Abstract
The social valorization of Preference For Consistency (PFC) was examined via a minimal group paradigm activating either equivalent or asymmetric intergroup relations. After an aesthetic judgment task and assignment to one of two groups, participants (N = 298) completed the PFC scale according to three instructions: on their own behalf, as an ingroup member, or as an outgroup member (order counter-balanced). Results showed that in equivalent intergroup relations, participants attributed greater PFC to the ingroup and to the self than to the outgroup. In asymmetric intergroup relations, participants attributed greater PFC to the high-status group and to the self than to the low-status group, and this was independent of the participants’ group membership. We discuss the contribution the minimal group paradigm can make to revealing the social valorization of psychological constructs and the mechanisms underlying the social value accorded to PFC.
Highlights
The desire to be consistent in one’s choices, attitudes and decision-making has fascinated social psychologists since the 1950s (Abelson et al, 1968)
Main analysis A 2 x 2 x 3 ANOVA, with repeated measures on the third factor, did not reveal a main effect of either intergroup relation or of participant’s group membership, F(1, 294) < 1; ns. It did reveal a significant main effect of instruction, F(2, 588) = 35.71, p < .001, h2 = 0.11, as the Preference for Consistency (PFC) score obtained in the ingroup identification condition (M = 6.22, SD = 1.2) was significantly higher than the score obtained in the outgroup identification condition (M = 5.38, SD = 1.51; LSD test, p < .001) but not different from the score obtained in the self-description condition (M = 6.21, SD = 1.01, p = .93)
The following discussion is based on two points: the interest of using the minimal group paradigm and manipulating group status to explore the social valorization of psychological constructs, and the contribution of our results to furthering understanding of the mechanisms underlying the social valorization of PFC
Summary
The desire to be consistent in one’s choices, attitudes and decision-making has fascinated social psychologists since the 1950s (Abelson et al, 1968). The tendency for consistency was first considered as a need inherent to human cognitive functioning (Festinger, 1957; Heider, 1946; Abelson & Rosenberg, 1958) This trend was supposed to control attitude organization and change (e.g., Mc Guire, 1960; Feldman, 1966), as well as interpersonal relationship management (e.g., Zajonc, 1968). The second approach takes a more social perspective, suggesting that the need for consistency is largely determined by societal expectations; expressing a preference for consistency should be socially approved and valued (see Testé, Jouffre, & Somat, 2010, or Sénémeaud, Mange, Gouger, Testé, & Somat, 2011, for a review). Adopting this second perspective on consistency, the present study aims to examine the social valorization of preference for consistency
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
