Premium
Counterattitudinal Advocacy on a Matter of Prejudice: Effects of Distraction, Commitment, and Personal Importance 1
Author(s) -
Eisenstadt Donna,
Leippe Michael R.,
Rivers Jennifer A.,
Stambush Mark. A.
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
journal of applied social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.822
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1559-1816
pISSN - 0021-9029
DOI - 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01878.x
Subject(s) - distraction , covert , prejudice (legal term) , psychology , social psychology , attitude change , cognition , policy advocacy , political science , public relations , cognitive psychology , linguistics , philosophy , neuroscience
White students were asked to advocate a tuition policy beneficial to Blacks at either high or low personal cost. Advocates wrote an essay while undistracted or distracted, or only committed to writing it. More attitude change occurred when the policy was personally costly (important) and advocates were undistracted. Distraction may disrupt the dominant covert cognitive response, which is normally favorable to a freely agreed‐to advocacy. This makes anti‐advocacy thoughts more likely and the advocacy seem weaker, especially when the advocacy involves conflicted racial beliefs whose contemplation under load activates negative stereotypes. Some participants wrote essays that defied their agreement to endorse the policy, and distraction enhanced their attitude change. In this case, distraction presumably disrupted an anti‐advocacy dominant cognitive response. Thought listings supported these interpretations. Finally, commitment alone led to attitude change. Coun‐terattitudinal advocacy fosters attitude change in prejudice‐relevant domains if conditions support advocacy‐favorable thoughts during advocacy.