Bending without breaking: examining the role of attitudinal ambivalence in resisting persuasive communication

The Social Utility of Ambivalence: Being Ambivalent on Controversial Issues Is Recognized as Competence

Research on attitudinal ambivalence is flourishing, but no research has studied how others perceive its expression. We tested the hypothesis that the expression of attitudinal ambivalence could be positively valued if it signals careful consideration of an issue. More specifically, ambivalence should be judged higher on social utility (competence) but not on social desirability (warmth), compared to clear-cut attitudes. This should be the case for controversial (vs. consensual) issues, where ambivalence can signal some competence. The participants in four experiments indeed evaluated ambivalence higher on a measure of social utility, compared to clear-cut (pro-normative and counter-normative) attitudes, when the attitude objects were controversial; they judged pro-normative attitudes higher for both social utility and social desirability when the attitude objects were consensual. Attitudinal ambivalence can therefore be positively valued, as it is perceived as competence when the expression of criticism is socially accepted.

Motivation to Maintain a Nonprejudiced Identity

Abstract. In the context of nationals’ attitudes toward immigrants, three studies investigated the moderating role of normative context and justification for prejudice on licensing effects. Justification for prejudice was either assessed (Studies 1 and 2) or experimentally induced (Study 3). The normative context (egalitarian vs. discriminatory) and the possibility to obtain (or not) credentials as a nonprejudiced person were manipulated in all studies. A licensing effect (i.e., greater prejudice in the credentials as compared to the no-credentials conditions) was observed only in the egalitarian norm condition when justification for prejudice was high. Thus, credentials appear to provide a way for establishing a normative self-image as nonprejudiced when justification for prejudice is high, which reduces conformity to an egalitarian norm.

Indigenous identity transformations: The pivotal role of student-to-student abuse in Indian Residential Schools

Embracing a shared social identity typically serves to protect group members in the face of threats. However, under some conditions, intragroup dynamics are diverted so that instead, they contribute to disturbances in collective well-being. The present analysis applies a social identity framework to understand how intragroup processes elicited in Indian Residential Schools (IRS) altered the capacity of Indigenous peoples to overcome damage to their identity and collective functioning. With the alleged goal of assimilating the Indigenous population, residential schools in Canada entailed the forced removal of Indigenous children from their communities. A Truth and Reconciliation Commission established in 2008 confirmed the extensive abuse perpetrated by IRS staff, but also raised awareness of the pervasiveness of student-to-student abuse. Supported by qualitative analyses of the reports of social service providers working with IRS survivors (N =  43), it is argued that a key part of the dynamics in the IRSs was the subversion of intragroup processes among Indigenous children in attendance. Understanding intragroup dynamics provides a basis for recognizing the persistent effects of IRSs, and for identifying strategies to heal and reclaim a positive collective identity.

A retrospective analysis of the effect of discussion in teleconference and face-to-face scientific peer-review panels

OBJECTIVE

With the use of teleconferencing for grant peer-review panels increasing, further studies are necessary to determine the efficacy of the teleconference setting compared to the traditional onsite/face-to-face setting. The objective of this analysis was to examine the effects of discussion, namely changes in application scoring premeeting and postdiscussion, in these settings. We also investigated other parameters, including the magnitude of score shifts and application discussion time in face-to-face and teleconference review settings.

DESIGN

The investigation involved a retrospective, quantitative analysis of premeeting and postdiscussion scores and discussion times for teleconference and face-to-face review panels. The analysis included 260 and 212 application score data points and 212 and 171 discussion time data points for the face-to-face and teleconference settings, respectively.

RESULTS

The effect of discussion was found to be small, on average, in both settings. However, discussion was found to be important for at least 10% of applications, regardless of setting, with these applications moving over a potential funding line in either direction (fundable to unfundable or vice versa). Small differences were uncovered relating to the effect of discussion between settings, including a decrease in the magnitude of the effect in the teleconference panels as compared to face-to-face. Discussion time (despite teleconferences having shorter discussions) was observed to have little influence on the magnitude of the effect of discussion. Additionally, panel discussion was found to often result in a poorer score (as opposed to an improvement) when compared to reviewer premeeting scores. This was true regardless of setting or assigned reviewer type (primary or secondary reviewer).

CONCLUSIONS

Subtle differences were observed between settings, potentially due to reduced engagement in teleconferences. Overall, further research is required on the psychology of decision-making, team performance and persuasion to better elucidate the group dynamics of telephonic and virtual ad-hoc peer-review panels.

The path of ambivalence: tracing the pull of opposing evaluations using mouse trajectories

Ambivalence refers to a psychological conflict between opposing evaluations, often experienced as being torn between alternatives. This dynamic aspect of ambivalence is hard to capture with outcome-focused measures, such as response times or self-report. To gain more insight into ambivalence as it unfolds, the current work uses an embodied measure of pull, drawing on research in dynamic systems. In three studies, using different materials, we tracked people’s mouse movements as they chose between negative and positive evaluations of attitude objects. When participants evaluated ambivalent attitude objects, their mouse trajectories showed more pull of the non-chosen evaluative option than when they evaluated univalent attitude objects, revealing that participants were literally torn between the two opposing evaluations. We address the relationship of this dynamic measure to response time and self-reports of ambivalence and discuss implications and avenues for future research.

Consumer ambivalence toward contraception – towards an integrative framework

Purpose

– This paper aims to introduce a comprehensive conceptual framework to study the influence of “consumer ambivalence towards contraception” and “intercourse frequency” along with attitudes toward contraception and satisfaction with most familiar contraceptive method, on contraceptive usage and intentions.

Design/methodology/approach

– A team of trained female interviewers used a structured questionnaire to conduct a clinic-intercept survey with 588 sexually active female consumers in two major hospitals and six randomly chosen clinics in Singapore (response rate = 29 per cent).

Findings

– Consumer attitudes toward contraception, satisfaction with most familiar contraceptive method and intercourse frequency have a positive effect on contraceptive usage. Consumer ambivalence toward contraception has a negative effect on usage and intentions and it negatively moderates the effects of attitudes, satisfaction and intercourse frequency.

Research limitations/implications

– This paper explores the role of consumer ambivalence toward contraception in general and not toward specific contraceptive methods. Moreover, it does not measure differences in the impact of personal cultural values and orientations of the participants on contraceptive usage. These could be useful avenues for future research.

Practical implications

– By clarifying the reasons for inconsistent contraception usage, this research will help health-care professionals, social workers and welfare organizations develop more focused consumer education programs and communication campaigns to reduce consumer ambivalence about contraception and improve contraception usage rates.

Originality/value

– This paper extends prior research on consumer ambivalence by exploring its direct and moderating impact on contraceptive usage, an important issue for female health and well-being. The authors also show intercourse frequency as a moderator in this process.

Ambivalence, prejudice and negative behavioural tendencies towards out-groups: The moderating role of attitude basis

Two experiments explored the relations between prejudice (suppression), (cognitive) ambivalence and negative behavioural tendencies towards out-groups. The current work argues that expressing out-group ambivalence based on cognitive, but not affective, information is a strategy to justify one's otherwise suppressed prejudice, which may ultimately "cover" the discriminatory nature of out-group-directed negative behavioural tendencies. Two experiments show that (1) participants evaluating the out-group in a normative context inducing prejudice suppression are more likely to self-report ambivalent beliefs rather than ambivalent emotions concerning the out-group as compared with participants whose prejudice expression is induced and (2) high-prejudice participants compared with low-prejudice participants are more prone to out-group-directed negative behavioural tendencies when these latter are self-reported after the expression of ambivalent beliefs but not ambivalent emotions concerning the out-group, and when the expression of their prejudicial evaluations is salient but not when it is not. In light of the extent to which ambivalent attitudes towards out-groups are often seamlessly integrated into public discourse, the implications of the findings are discussed not only for intergroup research but also at the societal level.

The social value of being ambivalent: self-presentational concerns in the expression of attitudinal ambivalence

We tested whether individuals can exert control over the expression of attitudinal ambivalence and if this control is exerted with self-presentational concerns. Using the self-presentation paradigm, participants reported more ambivalence about Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in a standard and a self-enhancement (present yourself positively) conditions than in a self-depreciation (present yourself negatively) condition, on felt (Experiments 1a and 2a) and potential ambivalence, in its cognitive (Experiments 1b and 2b) and affective components (Experiments 1b and 2c). The role of ambivalent attitudes in conveying a positive social value was confirmed by the fact that the above effect was found on a controversial attitude object (GMOs), but the opposite appeared on a noncontroversial one (e.g., tooth brushing, a truism; Experiment 3). Such a reversal was obtained by directly manipulating the perception of controversy on GMOs (Experiment 4). Attitudinal ambivalence may thus serve an adaptive function, that is, achieving a positive social value.

When Do People Rely on Affective and Cognitive Feelings in Judgment? A Review

Although people have been shown to rely on feelings to make judgments, the conditions that moderate this reliance have not been systematically reviewed and conceptually integrated. This article addresses this gap by jointly reviewing moderators of the reliance on both subtle affective feelings and cognitive feelings of ease-of-retrieval. The review revealed that moderators of the reliance on affective and cognitive feelings are remarkably similar and can be grouped into five major categories: (a) the salience of the feelings, (b) the representativeness of the feelings for the target, (c) the relevance of the feelings to the judgment, (d) the evaluative malleability of the judgment, and (e) the level of processing intensity. Based on the reviewed evidence, it is concluded that the use of feelings as information is a frequent event and a generally sensible judgmental strategy rather than a constant source of error. Avenues for future research are discussed.