Commitment to pro- versus counter-attitudinal behavior and the dynamics of social representations

Abstract

This research uses the counter-attitudinal essay paradigm ( Janis & King, 1954 ) to test the effects of social actions on social representations. Thus, students wrote either a pro- or a counter-attitudinal essay on Higher Education. Three forms of counter-attitudinal essays were manipulated countering respectively a) students’ attitudes towards higher education; b) peripheral beliefs or c) central beliefs associated with this representation object. After writing the essay, students expressed their attitudes towards higher education and evaluated different beliefs associated with it. The structural status of these beliefs was also assessed by a “calling into question” test ( Flament, 1994a ). Results show that behavior challenging either an attitude or peripheral beliefs induces a rationalization process, giving rise to minor modifications of the representational field. These modifications are only on the social evaluative dimension of the social representation. On the other hand, when the behavior challenges central beliefs, the same rationalization process induces a cognitive restructuring of the representational field, i.e., a structural change in the representation. These results and their implications for the experimental study of representational dynamics are discussed with regard to the two-dimensional model of social representations ( Moliner, 1994 ) and rationalization theory ( Beauvois & Joule, 1996 ).

Double foot‐in‐the‐door, social representations, and environment: application for energy savings

“…Table ) in order to determine their respective structural status (cf. Tafani & Souchet, ; as well as Tafani, Souchet, Codaccioni, & Mugny, ). These show that the negation of the cognitions “preserving natural resources” (83%; Fisher's exact test, p = .001), “preserving the future for the generations to come” (77%; Fisher's exact test, p = .001), and “preserving the environment” (69%; Fisher's exact test, p = .002) results in frequencies of refutation significantly superior to an equifrequency norm, which shows their central status in this population in the sense that their negation results in the fact that a large majority of the participants no longer consider the activity that is presented to them as an energy saving.…”

“…The relation between social representation and commitment (cf. Moscovici, ) was first considered in works on representational dynamics (Renard, Bonardi, Roussiau, & Girandola, ; Souchet & Tafani, ; Tafani & Souchet, , ). The relation between social representation and commitment was studied more recently from another perspective (Eyssartier, Joule, & Guimelli, ).…”

Methods for Studying the Structure of Social Representations: A Critical Review and Agenda for Future Research

“…Including social identification in the diagnosis of the structure of an SR would become an interesting factor since it would be involved in the convergence of the members of the group with regard to their way of thinking about the object and thus in the structuring of the representation. This aspect would be very important, for example, in research on the “ SR Structure Effect ” (Skandrani‐Marzouki et al, ) in the context of cognitive processes related to social influence (e.g., Mugny, Souchet, Codaccioni, & Quiamzade, ), attitude change (e.g., Tafani & Souchet, ), social comparison (Chokier & Rateau, ), behavioral commitment (e.g., Piermattéo et al, ; Souchet & Girandola, ; for a recent review, see Lo Monaco et al, in press) or in research linking the structure of social representations to emotions (e.g., Skandrani‐Marzouki et al, ). Thus, these investigations require prior identification of the structure of the SR. Future research may need to strengthen these essential theoretical links between the SR theory and identity approaches in order to provide information that will lead to methodological solutions.…”

“…Firstly, from the outset, “the arbitrary cutoff point” (Moliner, , p. 277) of 75% was proposed and is still used in many studies (Flament, ). Secondly, some studies (e.g., Roussiau & Bonardi, ; Tafani & Souchet, ) used a norm of equi‐frequency using the chi 2 ‐test. This method of data analysis considers elements as central when the proportion of refutations differs significantly from a random distribution.…”

Black and White or Shades of Grey? Comparing Social Representations Centrality Models

“…Tafani (2001) observed that the attitudes towards beliefs expressed in central elements are more resistant to transformation caused by writing a counter-attitudinal essay than the attitudes related to peripheral elements. Likewise, Tafani and Souchet (2002) observed that the commitment to a behavior that challenges an attitude or peripheral belief can affect the evaluations of peripheral elements only. Structural changes only take place when a challenging behavior implies a central element of the social representation.…”