An experimental analysis of the contrast effect and its implications for intergroup communication and the indirect assessment of attitude.

Abstract

Experiments I and II were designed to differentiate between alternative interpretations of the contrast effect. Experiment I examines and rejects the hypothesis that the effect is specific to rating scales, since the effect also occurs when subjects are asked to make CDmparative judgments. Experiment II leads to the rejection of the hypothesis that the effect is purely semantic (i.e., specific to situations in which verbal labels are applied to attitudes); when subjects are asked to write items that would be endorsed by people with whom they agree or disagree, they write much more extreme items for those with whom they disagree than for those with whom they agree. In fact, the items subjects write for people with who::n they disagree are not endorsed by those people, the reason most often given being that the items are too extreme. Experiments III, IV, and V demonstrate that the differences are so clear-cut that such attitude statement writing could be used as an indirect measure of attitude. Judges were able to categorize writers' attitudes rather accurately, but accuracy was no greater when the contrast effect was explained to them than when it was not. The implications Df these findings for intergroup conflict are discussed, particularly the implication of a positive feedback effect that will lead to exacerbation of group differences.

The Moral Stereotypes of Liberals and Conservatives: Exaggeration of Differences across the Political Spectrum

“…To examine the moral stereotypes that liberals and conservatives hold about each other, we took advantage of a method introduced by Dawes, Singer, and Lemons [23] of having partisans indicate the values of “typical” partisan group members, allowing comparison of these projections with the partisans' actual answers. Participants completed multiple versions of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ; [16]).…”

Attitudes and beliefs in a marching band: stereotyping and accentuation in a favorable intergroup context

“…Previous research has reported strong accentuation or contrast effects with ideologically opposed groups (e.g., Dawes et al, 1972), and with groups expressing a clear preference for ingroup over outgroup (Clarke & Campbell, 1955;Judd et al, 1991). The present research asked whether comparable accentuation effects would be observed in a context where ingroup favoritism was minimal or absent, and also whether accentuation effects were dependent on real differences between groups.…”

“…In the Dawes et al (1972) research, for example, the campus sample of Hawks and Doves was a very small sample of the larger population of Hawks and Doves nationwide, and it is possible that the university sample was not typical of the population. More generally, when subjects are asked to make judgments about a population, it is important to consider the size and/or representativeness of the sample used to infer population characteristics.…”

A Method for Creating Package Images that Reflect Consumer Taste Impressions

“…The finding that three revised images produced a higher average score before drinking than after drinking is attributed to a high expectation resulting in lower satisfaction [26]. That is, the average after drinking was lower because the desire to drink was initially high.…”