RESUMEN
People are often dissatisfied with their attitudes (e.g., liking their jobs too little or junk food too much) and would like to evaluate differently. On the basis of theory and research, a scale was developed to measure individual differences in preference for 2 types of cognitive tactics (epistemic or teleologic [E or T]) that people use when they try to change their own attitudes (Maio & Thomas, 2007). For each of 3 attitude objects (my life, a romantic partner, Arabs), the scale items loaded on the 2 intended factors, and E - T scale scores were significantly correlated across the 3 attitude objects (Study 1). Scale scores also displayed satisfactory internal and test-retest reliability and discriminant validity (Study 2). In addition, E - T scores (i.e., mean preference for epistemic vs. teleologic tactics) displayed satisfactory predictive and construct validity by predicting the extent to which individuals would recall negative attributes of their lives (Study 3) and of going to a counseling center (Study 4) after a session of deliberate self-persuasion. The discussion centers on theoretical and practical applications of the new scale.
Asunto(s)
Actitud , Cognición , Comunicación Persuasiva , Femenino , Humanos , Individualidad , Masculino , Psicometría , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
We studied mock jurors' evaluations of police false-evidence ploys across two false-evidence ploy information conditions (true or false confession). Study 1 participants evaluated lists of demeanor, testimonial, and scientific ploys and rated testimonial false-evidence ploys as more coercive than demeanor false-evidence ploys. Participants in the false-confession condition rated false-evidence ploys as more deceptive than did participants in the true-confession condition. Study 2 participants evaluated false-evidence ploy types within interrogation transcripts. Participants rated testimonial false-evidence ploys as more deceptive and coercive than demeanor false-evidence ploys; participants in the true-confession condition rated false-evidence ploys as more justified. Across studies, participants reading realistic transcripts rated false-evidence ploys as more deceptive and coercive. We discuss implications for scholars, attorneys, and interrogators.