106 Ss made judgments of numerosity after they were exposed to the judgments of male confederates. There was a curvilinear relationship between communication discrepancy and immediately measured opinion change. The prediction that with delayed measurement retention of the changed opinion would dissipate over time was not significantly supported. A significant linear trend interacted with the curvilinear trend in the immediate measurement condition. These results were interpreted as being consistent with the sleeper-effect phenomenon.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnisD. K.MeierN. C.The induction of opinion change through suggestions by means of “planted” contents. Journal of Social Psychology, 1934, 5, 65–81.
2.
AronsonE.TurnerJ. A.CarlsmithJ. M.Communicator credibility and communication discrepancy as determinants of opinion change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963, 67, 31–36.
3.
BerginA. E.The effect of dissonant persuasive communication upon change in self-referring attitude. Journal of Personality, 1962, 30, 423–438.
4.
BochnerS.InskoC. A.Communicator discrepancy, source credibility, and opinion change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1966, 4, 614–621.
5.
FestingerL.A theory of cognitive dissonance. Palo Alto: Stanford Univer. Press, 1957.
6.
FestingerL.AronsonE.The arousal and reduction of dissonance in social context. In CartwrightD.ZanderA. (Eds.), Group dynamics: research and theory. Evanston, Ill.: Row Peterson, 1960. Pp. 214–231.
7.
FisherS.LubinA.Distance as a determinant of influence in a two-person serial interaction situation. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1958, 56, 230–238.
8.
FreedmanJ. L.Involvement, discrepancy, and change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 69, 290–295.
9.
HovlandC. I.PritzkerH. A.Extent of opinion change as a function of change advocated. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1957, 54, 257–261.
10.
HovlandC. I.WeissW.The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1951, 15, 635–650.
11.
InskoC. A.Primacy versus recency in persuasion as a function of the timings of arguments and measures. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 69, 381–391.
12.
KelmanH. C.HovlandC. I.“Reinstatement” of the communicator in delayed measurement of opinion change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1953, 48, 327–335.
13.
MillerN.CampbellD. T.Recency and primacy in persuasion as a function of timing of speeches and measurement. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959, 59, 1–9.
14.
SmithF. T.An experiment in modifying attitude towards the Negroes. New York: Teachers Coll., Columbia Center of Educ., 1943. (No. 887)
15.
WattsW. A.McGuireW. J.Persistence of induced opinion change and retention of the inducing message contents. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1964, 68, 233–241.
16.
ZimbardoP. G.Involvement and communication discrepancy as determinants of opinion conformity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1960, 60, 86–94.
