抵制说服:自我损耗对大学生态度改变的影响

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2015.05.04

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以87名大学生为被试,采用2(损耗,非损耗)×2(强说服信息,弱说服信息)的实验设计,让被试完成损耗或非损耗任务后,阅读与其已有观念相反的或强或弱的说服信息,再测查其态度及认知反应,考察自我损耗对说服后态度的影响,并进一步考察认知反应在自我损耗与说服后态度关系中的作用。结果发现:(1)损耗组比非损耗组更容易顺从说服信息;(2)自我损耗及说服信息质量对说服后态度的交互作用边缘显著:在非损耗的情况下,个体阅读强、弱不同质量信息产生的态度有显著差异,在损耗情况下,个体阅读强、弱不同质量信息产生的态度差异不显著;阅读强说服信息,损耗组和非损耗组的态度差异不显著,阅读弱说服信息,损耗组的态度显著高于非损耗组;(3)自我损耗不影响个体的总体想法数量,但影响其思维偏好,自我损耗后个体更容易产生与说服信息一致的想法,中介分析表明自我损耗对说服后态度的影响是以思维偏好为中介的。

关键词: 自我损耗, 态度, 认知反应, 思维偏好

Abstract: A sample of 87 participants was selected in the present study,and used a 2 (depleted task or non-depleted task) × 2 (strong argument or weak argument) design to explore how ego-depletion effect on attitude change,and explore further the role of cognitive response between ego depletion and attitude change. Participants completed an initial task designed to deplete or not deplete their regulatory resources, then participants read a message supporting a counterattitudinal policy(strong or weak), at last, participants reported their attitude and cognitive responses. Results indicated:(1) ego depletion affected participants' attitude significantly, after ego-depletion,participants more acquiescent. (2) the effect of 2 × 2 interaction was significant, the participants who were non-depleted were able to differentiate between the strong and weak persuasive information; however participants who were depleted showed no distinction in their attitudes. At the same time, the participants who read strong persuasive information showed no distinction in their attitudes whether depleted or not, but the participants who read weak persuasive information showed different significant, the attitude change of students who were depleted was more dramatically. (3) the research showed that depletion didn't impaired the number of cognitions listed by participants' about the policy, while significantly affected thought favorability, depleted participants generated more favorable cognitive responses, mediate analysis showed depletion influenced attitude through thought favorability.

Key words: ego-depletion, attitude, cognitive response, thought favorability

中图分类号:

B844

齐晓栋, 张大均. 抵制说服:自我损耗对大学生态度改变的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(5): 539-546.

QI Xiaodong, ZHANG Dajun. Resistance to Persuasion: The Effects of Ego-depletion on Attitude Change of College Students[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2015, 31(5): 539-546.

参考文献

Aaker, J. L., & Maheswaran, D. (1997).The effect of cultural orientation on persuasion.Journal of Consumer Research,24(3), 315-328.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,51(6), 1173-1182.

Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego depletion: is the active self a limited resource?.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74(5), 1252-1265.

Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Tice, D. M. (2007).The strength model of self-control.Current Directions in Psychological Science,16(6), 351-355.

Bohner, G., &Dickel, N.(2011). Attitude and attitude change.Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 391-417.

Burkley, E. (2008). The role of self-control in resistance to persuasion.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,34(3), 419-431.

Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1981). Social psychological procedures for cognitive response assessment: The thought-listing technique.Cognitive assessment, 309-342.

Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989).Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman& J. A. Bargh (Eds.),Unintended thought(pp. 212-252). New York: Guilford

Clarkson, J. J., Hirt, E. R., Jia, L., & Alexander, M. B. (2010). When perception is more than reality: the effects of perceived versus actual resource depletion on self-regulatory behavior.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,98(1), 29-46.

Fennis, B. M., Janssen, L., & Vohs, K. D. (2009). Acts of Benevolence: A Limited-Resource Account of Compliance with Charitable Requests.Journal of Consumer Research,35(6), 906-924.

Furley, P., Bertrams, A., Englert, C., & Delphia, A. (2013).Ego depletion, attentional control, and decision making in sport.Psychology of Sport and Exercise,14(6), 900-904.

González-Vallejo, C., & Reid, A. A. (2006).Quantifying persuasion effects on choice with the decision threshold of the stochastic choice model.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,100(2), 250-267.

Hagger, M. S., Wood, C., Stiff, C., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. (2010). Ego depletion and the strength model of self-control: a meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin,136(4), 495-525.

Janssen, L., Fennis, B. M., & Pruyn, A. T. H. (2010). Forewarned is forearmed: Conserving self-control strength to resist social influence.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,46(6), 911-921.

Lewandowski, G. W., Ciarocco, N. J., Pettenato, M., & Stephan, J. (2012). Pick me up Ego depletion and receptivity to relationship initiation.Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,29(8), 1071-1084.

Muraven, M., Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Self-control as a limited resource: Regulatory depletion patterns.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74(3), 774-789.

Park, H. S., Levine, T. R., Kingsley Westerman, C. Y., Orfgen, T., & Foregger, S. (2007). The effects of argument quality and involvement type on attitude formation and attitude change: A test of dual-process and social judgment predictions.Human Communication Research,33(1), 81-102.

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986).The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,19, 123-205.

Petty, R. E., Wells, G. L., & Brock, T. C. (1976). Distraction can enhance or reduce yielding to propaganda: Thought disruption versus effort justification.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,34(5), 874-884.

Schmeichel, B. J. (2007). Attention control, memory updating, and emotion regulation temporarily reduce the capacity for executive control.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,136(2), 241-255.

Schmeichel, B. J., Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2003). Intellectual performance and ego depletion: role of the self in logical reasoning and other information processing.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,85(1), 33-46.

Vohs, K. D., & Heatherton, T. F. (2000). Self-regulatory failure: A resource-depletion approach.Psychological Science,11(3), 249-254.

Vohs, K. D., Baumeister, R. F., Schmeichel, B. J., Twenge, J. M., Nelson, N. M., & Tice, D. M. (2008). Making choices impairs subsequent self-control: a limited-resource account of decision making, self-regulation, and active initiative.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,94(5), 883-898.

Wheeler, S. C., Briol, P., & Hermann, A. D. (2007). Resistance to persuasion as self-regulation: Ego-depletion and its effects on attitude change processes.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,43(1), 150-156.

Zuwerink, J. R., & Devine, P. G. (1996). Attitude importance and resistance to persuasion: It's not just the thought that counts.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,70(5), 931-944.

窦凯, 聂衍刚, 王玉洁, 黎建斌. (2014). 自我损耗促进冒险行为.心理科学, 37(1), 150-155.

方杰, 张敏强, 邱皓政. (2012). 中介效应的检验方法和效果量测量: 回顾与展望.心理发展与教育, 28(1), 105-111.

方杰, 张敏强. (2012). 中介效应的点估计和区间估计: 乘积分布法, 非参数Bootstrap和MCMC法.心理学报,44(10), 1408-1420.

黎建斌. (2013). 自我控制资源与认知资源相互影响的机制: 整合模型.心理科学进展, 21(12), 235-242.

马向阳, 徐富明, 吴修良, 潘靖, 李甜. (2012). 说服效应的理论模型, 影响因素与应对策略.心理科学进展, 20(5), 735-744

任俊, 李瑞雪, 詹鋆, 刘迪, 林曼, 彭年强. (2014). 好人可能做出坏行为的心理学解释—基于自我控制资源损耗的研究证据.心理学报, 46(6),841-851.

于斌, 乐国安, 刘惠军. (2013). 自我控制的力量模型.心理科学进展,21(7), 1272-1282.

相关文章 15

[1]	李妍, 梁丽婵, 周欣然, 边玉芳. 家师关系与小学生学校态度：师生关系的中介作用及父母差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(1): 74-82.
[2]	丁芳媛, 杨义滢, 王阳茜, 贾云丞, 程刚. 家庭社会经济地位与大学新生短期择偶态度:基于潜变量增长建模的分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(5): 663-672.
[3]	余易达, 潘斌, 苗新煜, 陈光辉. 班级师生关系调节学生反欺凌态度与欺凌行为的关系:一项多水平分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2023, 39(4): 550-558.
[4]	薛笑然, 黄碧娟, 李红霞, 赵晓萌, 司继伟. 小学儿童数学态度与数学成就的纵向联系：学业拖延和数学元认知的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(4): 520-529.
[5]	王小凤, 燕良轼, 丁道群. 童年期不良经历对中学生良心的影响：特质自我控制和自我损耗的链式中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(4): 566-575.
[6]	李蓓蕾, 高婷, 张莉莉, 周楠, 邓林园. 学生感知的教师欺凌态度与学生欺凌行为的关系——学生欺凌态度的中介作用及其性别的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(3): 348-357.
[7]	程可心, 游雅媛, 叶宝娟, 陈志忠. 家庭功能与中学生自杀态度的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(2): 272-278.
[8]	赵晓萌, 张傲雪, 张明亮, 李红霞, 司继伟. 父母教育卷入与小学儿童数学焦虑的纵向联系:数学态度的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(5): 683-690.
[9]	王燕, 王素芳, 张伊娜, 王凯. 不同性别比和童年经济状况对未婚男性性态度的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(1): 54-59.
[10]	丁倩, 张永欣, 周宗奎. 相对剥夺感与大学生网络过激行为:自我损耗的中介作用及性别差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(2): 200-207.
[11]	慕德芳, 黄芳. 休息对自我损耗的补偿作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(6): 657-664.
[12]	舒首立, 桑青松, 郭永玉, 黄希庭. 作弊为什么会传染?社会损失和作弊态度的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(6): 664-671.
[13]	陈英敏, 刘忠花, 李亮, 曲艺, 韩磊, 高峰强. 高中生羞怯与学业适应的关系:学业求助的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2018, 34(3): 322-329.
[14]	陈晓晨, 蒋薇, 时勘. 青少年跨群体友谊与群际态度的关系研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(3): 285-293.
[15]	陈羿君, 沈亦丰, 张海伦. 单亲家长性别角色类型与子女社会适应的关系——性别角色教养态度的中介作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(3): 301-309.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed