
Cialdini, R. B. , Levy, A., Herman, C. P., Kozlowski, L. T., & Petty, R. E. (1976). Elastic shifts of opinion: Determinants of direction and durability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 663-672.
16.
Davis, P. E. (Ed.) (1973). Introduction to moral philosophy. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.
17.
Fridlund, A. J. (1991a). Evolution and facial action in reflex, social motive, and paralanguage. Biological Psychology, 32, 3-10.
18.
Fridlund, A. J. (1991b). The sociability of solitary smiling: Potentiation by an implicit audience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 229-240.
19.
Griffin, D. W. , & Ross, L. (1991). Subjective construal, social inference, and human misunderstanding. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 319-359). New York: Academic Press.
20.
Hass, R. G. , & Mann, R. W. (1976). Anticipatory belief change: Persuasion or impression management?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 105-111.
21.
Jellison, J. M. , & Green, J. (1981). A self-presentation approach to the fundamental attribution error: The norm of internality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 643-649.
22.
Jenkins, J. J. (1981). Can we have a fruitful cognitive psychology? In J. H. Flowers (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 221-238). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
23.
Jones, E. E. , & Wortman, C. (1973). Ingratiation: An attributional approach. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
24.
Kaplan, M. F. , & Miller, C. E. (1987). Group decision making and normative versus informational influence: Effects of type of issue and assigned decision rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 306-313.
25.
Keppel, G. (1982). Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
26.
Klimoski, R. , & Inks, L. (1990). Accountability forces in performance appraisal. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 194-208.
27.
McAllister, P. , Mitchell, T. R., & Beach, L. R. (1979). The contingency model for the selection of decision strategies: An empirical test of the effects of significance, accountability, and reversibility. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24, 228-244.
28.
McKeon, R. (1957). The development and the significance of the concept of responsibility. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 2, 3-32.
29.
Mixon, D. M. (1974). If you won’t deceive, what can you do? In N. Armistead (Ed.), Reconstructing social psychology (pp. 72-85). Baltimore: Penguin.
30.
Petty, R. E. , & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration-likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). New York: Academic Press.
31.
Rosenthal, R. , & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
32.
Saks, M. J. , & Hastie, R. (1978). Social psychology in court. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
33.
Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
34.
Schlenker, B. R. (1986). Personal accountability: Challenges and impediments in the quest for excellence. Technical Report for the Navy Personnel Research and Development Center, San Diego.
35.
Schlenker, B. R. , Britt, T. W., Pennington, J.Murphy, R., & Doherty, K. (1994). The triangle model of responsibility. Psychological Review, 101, 632-652.
36.
Schlenker, B. R. , Dlugolecki, D. W., & Doherty, K. (1994). The impact of self-presentations on self-appraisals and behavior: The power of public commitment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 20-30.
37.
Schlenker, B. R. , & Weigold, M. F. (1989). Self-identification and accountability. In R. A. Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Impression management in the organization (pp. 21-43). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38.
Schlenker, B. R. , & Weigold, M. F. (1992). Interpersonal processes involving impression regulation and management. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 133-168.
39.
Schlenker, B. R. , Weigold, M. F., & Doherty, K. (1991). Coping with accountability: Self-identification and evaluative reckonings. In C. R. Snyder & D. R. Forsyth (Eds.), The handbook of social and clinical psychology (pp. 96-115). New York: Pergamon.
40.
Semin, G. R. , & Manstead, A. S. R. (1983). The accountability of conduct: A social psychological analysis. London: Academic Press.
41.
Simonson, I. , & Nye, P. (1992). The effect of accountability on susceptibility to decision errors. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 416-446.
42.
Smith, S. S. , & Richardson, D. (1983). Amelioration of deception and harm in psychological research: The important role of debriefing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1075-1082.
43.
Taylor, K. M. , & Shepperd, J. A. (1996). Probing suspicion among participants in deception research. American Psychologist, 51, 886-887.
44.
Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Accountability and the complexity of thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 74-83.
45.
Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 297-332.
46.
Tetlock, P. E. (1992). The impact of accountability on judgment and choice: Toward a social contingency model. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 331-376). New York: Academic Press.
47.
Tetlock, P. E. , & Boettger, R. (1989). Accountability: A social magnifier of the dilution effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 388-398.
48.
Tetlock, P. E. , & Kim, J. I. (1987). Accountability and judgement processes in a personality prediction task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 700-709.
49.
Tetlock, P. E. , Skitka, L., & Boettger, R. (1989). Social and cognitive strategies for coping with accountability: Conformity, complexity, and bolstering. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 632-640.
50.
Weldon, E. , & Gargano, G. M. (1985). Cognitive effort in additive task groups: The effects of shared responsibility on the quality of multi-attribute judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 36, 348-361.
51.
Weldon, E. , & Gargano, G. M. (1988). Cognitive loafing: The effects of accountability and shared responsibility on cognitive effort. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 14, 159-171.
