Extremitization of Attitudes: Does Thought- and Discussion-Induced Polarization Cumulate?

Abstract

A within-subjects experimental design with 240 college undergraduates revealed that the typical paradigms used to make attitudes more extreme in the laboratory (individual thought and group discussion) failed to produce cumulative change over time. Over the course of 4 sessions of thought and/or discussion spread over 2 weeks, attitude polarization for both political and personal issues was observed only from pretest to following Session 1 of individualized thought-listing. Reading messages from 2 to 5 other participants in Session 2 did not extremify attitudes beyond the thought-induced polarization created in Session 1. Even so, attitude polarization was most consistent when participants discussed the issue with other participants over electronic mail-compared to thought listing (significant polarization following some sessions) and thought only (a control condition of repeated expression; no polarization found). Although polarization did not cumulate, it also did not dissipate (or depolarize) after 2 weeks. Correlational analyses indicated that increases in attitude importance tended to accompany increases in attitude extremity. Results are discussed from the perspective of the catastrophe theory of attitudes, dynamic social impact theory, and group polarization literature.