Publicatie
Publicatie datum
Better not ask me why: effects of providing reasons for political attitudes.
Bosveld, W., Koomen, W. Better not ask me why: effects of providing reasons for political attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology: 1996, 35, p. 523-533.
Download de PDF
The present study extended earlier findings with respect to the effects of providing reasons for one's attitudes. On the basis of earlier work on reasoning it was expected that participants, asked to explain why they held a specific attitude towards a politician or a political party, would become more inconsistent in their attitudes compared with participants in a control condition. This is because people often do not have access to the reasons underlying their attitudes.
To meet some of the objections that can be raised to earlier research, participants in the present study (239 Dutch citizens with mean age of 43.5 yrs) were first asked for their attitudes, immediately followed by the request to explain why they held that attitude. After that, attitudes were measured again.
Overall, it was shown that for 2 out of 4 targets, attitudes became relatively inconsistent after providing reasons. Further, the moderating effect of involvement in politics was shown. Less involved participants showed reasoning effects for all 4 targets, whereas more involved participants did not show these effects, and for 1 target even became more consistent in their attitudes.
To meet some of the objections that can be raised to earlier research, participants in the present study (239 Dutch citizens with mean age of 43.5 yrs) were first asked for their attitudes, immediately followed by the request to explain why they held that attitude. After that, attitudes were measured again.
Overall, it was shown that for 2 out of 4 targets, attitudes became relatively inconsistent after providing reasons. Further, the moderating effect of involvement in politics was shown. Less involved participants showed reasoning effects for all 4 targets, whereas more involved participants did not show these effects, and for 1 target even became more consistent in their attitudes.
The present study extended earlier findings with respect to the effects of providing reasons for one's attitudes. On the basis of earlier work on reasoning it was expected that participants, asked to explain why they held a specific attitude towards a politician or a political party, would become more inconsistent in their attitudes compared with participants in a control condition. This is because people often do not have access to the reasons underlying their attitudes.
To meet some of the objections that can be raised to earlier research, participants in the present study (239 Dutch citizens with mean age of 43.5 yrs) were first asked for their attitudes, immediately followed by the request to explain why they held that attitude. After that, attitudes were measured again.
Overall, it was shown that for 2 out of 4 targets, attitudes became relatively inconsistent after providing reasons. Further, the moderating effect of involvement in politics was shown. Less involved participants showed reasoning effects for all 4 targets, whereas more involved participants did not show these effects, and for 1 target even became more consistent in their attitudes.
To meet some of the objections that can be raised to earlier research, participants in the present study (239 Dutch citizens with mean age of 43.5 yrs) were first asked for their attitudes, immediately followed by the request to explain why they held that attitude. After that, attitudes were measured again.
Overall, it was shown that for 2 out of 4 targets, attitudes became relatively inconsistent after providing reasons. Further, the moderating effect of involvement in politics was shown. Less involved participants showed reasoning effects for all 4 targets, whereas more involved participants did not show these effects, and for 1 target even became more consistent in their attitudes.