A style variable in assertion training

Abstract

The present study developed out of an interest in mediating cognitive sets as elements bearing on response class X response topography interactions in assertion training (Rich & Schroeder, 1976). One way to view such mediating sets is in terms of interpersonal style (Frankel, 1978; Shapiro, 1965). Styles include cognitive expectancies (Kelly, 1955), which provide ways for individuals to orient toward and perhaps define experiences (Bowers, 1973), and sets of rules designed to govern specific behaviors that might occur in any given situation. For example, a person who views the world (cognitive set) in terms of power relationships might orient toward interpersonal situations in terms of who has what kind of power, and then defer, challenge, cooperate, or ignore (rules) as a function of available cues. Anecdotal reports by assertion trainers (N. Roberts, 1977, personal communication) describe two such styles. Direct responders are seen as concret e in response to assertion instructions. For example, they learn to say no to tlnreasonable requests when so instructed but have difficulty making topographically different assertion responses. Negotiators, on the other hand, tend to respond to the "say no to unreasonable requests" instruction by making a great variety of topographically different responses, but have difficulty actually saying no. The style variable was operationalized here via the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility (HGS) (Shot & Orne, 1962)--a decision that arose out of the authors' interest in the structural approach to