Abstract
This paper presents an induced compliance experiment (N=55) that tests the idea, developed from social identity theory (SIT), that attitude shift towards advocacy reflects conformity to a consistency norm. Following computer-mediated group discussion of the primed consistency norm in either anonymous or identified conditions, participants were given either high or low choice to advocate counterattitudinally. As predicted by the social identity model of de-individuation effects (SIDE), anonymity increased identity salience and adherence to the in-group's consistency norm. As predicted by the social identity approach to dissonance, high choice/anonymous participants shifted attitude significantly more than high choice/identified participants, an effect that was mediated by salience. Contrary to predictions, the high choice/identified condition did not shift attitude significantly more than the low choice condition, though the predicted effect was found when salience was controlled for. These data strongly support both SIDE's view of anonymity and the SIT approach to dissonance, especially as alternative approaches predict the reverse of these effects. Implications for research and theory are discussed in relation to dissonance, anonymity and social identity.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call