No abstract

This study tested a central proposition, stemming from Rotter's Social Learning Theory, that conformity is related to low expectations of success in socially evaluative situations and is consequently accompanied by defensive processes. 2 variants of an Asch situation representing increasing degrees of personal commitment were compared to a control condition. Situational measures of confidence included betting and statements of expectancy. Additional personality indices included level of aspiration, need for approval, and internal vs. external control of reinforcement. The Ss were 110 introductory psychology students. Results depict the conformer as one who has a low expectation of success in evaluative situations. His lesser confidence leads to avoidant behavior to resolve the ensuing conflict. Defensive processes of the conformer tend to become more marked as personal commitment increases.

This research represents an effort to design and validate a psychometric measure of a theoretical construct derived from a formalized theory of behavior. The model provided by Rotter's (14) Social Learning Theory of Personality (SLT) has been employed in this project.Several authors (1,4,8,17) have argued for a more "rational approach" in the design of personality tests; but, as Butler points out: ". . . the writer knows of no personality inventory for which the content, the form of items and the psychometric methods applied have been dictated by a formal psychological model" (1. P-77)-A survey of the literature supports Butler's contention by indicating that the great majority of attempts to improve test construction has been devoted to de-1 This study is a condensation of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado, June, 1956.' The writer wi shes to express his indebtedness to Richard Jessor whose continued support, both academi c and personal, enabled the completion of this study. Of the many who contributed to this project the assi stance of Maurice P. Smith, Victor C. Raimy, Kenneth R. Hammond, and William B. Sawrey is gratefully acknowledged. A special vote of thanks is owed to the large number of undergraduate students who so patiently and willingly took the various forms of this test. Finally, I wish to express my appreciation to

No abstract

No abstract