Machiavellianism, justification, and attitude change following counterattitudinal advocacy.

Abstract

This study investigated the following interaction hypothesis: When countcrattitudinal messages are prepared for an uncommitted audience under conditions of low justification, low Machiavellians will report significantly greater self-persuasion than high Machiavellians; but when messages are prepared under conditions of high justification, high Machiavellians will report significantly greater self-persuasion than low Machiavellians. The subjects wrote counterattitudinal essays advocating elimination of college student draft deferments under conditions of cither high or low justification, manipulated in terms of the number of grade points awarded for participation. The results supported the hypothesized interactive relationship between Machiavellianism and justification. When the justification was low, attitude change was greater for low than for high Machiavellians; given high justification, the opposite relationship was observed. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for recent dissonance theorizing, which stresses the importance of avcrsive audience consequences as a determinant of attitude change following counterattitudinal advocacy.