Counterattitudinal and proattitudinal advocacy in the forced compliance paradigm: a test of self-perception theory.

Abstract

Summary Self-perception theory has resulted in the hypotheses that (a) forced advocacy decreases agreement with the position advocated; (b) advocacy in the absence of external pressure results in agreement with the advocated position; and (c) forced advocacy results in attitudes held by similar others. To test these hypotheses, 60 female introductory psychology students advocated either a counter- or a proattitudinal position under choice or no-choice conditions. Results from the counterattitudinal cells replicated the standard effect of greater attitude change in the direction advocated under choice conditions than under no-choice conditions (p < .05); there were no differences between proattitudinal cells; no-choice Ss' final attitudes differed significantly from their estimates of the typical S's attitude (p < .001). Results were consistent with hypothesis b but not with a and c. A modification of self-perception theory is presented to account for the results.