An experimental comparison of conclusion-drawing by the communicator and by the audience

Carl I. Hovland, Wallace Mandell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

"The effects upon opinion change of having the communicator draw the appropriate conclusion from material he had presented were compared with those produced when the drawing of the conclusion was left to the audience . . .. Over twice as many S's changed their opinions in the direction of the position advocated by the communicator when the speaker drew the appropriate conclusion than when the drawing of the conclusion was left to the audience." This relationship was studied as a function of the interacting variables: (1) confidence in the communicator, (2) intellectual ability, and (2) personality traits possessed by members of the audience. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)581-588
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Abnormal and Social Psychology
Volume47
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1952
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Aptitude
Personality
Direction compound

Keywords

  • AUDIENCE CONCLUSIONS
  • AUDIENCE, CONCLUSIONS, SPEAKER INFLUENCE
  • COMMUNICATION
  • COMMUNICATION, SPEAKER &
  • LANGUAGE &

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

An experimental comparison of conclusion-drawing by the communicator and by the audience. / Hovland, Carl I.; Mandell, Wallace.

In: Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 47, No. 3, 07.1952, p. 581-588.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4656d6e9f236428d991a71c626f9fa46,
title = "An experimental comparison of conclusion-drawing by the communicator and by the audience",
abstract = "{"}The effects upon opinion change of having the communicator draw the appropriate conclusion from material he had presented were compared with those produced when the drawing of the conclusion was left to the audience . . .. Over twice as many S's changed their opinions in the direction of the position advocated by the communicator when the speaker drew the appropriate conclusion than when the drawing of the conclusion was left to the audience.{"} This relationship was studied as a function of the interacting variables: (1) confidence in the communicator, (2) intellectual ability, and (2) personality traits possessed by members of the audience. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).",
keywords = "AUDIENCE CONCLUSIONS, AUDIENCE, CONCLUSIONS, SPEAKER INFLUENCE, COMMUNICATION, COMMUNICATION, SPEAKER &, LANGUAGE &",
author = "Hovland, {Carl I.} and Wallace Mandell",
year = "1952",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1037/h0059833",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "47",
pages = "581--588",
journal = "Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology",
issn = "0096-851X",
publisher = "Boyd Printing",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An experimental comparison of conclusion-drawing by the communicator and by the audience

AU - Hovland, Carl I.

AU - Mandell, Wallace

PY - 1952/7

Y1 - 1952/7

N2 - "The effects upon opinion change of having the communicator draw the appropriate conclusion from material he had presented were compared with those produced when the drawing of the conclusion was left to the audience . . .. Over twice as many S's changed their opinions in the direction of the position advocated by the communicator when the speaker drew the appropriate conclusion than when the drawing of the conclusion was left to the audience." This relationship was studied as a function of the interacting variables: (1) confidence in the communicator, (2) intellectual ability, and (2) personality traits possessed by members of the audience. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

AB - "The effects upon opinion change of having the communicator draw the appropriate conclusion from material he had presented were compared with those produced when the drawing of the conclusion was left to the audience . . .. Over twice as many S's changed their opinions in the direction of the position advocated by the communicator when the speaker drew the appropriate conclusion than when the drawing of the conclusion was left to the audience." This relationship was studied as a function of the interacting variables: (1) confidence in the communicator, (2) intellectual ability, and (2) personality traits possessed by members of the audience. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

KW - AUDIENCE CONCLUSIONS

KW - AUDIENCE, CONCLUSIONS, SPEAKER INFLUENCE

KW - COMMUNICATION

KW - COMMUNICATION, SPEAKER &

KW - LANGUAGE &

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0000471065&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0000471065&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/h0059833

DO - 10.1037/h0059833

M3 - Article

VL - 47

SP - 581

EP - 588

JO - Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology

SN - 0096-851X

IS - 3

ER -