Interactive effects of commitment to future interaction and threat to attitudinal freedom.

Abstract

The present research investigated the attitudinal effect of two variables, commitment to future interaction and threat to attitudinal freedom. Threat to attitudinal freedom was manipulated via a note from the subject's partner which either arbitrarily assigned the subject an attitudinal position (high threat) or solicited the subject's attitudinal preference (low threat). With no expectation of future interaction with the partner (low commitment), we expected greater negative, or boomerang, attitude change under high threat than under low threat. However, with expectation of future interaction with the partner (high commitment), we expected an attenuation of this effect, presumably because commitment to future interaction with the partner would forestall restoration of attitudinal freedom via negative attitude change. The significant Commitment X Threat interaction on the attitude change measure confirmed the prediction. In addition, only under high commitment, subjects covertly derogated the partner, in line with previous results. Theoretically, reactance is aroused when an individual's freedom to adopt or change an attitudinal position is threatened with elimination (Brehm, 1968). The theory assumes that an individual is free to select his own position, and that this freedom may be threatened by attempts to influence that position (Brehm, 1968), Reactance arousal motivates the individual to restore the threatened freedom either by rejecting the influence attempt (Brehm & Sensenig, 1966) or by rejecting the position advocated by the influence attempt, leading to negative, or boomerang, attitude change (Sensenig & Brehm, 1968). The greater the perceived threat to attitudinal freedom, the greater the reactance aroused and the greater the attitude change away from the position advocated b}T the influence attempt.