REFERENCE GROUP THEORY AS A PREMCTOR OF MESSAGE SOURCE EFFECTS Dissertation for the Degree of Ph. D. MICMGAN STATE UNNNERSITY STUART H. SURUN 1974, -.~... ""‘""'""‘?’w'a llxlllutlgllllliltltllltt tum _, 3 JAE-a: . 7. This is to certify that the thesis entitled REFERENCE GROUP THEORY AS A PREDICTOR OF MESSAGE SOURCE EFFECTS presented by Stuart H. Surlin has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph . D o dggree in COHmunicat ion fiafi fl/ Major professor Date July 26, 197a 0-7 639 ll , [ll 1". l [I .».[{I|lli. ‘[ .[.[v[ If I .. . [ll [a 9" {I I|| I III I II o If It (\ llllll-‘I‘Illl‘ lll‘ I‘ll . .lull. LI u I ABSTRACT REFERENCE GROUP THEORY AS A PREDICTOR OF MESSAGE SOURCE EFFECTS By Stuart H. Surlin This study attempts to apply a social—psychological theory, Reference Group Theory, to a communication effects situation. Previous research has dealt with the differential effectiveness of a message source based upon the topic being discussed and contextual conditions. Reference Group Theory would predict uniform effectiveness across all topics by a normative referent message source for a particular message receiver or group of receivers. A nonverbal cue, dressing behavior, was used as a method of identifying a modal normative referent for a partic- ular population, students at the University of Georgia. The modal normative and negative comparative dress type referent for this particular population were operationalized through pretested dress type descriptions. The dress types rated most "like me" and "worse than me" by University of Georgia students in the pretest were then used as the normative and negative comparative dress types, respectively, in the study. The study consisted of a factorial experimental design in which identical messages containing the source's view on 3/ ,7QV7 (/ £007 2 Stuart H. Surlin three topics: the University of Georgia dormitory policy, the air pollution problem, and busing for racial integration, were identified with two source manipulations. The source was described as being dressed in either a modally normative or negative comparative manner. The message was randomly distributed to three hundred University of Georgia students. The degree of personal identification by each respondent with the source from which the message was received was also used as an independent variable. The hypothesized effects of the personally and modally normative referent message source were: increased receiver agreement with source, perceived higher importance of topics discussed, perceived higher source credi- bility, and higher topic comprehension. The modal normative message source was not found to elicit favorable message effects from respondents, for any effect conditions. It is believed that for large groups of people there will be many people who do not personally accept the modal normative referent as their own personalized norma- tive referent, therefore overall message effects are averaged out resulting in a regression toward the mean. H0wever, support was received for a personalized normative referent message source concerning increased agree- ment on topics discussed and increased projected agreement on some non-discussed topics. Lesser support was exhibited for increased importance of topics and higher perceived source credibility effects by a personalized normative message source. \I'lv’. IIIIJI'V [IL] \«Ilsl‘ II ll\i{ [Ll ['k[[’ll {.Il. all. III I I l l 3 , StuarttL Surlhi No support was found for higher comprehension effects. Although there was not consistent and strong support for all hypothesized effects in the personalized normative referent message source analysis condition, the author tenta- tively accepts the theoretical application of Reference Group Theory to communication situations. Future research which is suggested by the author could both improve the present study, as well as extend the theory upon which the study is based. Some suggestions include using other cues for reference group identification while considering the clarity and strength of the cue; using other respondent groups; and clustering topic areas. REFERENCE GROUP THEORY AS A PREDICTOR OF MESSAGE SOURCE EFFECTS By Stuart H. Surlin A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Communication 1974 Accepted by the faculty of the Department of Communication College of Communication Arts, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree. %{I Jr! 1, Kata/f Director of Thesis Guidance Committee: % 6‘” 14([1 L $715901[1, Chairman M (1m; ( {22164-71 l €%X]Zégf . )ut DEDICATION To my wife Judi who gave me a boost up to my peaks and helped pull me up from my valleys. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Since so many individuals were of unique assistance to me throughout the writing of this dissertation the order in which they are acknowledged has no reflection upon their perceived importance to the successful completion of this study. An unfortunate loss to friends and family, as well as a major loss to the academic world was the passing away of Dr. Verling Troldahl, my original dissertation committee chairman. His assistance in the initial planning and data collection stages of this study was immensely helpful. Like- wise, the humanitarian and academic spirit exhibited by Dr. Lawrence Sarbaugh as he stepped into the chairmanship posi- tion and led this candidate to a successful completion of his Ph.D. requirements was much appreciated. Since the dissertation requirements were completed away from the Michigan State campus, the financial and emotional support given to me by administrators of the University of Georgia was greatly appreciated. The candidate was financially supported during one summer by a University of Georgia Moss Fellowship and the time freed in order to pursue my dissertation research was very beneficial to its final completion. Likewise, the emotional support supplied by my Sequence Head, Frazier Moore; and my Dean, Warren iii Agee, provided the proper environment within which to con- tinue my research. My colleague John Leckenby was not only quite helpful in assisting me in the computer analysis of my data but he was a constant "sounding board" for ideas and interpreta- tions espoused by the author. Also, students, at the Univer- sity of Georgia, who were self-motivated and became inter- ested and involved in some stage of this study, such as Ellen Green, Fran Fulton, and Cathy B. Brown, deserve a big "thank you." iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 - Introduction, Theory, Review of Litera- Chapter C. D. E. A. B. C. ture, and Hypotheses IntrOdUCtion o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Theoretic Base 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 1. George Kelly's Personal Construct Theory Of Personality o o o o o o o o 2. Social Interaction Theory . . . . . . a. The Basis and Area of Applica- tion for Reference Group Theory . b. Distinction Between Normative and Comparative Referents . . . . . Reference Group Theory Adapted to Com- munication o o o o o o o o o o o Hypotheses and Supporting Literature . . FOOtnO'teS to Chapter 1 o o o o o o o o 0 Methodology Design 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Population and Sample . . . . . . . . . . Operationalization of Variables . . . . . lo Dependent variables 0 o o o o o o o o a. Agreement with Message Source Referent . . . . . . . . . . . . b. Importance Rating of Topics . . . c. Source Credibility Ratings . . . d. Comprehension of Discussed Topics 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 2. Independent Variables . . . . . . . . a. Reference Source Dress Types . . b. Respondent Personal Identifica- tion with Dress Types . . . . . . c. Message or Topic Choice 3. Demographic Variables . . . Data COlleCtion o o o o o o o o 1. InStrmnent o o o o o o o o 2. Administration . . . . . Method of Statistical Analysis . . . . . FOOanteS to Chapter 2 o o o o o o o o o Page 14 18 22 24 48 52 53 55 55 55 56 57 59 61 61 65 67 68 69 69 71 73 75 . III‘. {.i) \flltlt’llll 1i t’Jl" I {ll lljl‘li Ill [{[tl‘l‘ [II I l I it Chapter 3 - A. B. c. D. E. Chapter 4 - B. C. Bibliography Appendices Appe Appe Appe Appe Appe Appe Appe Findings Findings for Agreement on Attitude Measures 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Findings for Importance of Discussed Topics 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Findings for Source Credibility Measures. Findings for Comprehension Measures . . . smary Of Findings 0 o o o o o o o o o o 1. Findings 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o 2. Interpretation 0 o o o o o o o o o 0 Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations summary 0 o o o o o o o o o o 1. Theory, Hypotheses, and Review of Literature 0 o o o o 2. Methodology for Testing of. Hypotheses 3. Findings 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o COUClUSionS o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Recommendations 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 1. Application of Findings in a Com- munication Setting . . . . . . . . . 2. Future ResearCh o o o o o o o o o o o a. Modification of Present Research. b. Related StUdieS o o o o o o o o o l. Clarity of Identifying Cue . 2. Multiple and Conflicting Cues 3. Personal vs. Societal Norms . 4. Delineation of Cognitive StIUCture o o o o o o o o o o ndix A - Copy of Questionnaire . . . . . ndix B - Pretest of Dress Types . . . . . ndix C - Demographic Frequencies for Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . ndix D - Factor Analysis of Source Credibility Items . . . . . . . ndix E - Mean Scores of Self-Reported Dress Description Ratings . . . ndix F - Respondent Mean Scores for Agreement and Perceived Agree- ment With Source's Position by Topic and Control Variable SUbgroupS o o o o o o o o o o o ndix G - Respondent Mean Scores for . Agreement with Source on Each of Three Topics for Each of Two Types of Sources, by Sex and Social Class of Respondent . . . vi Page 76 86 91 94 98 98 98 101 101 104 106 108 111 111 113 113 117 117 120 121 122 125 134 147 155 156 157 158 159 Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix RespOndent Mean Scores for Agree- ment with Source on Each of Three Topics for Each of Two Types of Sources, by Year in School_and School of Enrollment . . . . . . . . Respondent Mean Scores for Agree- ment and Perceived Agreement with Source's Position by Level of Source-Receiver Identification SUbgroupS o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Respondent Mean Scores for Per- ceived Importance of Three Dis- cussed Topics by Level of Source- Receiver Identification, and Independent and Control Variable SUbgrOUPS o o o o o o o o o o o o o RespOndent Mean Scores for Source Credibility Ratings by Sex of Respondent and Source-Receiver Identification SUbgroupS o o o o o 0 Respondent Mean Scores for Compre- hension Ratings by Sex of Respondent and Source-ReceiVer Identification Subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Page 160 161 164 166 167 Table 1. 10. LIST OF TABLES Three-Way ANOVA for Agreement on Discussed Topics by Sex, Topics, and High-Low Identifi- cation with the Modal NOrmative Designated Source 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Agreement Mean Scores on Three Topics Discussed by the Modal NOrmative Designated Message Source for High-Low Respondent Identification Subgroups. Mean Agreement Score Comparisons on Eight Topics for the Highest and Lowest Identification with the Modal Normative Designated Source . . . . . . Three-way ANOVA for Agreement on Discussed Topics by Sex, Topics, and High-Low Identifica- tion with the Modal Negative Comparative DeSignated source 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Mean Agreement Score Comparisons on Eight Topics for the Highest and Lowest Identification with the Modal Negative Comparative Designated Source. Three-Way ANOVA for Importance of Discussed Topics by Sex, Topics, and High-Low Identifica- tion with the NOrmative Designated Source . . . . Three-way ANOVA for Importance of Discussed Topics by Sex, Topics, and High-Low Identifica- tion with the Negative Comparative Designated Source 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Mean Scores for the Three-Way Interaction Effect of Discussed Topics, Sex, and High-Low Identifi- cation with the Modal Negative Comparative Designated Source on Topic Importance Ratings . . Two-way ANOVA for Totaled Source Credibility Factors by Sex and High-Low Identification with the Mbdal NOrmative Designated Source . . . . . . Two-way ANOVA for Totaled Source Credibility Factors by Sex and High-Low Identification with the Modal Negative Comparative Designated Source. viii Page 78 78 8O 82 83 87 88 89 91 92 II, |' \I‘ 1' ,1 \r ‘1'. I?!) ’ ll .\ '4 \II 1" l‘fi "..I‘{ l" . . ‘II :‘ (3.1". ('1 {[(lql‘lii itl ll Table 11. 12. 13. Page Respondent Mean Scores for Source Credibility by Sex of Respondent and Level of Source-Receiver Identification Subgroupings . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Two-Way ANOVA for Comprehension of the Message by Sex and High—Low Identification with the Modal Normative DeSignated source 0 o o o o o o o o o o 96 Two—Way ANOVA for Comprehension of the Message by Sex and High-Low Identification with the Modal Negative Comparative Designated Source . . . . . 96 ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION, THEORY, REVIEW OF LITERATURE, AND HYPOTHESES A. Introduction The effects of an individual as a message source have been found to differ as a result of many variables. Many of these variables consist of the endogenous and exogenous aspects of the message source. A general theory has not been available to deduce the relationship between source variables and the generalized effect of a source of a given type upon an audience. A systematized manner of predicting message source effects is needed over a wide range of topics for a particular individual or group of individuals. This study proposes a method of not only working towards a highly generalizable means of predicting message source effects, but also begins testing the proposi- tions stated in Reference Group Theory. Past research in the communication area has con- centrated on identifying the characteristics of a message source which lead to his identification as a highly credible, or more effective, source. waever, as the source moves from topic to topic his credibility may be expected .\- 2 to vary. The aim of this study is to uncover a higher order of source identification which leads to more stable effects ratings over a range of topic areas. The identification of message sources as normative "psychological" referents should lead to a higher order of influence which will generalize to many topic areas. It is felt that once a message source is identified, through some verbal or nonverbal cue, as being a normative "psycho- logical" referent, then a message encoded by this indi- vidual would be more effective than a similar message encoded by an individual not perceived as being a normative "psychological" referent. A normative "psychological" referent is deemed a high credible source because of his ability to "see the world" as the message decoder assesses it. George Kelly's Personal Construct Theory is invoked as a method of explaining the importance of "correctly predicting" the world around oneself. Thus, an individual who "sees the world" the way I do will be better able to help me "cor- rectly predict" the world around me. Thus, it is impera- tive that gfiguexbe_encoded by the source which will com- municate the fact that he is a normative "psychological" referent for the receiver. Once this cue is communicated, then the specific message communicated by this source will be differentially effective. Previous source credibility variables consisted of ways of identifying the source's credibility based upon his J tJ—k 1“ ‘4“ J - ___‘., ‘A‘.’.L«, d‘-’ .IAA-\a .nouv...v ‘-‘ l I l ’ I " " ‘.'_"" fi’fi‘F—"' 3 perceived social position, social class, educational and occupational achievements, etc. These characteristics are differentially perceived by different people in different situations. The higher order measure, used in this study, is predicated upon the source and receiver's personal and parallel "psychological" behavior. This is seen as a powerful and consistent method of predicting perceived source credibility and subsequent effect. The key problem is to identify the verbal and non- verbal cues which would communicate to the receiver that the source is, indeed, a normative "psychological" referent. Dressing behavior was chosen for this study because data from previous studies indicate that an individual's manner of dress is closely tied to the "psychological" self. Also, it is a highly visible form of nonverbal communication. Thus, a message source, before encoding a verbal message, has told something about himself merely by the manner in which he is dressed, a nonverbal message. By the time the verbal message is communicated the message source has already been classified as either a normative "psycho- nlogical" referent or not, and consequently his message will be differentially received. First, the author will discuss Kelly's Personal Construct Theory, emphasizing the aspects of this psycho- logical theory which set forth the cognitive base for social behavior. Next, social interaction theory will be briefly 4 developed as a means of viewing the historical development of what eventually becomes the reference group concept. Then, the author will discuss the convergence of these individual psychological and sociological theories as they form a socio-psychological theory, Reference Group Theory. Finally, findings from previous research containing variables and concepts paralleling the variables and con- cepts dealt with in Reference Group Theory are cited, and hypotheses for the current study are stated. The aim of the study is to further the explication of Reference Group Theory as well as furthering communication research. B. Theoretic Base 1. George Kelly's Personal Construct Theory of Personality According to Personal Construct Theory, each;man\is constantly trying to control and predict the events which occur in his environment. George Kelly compares this general behavior of every man to the occupational goals of scientists. He states, "Thus the notion of 'man-the- scientist' is a particular abstraction of all mankind and not a concrete classification of particular men. . .every 1 In man is, in his own particular way, a scientist." addition to his constant search for prediction and control, man also is striving for mental consistency or balance. Man is constantly, in Kelly's estimation, attempting to 5 avoid the discomfort that inconsistency between prediction and construing of reality always brings. The manner in which man has been able to symbolically represent his environment, and effectively communicate his representation to others is through constructs, construct systems, and his ability to verbalize. Symbolic repre— sentation of the environment and an ability to communicate these symbols distinguish man from all the other living organisms in the universe. Man looks at his world through patterns. The patterns he imposes upon events to which he is exposed determine what he experiences in the universe. In other words, he creates his own experience. Future events are accordingly perceived in relation to his previous "experi- ences." George Kelly describes "constructs" and "construct systems" as, ". . . these patterns that are tentatively tried on for size. They are ways of construing the world . . . a representation of the universe, a representation erected by a living creature and tested against the reality of that universe. . . . In general, man seeks to improve his constructs by increasing his repertory, by altering them to provide better fits, and by subsuming them with superordinate constructs or systems. . . . Those construc- tion systems which can be communicated can be widely "2 shared. In other words, "constructs" are the patterns in the interpretations that we place on events; we use them to 6 look for replication among the events in our universe. George Kelly sees man as being flexible enough to change his construct system as he deems necessary. Man is constantly trying to increase the specific predictive efficiency of each construct and the over-all predictive efficiency of the system of which it would, if adopted, become a part. If the universe is in a constant state of flux, then it would necessitate a certain degree of freedom on each individual's part to maintain high predictive efficiency for his construct system. Thus, George Kelly has built into his theory the con- cept "constructive alternativism." He says, ". . . we assume that all of our present inter- pretations of the universe are subject to revision or replacement . . . there are always some alterna- tive constructions available to choose among in dealing with the world. No one needs to paint him- self into a corner; no one needs to be completely hemmed in by circumstances; no one needs to be the victim of his biography."3 The basic theory consists of one fundamental postu- late and eleven corollaries. The ones relating to this study will be presented and briefly discussed. I. Fundamental Postulate: A person's processes are psychologically channelized by the ways in which he antici- pates events. Cognitive and overt behavior in which an individual engages reflects the anticipations one has for the future, and one's anticipations are expressed in one's constructs. Behavior is both motivated and given its consistency by attempts to anticipate events. 7 II. Dichotomy Corollary: A person's construction system is composed of a finite number of dichotomous con- structs. All thinking is considered to be basically dichot- omous. At one point and for one event, if a construct is relevant, an either-or decision must be made. For example, if the evaluative construct "good-bad" is relevant for a particular event, then either the pole "good" or "bad" is invoked as a means of construing the event. III. Choice Corollary: A person chooses for him: self that alternative in a dichotomized construct through which he anticipates the greater possibility for extension and definition of his system. Whenever a person is confronted with the choice of an alternative on a construct, he will tend to make that choice in favor of the alternative which seems to provide the best basis for anticipating the ensuing events. The decision is elaborative for one always chooses between: becoming more certain about fewer things, or, becoming vaguely aware of more things. Therefore, Kelly refers to this as the "elaborative choice." IV. Experience Corollary: A person's construction system varies as he successively construes the replications of events. Kelly states that, "As one's anticipations or hypo- theses are successively revised in the light of the unfold- ing sequence of events, the construction system undergoes a 8 progressive evolution. The person reconstrues. This is "experience." ". . . The person who merely stands agog at each emerging event may experience a series of interesting surprises, but if he makes no attempt to discover the recurrent themes, his experience does not amount to much. It is when man begins to see the orderliness in a sequence of events that he begins to experience them." The Experience Corollary has strong implications for Kelly's conceptualization of the topic of "learning." It is most easily explained through the description used by Kelly himself. He says that, "When we accept the assumption that a person's construction system varies as he successively con- strues the replications of events, together with the antecedent assumption that the course of all psycho- logical processes is plotted by one's construction of events, we have pretty well bracketed the topic of learning: . . . Thewburden of our assumption is that uflearningcfis not a special class of psychdlogicalwpro- cesses; it is synonymous with any and all psycho- logical processes. It is not something that happens to a person on occasion; it is what makes him a person in the first place." Thus, "learning" is not conceived of as stimulus response with reinforcement, but rather as a consequence of how the person construes the event, what recurrent themes he perceives, and how he restructures his construct system as a result. It is a way of looking at what the person has "learned" or "experienced" instead of trying to get him to "learn" or "experience" a certain event in a certain manner. When two individuals interact, this event is defined as an "experience." In turn, this is typed as a "learning 9 experience." One learns to classify "others" as being relatively similar-dissimilar to oneself in the manner in which the environment is construed, through these inter- action events. Over time, one becomes aware of the satis- faction occurring by becoming attuned to individuals per- ceived as construing the environment the same way "I do," and by accepting the description of events communicated by this "other." In other words, individuals which cue each other into perceiving an interpersonal-similarity in con- struing the environment around them will be taken on as highly credible sources for one another. This is done be- cause of the belief that the other individual will help him better anticipate his environment through the information he communicates. V. Commonality Corollary: To the extent that one person employs a construction of experience which is similar to that employed by another, his psychological pro- cesses are similar to those of the other person. When looked at from the point of view of a stimulus- response oriented psychologist, one would say that if two people were "exposed" to the exact same experience then they would also duplicate each other's psychological processes. In other words, they would have been expected to interpret their experience in approximately the same manner. Kelly is saying that people have similar experiences based only on the similarities they share concerning their construing of events. 10 It is possible for two people to be exposed to the same event but construe it differently--this is not a "common experience;" on the other hand, two people can be said to have had a "common experience" even when they have been exposed to quite different events. The commonality of experience is based upon their construing of the event, and not upon their exposure to the event, itself. This theoretic corollary will lead to predictions concerning the perception of a human interaction event or experience. An individual may be perceived by one indi- vidual as not construing the world similarly but perceived, on the basis of the same cues, by another individual as construing the world similarly. Following from this, the message communicated by the first individual would not carry a "common" meaning for the two message source receivers, or have "common" effect upon their construal of the environment and their consequent behavior. VI. Sociality Corollary: To the extent that one person construes the construction processes of another, he may play a role in a social process involving the other person. George Kelly defines "role" as, ". . . a course of activity which is played out in the light of one's under- standing of the behavior of one or more other people."6 This definition is conceptually similar to the definition of "role" in reference group theory. Thus, if an individual "understands" (i.e., is capable of predicting other people's 11 behavior) the people he comes in contact with, then he will be ready and usually willing to enter into a relationship with these other people. This corollary does not try to infer that two indi- viduals have to be alike in the manner they construe events in their environment. But, it does state that each person does have to effectively construe the other person's con- struction system in order to achieve an effective or viable role relationship (i.e., one that is not usually in a state of imbalance or discomfort). In George Kelly's personality theory, one begins to understand how a similarly construed environment on the part of two individuals becomes the basis for social inter- action on the part of these individuals and increased com- mon experiences which, in turn, lead to greater similarity in construing the environment. Thus, with the addition of a social orientation, as discussed in the next section, the author is laying the groundwork for the explication of Reference Group Theory as used in this study. 2. Social Interaction Theory The basic premise of social interaction theory is that social behavior results from interaction with others. As primarily explicated in the works of Mead (1934), social behavior integrates the relationship of the external environment and internal introspection. Thus, through 12 continuous development in Darwinian style, the "self" emerges from interaction between the individual's "I," "me," and "generalized others." For Mead, "mind," through its capacity to use significant symbols, a characteristic solely identified with human behavior; is the ability to perceive another individual's reaction to one's perspective. Thus per- ceived, one may modify or decide to continue his present perspective. In this manner, the social process begins. Mead states: "Mind arises in the social process only when that process as a whole enters into or is present in the experience of any one of the given individuals involved in that process. . . . It is by means of ,reflgxiyeness-gthe turning-back of the experience of the individuals involved in it; it is by such means, which enable the individual to take the attitude of the other toward himself, that the individual is able consciously to adjust himself to that process, and to modify the resultant of that process in any given social act in terms of his adjust- ment to it. Reflexiveness, then, is the B----) sn__) B "S" is the self which is antecedent to "B" behavior. Behavior results from the mental process involving a symbolic other and takes the form of a revised self (51. . .Sn), and "self" consistent overt action. The symbolic referent, the resulting cognitive structure change, and the overt behavior can all be determined once the initial cognitive structure of the individual has been measured. Thus, the symbolic other which is chosen as a referent, the cognitive structure change, and the overt behavior can be predicted. This is not to say that the individual is consciously aware of the particular individual or group he is using as a -Qhwou \a-d l8 symbolic other. The criterion of consciousness is not always necessary. An individual is not reacting to a particular person or group in a role related manner, but one is reacting to a perceived cognitive structure. The perceived cognitive structure of one's "self" as it relates to symbolic others. b. Distinction Between Normative and Comparative Referents Reference Group Theory, explicated in this paper, primarily evolves around the functioning of two concepts, the "normative" referent and "comparative" referent. Past researchers have used similar wording when discussing the reference group concept (Hyman, 1942; Newcomb, 1950; H. Kelley, 1952; SESFlifiend sherighiggg; Shibutani, 1955). The term "reference group" was first used by Hyman (1942) when he was attempting to understand the way indi- viduals ranked themselves in terms of their choice of a social framework for comparison. At about the same time Newcomb, Hartley, and Sherif were all grappling with the manner in which individuals related themselves to groups within the larger community. In 1949, Stouffer and his associates were led in their studies of The American Soldier to the concept of "relative deprivation." They reasoned that the soldier's sense of deprivation was not dependent on an absolute level, but was relative to the perceived level in the groups with which he compared himself. 19 Merton and Rossi (1949, in Hyman and Singer, 1968) synthesized the findings up to that point and kept interest in the concept alive. H. Kelley's (1952) distinction be- 41/; w./ tween "comparative" and "normative" reference groups, corresponding to the two functions of reference groups as standards of comparison for self-appraisal or as a source of the individuals' norms, attitudes, and values, is basic to all other formulations of the reference group concept. Refinements of this concept have taken the form of dis- tinguishing between: (1) positive and negative normative, in which individuals may form their attitudes in opposition to the norms of a group as well as in accordance with them, (2) conformity to group norms, in which a strong reference group can shrink one's alternatives in thought and behavior, (3) anticipatory socialization, in which individuals may take as a reference group a nonmembership group to which they aspire to belong and take on what they believe to be the group's norms before coming in contact with the group, or (4) multiple reference groups, in which the number and types of groups used as reference groups differs from individual to individual. Although an increasing number of refinements have been made to the reference group concept, a well defined theory has never been explicated in this area. The author has redefined "normative" and "comparative" referents, using a strong psychological approach to these concepts, and has 20 integrated them into his first attempt at explicating Reference Group Theory. Referent perceptions fall along a continuum from a referent most similar in cognitive structure to least similar. NOrmative and comparative distinctions are made on this basis. When the symbolic other is seen as sharing a relatively consistent cognitive structure with another individual, the "other" is used in a "normative" fashion. This relates to George Kelly's Personal Construct Theory of Personality in that a normative referent will be perceived as construing the environment in a manner similar to the individual. This leads to the potential for a reverberating relationship where the individual and normative referent have an increased number of common experiences and increas- ing similarity in construing the environment. When the "symbolic other" isgnot perceived as sharing a relatively similar cognitive structure with an individual the "other" is used as a comparative referent. Every indi- vidual is conceptualized as deciding upon the relative degree of similarity involved with each comparative referent. A positive comparative referent is an "other" perceived as possessing a cognitive structure less similar to the indi- vidual than that of a normative referent. He is perceived as being relatively less able to accurately predict and/or anticipate events in the individual's environment. A negative comparative referent is an "other" perceived as possessing a cognitive structure least similar to the 21 individual. Consequently, this referent would be perceived as being least able to accurately predict and/or anticipate events in the individual's environment. In summary, the three primary concepts of Reference Group Theory are (l) normative referent, (2) positive comparative referent and (3) negative comparative referent. These symbolic referents may be either groups perceived as containing unified characteristics, or an individual per- ceived as exhibiting the characteristics held by members of a specific group, who are classified as either being normative, positive comparative. or nggative comparative. Each and every referent is placed within one of these con- ceptual groupings. Range of Perceived Construct (A) NOrmative Referent - most Systems similar construct systems C (B) Positive Comparative Referent - next most a similar construct systems (C) Negative Comparative Referent - least similar construct systems The decision to place a referent into one of these three categories is an individual, personal decision made on the basis of the individual's perception of the degree of cognitive or construct similarity existing between the individual and the referent. This categorization system can be visualized as independent concentric circles with the individual viewing his cognitive "self" as the center of 22 the circle. The referent seen as being the closest to the "self" in cognitive structure is a normative referent, the next closest range of cognitive structures are included in the positive comparative referent area, and the least similar cognitive structured referents are categorized as negative comparative referents. These are perceived, not as discrete categories, but as lying along a continuum from highest similarity to highest dissimilarity between con- struct systems. C. Reference Group TheoryiAdapted to Communication Now that the sociological and psychological theoretic formulations which form the background for Reference Group Theory have been presented, and now that the basic concepts of Reference Group Theory have been defined, the basic Reference Group Theory in relation to communication can be explicated. Reference Group Theory consists of the main postulate and three corollaries. They are: I. Fundamental Postulate: kMen act in a social frame of reference yielded by the groups of which they are a psychological part. II. Function Corollary: The reference group func- tions as either a normative type, in that it sets and main- tains standards for the individual; or the comparative type, in that it serves as a standard of comparison relative to which the individual evaluates himself and others. 23 III. Choice Corollary: A group will become a normative frame of reference for an individual when he perceives a psychological similarity between himself and the referent. IV. Effect Corollary: The closer the psychological similarity between an individual and a referent then the greater the referent's effect upon the individual. One must be reminded that the individual determines the manner in which each referent is perceived. The reference group is not forcing itself upon the individual, each individual decides which groups are nonnative, and how this will consequently affect the individual's "self," and overt behavior. Once information is communicated from one individual to another this classification process begins. Although there is no previous research specifically testing the various aspects of Reference Group Theory stated in this paper, as well as research applying the theory to communication situations, there are several research studies which support the conceptual development and possible application of this theory. In the next sec- tion, besides citing those studies, the author will state the hypotheses which will guide his search for support, and appliCation of Reference Group Theory to a communication effects situation. 24 D. Hypotheses and Supporting Literature Personal Construct Theory and Reference Group Theory are joined together as the basis for deriving hypotheses in this study. Based on the theory of personal constructs, the following proposition is presented as a guide for con- ducting the present study: over a period of time, as an individual "chooses" (choice corollary) the similar alter- native on the dichotomized constructs (dichotomy corollary) in his anticipation of events as does a "symbolic other" who "experiences" (experience corollary) events in a "common" (commonality corollary) manner with the individual, he will be more apt to "socialize" (sociality corollary) with this "symbolic other" and will continue to use this "symbolic other" as a frame of reference for anticipating future events, and as a provider of information in evaluat- ing and testing the reality of these events. In other words, the "symbolic other" becomes a normative referent individual and is in a position to influence the individual as a source of messages in the ways which are stated below in this section in the empirical hypotheses which follow. Likewise, literature is cited which supports the stated hypotheses. Communicative behavior is inextricably woven into social and cognitive behavior. Although one may use Reference Group Theory to predict exposure to message sources, the type of message encoded by sources, etc.; this 25 study attempts to predict the effect of referent individuals used as message sources. These findings have both theo- retical as well as practical significance. Although George Kelly's cognitive theory is a balance theory, it should not be considered isomorphic with the balance theory explicated by Newcomb (1953). Newcomb co-orients the receiver to the message source and to the message topic. Only when the individual has cognitively balanced his relationship to the source and the topic by the use of consistent positive-negative valences will balance occur. Kelly does not‘take a sign-valence oriented stance. Within Kelly's paradigm a cognitive change along a specific construct may occur, within any communication situation, but not necessarily. The use of new or dif- ferent constructs may be the result. Thus, for Kelly, balance is conceptualized on the basis of an individualized cognitive structure and not "in relation" to other indi- viduals or objects. One's cognitive structure will reorient itself in a manner to be more highly predictive of events involving other individuals or objects. This is the basis for hypothesized effects resulting from the experimental manipulations in this study. The first set of hypotheses deals with sources lidentified by the experimenter‘as being dressed in a modal normative or negative comparative manner for the receiver sample group. The experimenter decided upon the modal dressing types after accumulating pretest data from a sample [I itig.%[[[ft{[I.-lfl[llr-t[i[i,[i [ ll 26 of respondents drawn from the same universe as the respond- ents used in the final data collection. This set of hypotheses are of practical importance because of the assumption, upon which they are based, that communicator effects may arise on a broad respondent group level because of the modal dressing behavior of the communicator. The second set of hypotheses are of more theoretical importance since they are based upon the similarity of con- struing one's environment by two individuals. Support for this set of hypotheses will confirm the potential effects of communicators based upon the perceived similarity of construal on the part of two individuals. When modal normative and negative comparative message sources (the most similarly and most dissimilarly perceived referents respectively) have been classified on pretest ratings by a sample of a population, and each message source presents identical messages discussing three separate topics to a sample of this population, then the author hypothesizes: 51 (a): The attitudinal position stated by the modal normative source will be agreed with to a greater degree on all discussed topics than will be the attitude position stated by the modal negative comparative source. Research findings suggest that if two individuals are alike in their experiences and cognitive structure they will be more apt to affect the cognitive processes of one 27 another to a greater degree than will others not perceived to be as similar. Sechrest (1963), a student of Kelly's, has delved into the possibilities evolving from this relationship. He states: "It is not simple to determine similarity in construction systems or to assess the degree to which one person is construing the construction process of another, but some beginnings have been made. Assum- ing that persons who use similar verbal construct labels have similar construct systems, . . . such persons have more satisfactory relationships with each other (in terms of better communication and greater personal gratification) than with others. . . . Personal constructs (again in terms of verbal labels) that are used jointly by two or more persons have a greater consensus in their application within a group than do constructs that are unique to a given group member. . . . persons who were construed by an individual as similar were predicted by him as likely to behave in similar ways. . . . knowledge of another individual's personal construct system led to more accurate predictions about behavior than did descriptions by others of that person. . . . Subjects were more accurate in their predictions of the be- havior of persons with whom they felt comfortable than persons with whom they felt uncomfortable, and this can be taken to suggest that the ability to construe (anticipate) another person's behavior leads to a more satisfactory relationship with that person."13 Thus, individuals with similarly perceived construct systems have more communicative contact, can more accurately predict each other's behaviors, behave in more similar ways, and receive greater satisfaction from their interaction. Therefore, not only will an individual behave similar to a normatively perceived referent in any particular situation, but the individual is also accesible and receptive to per- suasive communication from this normatively perceived referent. 28 The Handbook of Social Psychology (1969) treats the area of message source attractiveness to an extensive degree. McGuire states, "Source attractiveness as a factor in social influence has been studied under at least three aspects: familiarity, similarity, and liking. The three are interrelated, perhaps in a causal way. Similarity may lead to familiarity and familiarity to liking; or liking may lead to familiarity and familiarity to similarity (Newcomb, 1961). In fact, the three probably make up a reverberating circuit in which they mutually strengthen one another."14 The theoretical formulation used by this author acknowledges the existence of this reverberating circuit. The author has chosen to enter this circuit at the point of "perceived similarity." It is through perceived similarity that liking and familiarity are nurtured, which leads to greater similarity. McGuire further states that, "There is a considerable body of evidence that a person is influenced by a persuasive message to the extent that he perceives it as coming frOm a source similar to himself. Presumably the receiver, to the extent that he perceives the source to be like him- self in diverse characteristics, assumes that they also share common needs and goals. The receiver might therefore conclude that what the source is urging is good for "our kind of peggle," and thus changes hls attitude accordingly." The present theoretical formulation predicts influ- ence on the basis that "our kind of people" are better at anticipating events that affect us than are "other kinds of people." Newcomb (1953, 1961) clearly shows through several of his studies that ideological similarity induces familiarity 29 and interpersonal liking, and the reverse sequence also. Sampson and Insko (1964) concur based on their findings from experimentation in an autokinetic situation, ". . . the direction of P's judgmental change is such as to increase his similarity to 0 when he likes O and to decrease his similarity when he dislikes 0."16 Likewise, Byrne and his colleagues have undertaken several studies in this area (Byrne, 1961; Byrne and Clore, 1966, 1967; Byrne and Griffitt, 1966; Byrne and Nelson, 1964; Byrne, Young, and Griffitt, 1966). Results point to the fact that liking increases with the number of common attitudes that the subject is told he shares with the other person. Byrne, Young, and Griffitt (1966), strongly state "It is a relatively well-established empirical law that interpersonal attraction is a positive linear function of the proportion of attitude statements attributed to an individual which are in agreement with the attitudes of one subject."17 Brock (1965) found that even when the similarity between individuals is the amount of paint used, the indi- viduals using a like amount of paint were influenced more than were the individuals using an unlike amount of paint. Brock concluded, ". . . a recipient's behavior with respect to an object is modifiable by the communicator's appeal to the extent that the recipient perceives that he and the . . . 18 communicator have a similar relationship to the object." 30 Likewise, when a quantified social distance measure is used as a dependent measure, individuals of a different race and strangers were kept physically farther away than were friends and relatives (Duke and NOwicki, 1972). This method of measure holds great potential as a means, other than by verbal attitude measures, of identifying normative and comparative referents. Thus, individuals similar to me will be allowed "closer" to me which, in turn, begins the circular effects of liking, familiarity, increased influence leading to more similarity, etc. Using this measure, normative referents would be allowed "closest," positive comparative referents "second closest," and negative comparative referents "least close." The basis for favorability is similarity. In other‘ words, perceived similarity of cognitive structure is judged on a continuum. The cognitive structure perceived in relation to one's own cognitive structure is perceived on the basis of concentric circles and not in a linear fashion. Thus, anyone falling into a particular cognitive structure area is perceived as that type of referent. This conceptualization of interpersonal distance nicely parallels Duke and Nowicki's (1972) conceptualization of interpersonal distance. This conceptualization is supported by the findings previously presented. The more similar an individual, in beliefs, demographic and social attributes, and especially in cognitive structure then the greater his liking, familiarity, and influence. Relating this same process to 31 "image convergence," a parallel concept, Alexander (1971) states: "One basic use of communication is to develop image convergence between participants. This convergence of images can be accomplished with relative ease if the initial distance between the images is not critical. . . . People tend to seek out others who will validate their View of reality. If the distance between two images is critical, change would depend on the skill of the communicator and the situation."19 In other words, the closer the message source is perceived in terms of cognitive structure, the more similar he is perceived in anticipating or construing events by the receiver. The message source perceived farthest away in similar cognitive structure will be judged to be least capable of anticipating or construing events as would the receiver. Once two individuals perceive that they have similar cognitive structures which have developed through "common experiences," their anticipations of various future events will coincide (Sechrest, 1963). This perceived similarity in cognitive organization leads to a "psychological partner- ship" which cannot be negated when moving from one topic to another. Our cognitive structure is tightly knit and highly organized. A normative referent is perceived to have the same configuration in his cognitive structure. If an individual perceives a change or a movement by his normative 32 source then the individual will, most likely, respond in kind. Although not directly studied in this research pro- ject, one could argue for increased attitude change effects by normative referents. This phenomenon has been uncovered by previous researchers. Sherwood (1965) reported that: "The study was based upon the assumption that persons use the same or similar cognitive categories in perceptions of themselves and of others. The correlations found between the generality of a self attribute for the individual and the salience to the group represent some evidence for this assumption. Subjects tended to rate the same dimensions as important for both self evaluation and for evalua- tions of others." Thus, we see normative referent others having the same attributes which we see in ourselves. Likewise, we relate ourselves to objects or topics in the same way (i.e., we construe or anticipate objects or topics similarly). Thus, a perceived construal of the environment by a normative referent will result in a similar construal on the part of the individual. On the other hand, an indi- vidual perceived as negative comparative will not be agreed with on the basis of his construal of the environ- ment. Infante (1972) points to how a change in perceived anticipation on the part of the normative referent will trigger a change in perceived anticipation in the individual. "An individual's perceptions of the desirability and likelihood of the consequences associated with an object of persuasion (i.e., an attitude object, or stimulus, to which a communicator may attempt to in- duce receivers to respond in a certain way) from a unique configuration which may be called his cognitive 33 structure for an object of persuasion. Such a cogni- tive structure is predictive of attitude toward the object of persuasion. We may reason that if a person is persuaded to alter his perceptions of the desirability and likeli- hood of the consequences which he associates with an object of persuasion, such changes represent an operational definition of 'change in cognitive structure regarding an object of persuasion.’ Further, if cognitive structure changes, so will attitude: thus, changes in cognitive structure should predict attitude change."21 In effect, Weiss (1957) was exploring this precise area when he found that by agreeing with the views of an audience on one issue, he was better able to persuade the audience on other issues. In essence, upon agreeing with the audience the message source is cueing the audience to cognitive similarities between him and the audience. Thus, the source induces the audience to realign their cognitive structure in a more similar manner to their "normative" message source on other issues. Weiss states, ". . . a statement by a communicator of opinion congruence on a topic of importance to the communicatees facilitates the opinion-change effectiveness of a following, persuasive communication."22 Stotland and his associates (Stotland, Zander, and Natsoulas, 1961; Stotland and Patchen, 1961) have undertaken several studies which all point to the fact that subjects empathize with and adopt the feelings and opinions of others to the extent that these others have been represented as similar to themselves. For example: 34 "It was found that those low in prejudice at the first administration become more prejudiced but only if they were told the case history was about someone like themselves."23 They did find the tendency to be more pronounced in women than in men, ". . . subjects tended to prefer the nonsense syllables chosen by the paid participant with whom they agreed more often on musical preferences, provided that the musical pre- ferences were strong, or provided that the subjects received social support for their musical preferences. Subjects were also asked to make choices from a series of pairs of girls' names and were asked to guess the preferences of the other two members. It was found, as hypothesized, that subjects assigned their own preferences on girls' names to the paid participant with whom they more often agreed on musical preferences."24 Since importance, saliency, and topic "preference" were found to influence responses in previous research, this author will investigate the relationship of a normative message source to the perceived "importance" of a topic to the receiver. It is felt that a normative message source can transfer "importance" to a topic based on the fact that the message source finds the topic "important" enough to discuss. Charters and Newcomb (1952) found that Catholic subjects were more apt to give "Catholic" responses when reminded of their Catholicism. This shows that a listener will be more influenced by the opinions of those groups which are especially salient at a given time. This phenomenon is extended to include increased saliency for any topic discussed by a normative (i.e., high salient) source. Therefore, the next hypothesis states: H1 (b): The perceived importance of the topics will be greater when discussed by the modal normative source than when discussed by a modal negative comparative source. 35 A significant relationship is expected between source credibility ratings and the perception of a message source as a normative or non-normative referent. Since the label "source credibility" refers to the perception that an audience has of a communication source and that high source credibility is conferred upon the source by the audience, it is felt that an individual perceived as a normative source also will be perceived as being a high credible source. The method of measuring source credibility in this study is based upon Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz (1969-1970) findings which delineate three major factors of credibility: safety, qualification, and dynamism. Therefore, the next hypothesis states: El (c): The modal normative source will be per- ceived as more credible than a modal negative comparative source on the factors of "Safety," "Qualification," and "Dynamism." Likewise, the author will tap the relationship existing between normative and negative comparative message sources and differential comprehension of the mes- sage by message receivers. It follows that highly credible sources who increase the saliency of the topic will, there- fore, also increase the comprehension of the message. Previous research has not established a link between high credibility and increased comprehension (Hovland, Janis, 36 and Kelly, 1953; King, 1964; Petrie, 1963; Thompkins and Samovar, 1963). The reason for this lack of significant relationship may result from a heightening of attention to the message manipulation. This would cause increases in comprehension for subjects within all levels of source credibility. In this study, the message manipulation as well as the source manipulation are both heightened. Even so, the last hypothesis states: H1 (d): The topics discussed by the modal normative source will be comprehended to a greater degree, than topics discussed by a modal negative comparative source. A more intensive and rigorous manner of identifying the relationship of normative referents to individuals can be accomplished when an exact measure of an individual's perceived cognitive similarity to the message source is received. It is expected that when subsamples of the respondent treatment groups are split on perceived levels of agreement with the message source on one variable, then one can test how an individual generalizes this information to the perception of the message source on other variables- This suggests the second set of hypotheses used in testing the tenets stated in the Reference Group Theory. Using perceived level of agreement with the message source as the independent variable, the following hypotheses and subhypotheses have been developed: 37 The more similar is a referent to one's own (a) II behavior on a given variable then the more similar will an individual perceive the referent concerning their cggnitivefl structures on a number of attitudinal variables. The more similar is a referent to one's own (b) behavigr_on a given variable then the greater the perceived importance of the topics discussed by the referent. The more similar is a referent to one's own (C) behavior on a given variable then the higher the credibility of the referent on the factors of "Safety," "Qualification," and "Dynamism." (d): The more similar is a referent to one's own behavior on a given variable then the higher the comprehension of the topics discussed by the referent. Part (d) runs counter to previous research findings but is justified on the basis of heightened message source identification within the experimental design. This lack of lmeightened source identification may be the reason for snapport of the null hypothesis in past research when "measuring comprehension differences. A normative referent has been defined as an indi- Vicflual that shares a similar cognitive structure to a 38 receiver of the message. Although he may or may not con- strue events exactly similar to the way the receiver con- strues events, if he is perceived as being relatively closer in structure to the receiver than others, the source is seen as being a normative referent. Definitionally, he is also perceived as a "symbolic other," so that face-to- face interaction does not necessarily need to occur at the time of message transmission. The acceptance of this hypothesis strengthens the "choice" and "effect" corollaries of Reference Group Theory as it refers to normative referents. Perceived similarity is the basis for choice but cognitive identity and improved anticipation of events are the bases for effect. Dressing behavior was chosen as the one variable used for identifying the message source as either a norma- tive or negative comparative referent, in this study, because of the visibility involved in this nonverbal cue. Clothing behavior is instantaneously communicated upon view- ing a message source. In our society, clothing behavior is widely believed to project the "type" of person one per- ceives himself as "being," in a cognitive or attitudinal manner. Clothing is categorized as artifact or object JLanguage. This form of nonverbal communication, according t<3 Ruesch and Kees (1956): ". . .may be intentionally shaped as symbols, or they may come to be looked upon as symbols. When they are not used for shaping perception, facilitating 39 evaluation, or simplifying action, they consequently stand for something else and assume functions similar to those of words, standing for individuals, animals, activities, or other objects."25 Marketing and consumer behavior researchers are aware of the symbolic communicative nature of clothing. Grubb and Grathwohl (1969) observe: "If a product is to serve as a symbolic com- municative device it must achieve social recognition, and the meaning associated with the product must be clearly established and understood by related seg- ments of society. This process is in reality a classification process where one object is placed in relation to other objects basic to society. . . . A prime example of symbolic classification and consumer behavior is fashion. If a particular style becomes popular, behavior of a segment of society will be directed toward the purchase and use of items mani- festing this style. As the fashion declines in popularity, the group will discontinue purchase of these items and may reject the use of the remaining portion of previous purchases. Thus, an act of classification not only directs action, but also arouses a set of expectations toward the object classified. Individuals purchase the fashion item because of their feelings about what the item will do for them. The essence of the object resides not in the object but in the relation between the object and the individuals classifying the object." Bourne (1969), another consumer behaviorist, has also considered clothing to be an effective symbolic com- municative cue. Likewise, he continues to state that reference group orientations affect one's clothing behavior. .He states: "There could hardly be a more socially visible product than this. . . . The type of clothing purchased is, however, very heavily influenced by reference- groups, with each sub-culture in the population (teenagers, zoot-suiters, Ivy League Collegians, workers, bankers, advertising men, etc.) setting its own standards and often prescribing, within fairly narrow limits, what those who feel related to these groups can wear." 40 This study is based on the premise that a generalized perception of an "other's" attitudinal structure will be made from the cue communicated by the "other's" clothing behavior. In other words, if the individual is perceived to dress in a similar manner then the individual will con- sequently be perceived as holding a similar attitudinal structure. "Normative" dress behavior can be defined on the basis of modal referent group behavior or on the basis of individual behavior. Initial message source identification is defined on the basis of modal referent group behavior determined from pretest data, for testing the first hypo- thesis. However, the individual respondent definition of dress behavior will be gathered and analyzed as the basis for testing the second hypothesis. Various studies have used clothing as a variable involved in the perception of others. Sommers (1963)28 used clothing, as well as other product categories, as a basis for perceiving the behavior of individuals within various social strata. He found support for his hypothesis that individuals in higher social strata are better able to predict products which best describe individuals in lower social strata than vice versa. Likewise, there was a high level of solidarity of perception exhibited by a stratum in how they perceive "others." Hoult (1954)29 conducted extensive research on the correlation between clothing and the status of men. In his first experiment, judges of status were familiar with 41 subjects they evaluated. Not surprisingly, their familiarity overcame the clothing variable and no effects due to clothing were observed. In his second experiment the subjects were unfamiliar to the judges. A significant relationship was discovered between clothing style and a man's perceived status. Rosencranz (1952)30 was interested in the effect clothing had on how people perceived another person. She administered a test consisting of seven pictures and respondents offered feedback as to what economic status or social role the subject appeared to be carrying out. The respondents themselves represented varying social and economic backgrounds. While all respondents perceived some difference in status and background, respondents with higher occupational status, income, education, organizational membership, magazine readership and verbal intelligence had greater awareness of clothing style and its role in deter- mining one's status. Douty (1963)31 likewise, found a relationship between dress and perceived status. These two studies were replicated and verified for more contemporary styles of clothing by Hamid (1968).32 )33 Kelly (1969 was able to establish that dress style determined political stereotypes. Less conventional clothing was rated as being worn by people with leftest political views and were regarded as pro-negro, against the Vietnam war, and as marijuana users. The more conventional dress 42 styles were associated with football and fraternities. Thus, a relationship was found to exist between clothing behavior and the consistent projection of individuals into other behavioral and attitudinal categories. Within the context of a mass communication situation, )34 Sanders and Pritchett (1971 found clothing behavior to be a significant aspect in the perception of an "ideal" television newscaster. An "ideal" newscaster is advised to wear a dark coat, white shirt, and solid or striped tie. Clothing choice has also been used as the dependent variable in experimental research. In Venkateson's study (1970) the task required subjects to evaluate and choose the best suit among three identical men's suits. In the absence of any group influence, each suit was equally likely to have been selected as the best suit. HOwever, group pressure was found to be effective and the subjects tended to conform to the group norm of suit selection. Venkateson concludes: "The acceptance of social influence, as shown in the 'conformity condition,‘ implies that consumers accept information provided by their peer groups on the quality of a product, of a style, etc., which is hard to evaluate objectively. More generally, the group norm or the prevailing group standard directs attention of its members to a new style or a product. It provides a frame of reference which is the first stage in the consumer decision-making process. In many buying situations there exists no objective standard independent of others' opinions. For those situations the implications are clear. The findings also imply that peer groups, friends, and acquaintances may be a major source of influence and information in the attention directing stage of the buying process for major items." 43 The "attention directing" function of peers, friends, and acquaintances mentioned by Venkateson in relation to consumer behavior is hypothesized to be operative in the issue-oriented area. Thus, this current study is based on the premise that issue-oriented items will be attended to most by individuals receiving the message from a normative source. Because of heightened attention, receivers of the message will rate the topic to be of greater "importance" and will "comprehend" the message to a greater degree than will individuals not receiving the same message from a normative source. As in this current study, past experiments have used clothing behavior as an independent variable affecting the perception and/or effectiveness of the message source. Fulton (1970) used "dress" as a cue for measuring the source credibility dimension "conscientiousness." He found that "conscientiousness" was one of the three dimensions significantly related to message source attractiveness. He states that perceived "conscientiousness" is ". . . posi- tively and significantly related to an independent measure of the attractiveness of a public speaker who is judged only by those overt cues which the listener perceives during the speech act."36 The most recent experiment using clothing behavior as an independent variable was conducted by Andersen, Jensen, and King (1972). College students were presented a message on the effects of slavery in America. The message 44 source was a student speaking in person and dressed in either a homophilous or "like" manner (i.e., faded blue jeans and a plaid work shirt) or a heterophilous or "unlike" manner (i.e., dress pants, a tie and a suitcoat). The dependent measures consisted of source credibility ratings and comprehension scores. They found that: "On all four dimensions of credibility (compe- tence, dynamism, sociability, and composure), the homophilous speaker was found to be more credible. The results conflict with a study by Jensen and Hunter ("The Effects of Clothing on Perceived Peer Credibility." Communications Research Center, Illi- nois State University, 1972) conducted at the same time. Jensen and Hunter used photographs and found that the heterophilous condition (a suit) was per- ceived as more competent. The fact that one experi- ment was conducted with a live source and other with a printed message and photographs may explain the conflict." No significant difference on comprehension was pro- duced by the message sources. The authors noted that the comprehension, or retention scores for the subjects were low. Thus, they concluded that even without a high atten- tion condition there was still no link between source credibility and comprehension. Discussion by Ruesch and Kees (1956), Grubb and Grathwohl (1969), and Bourne (1969) strongly supports the premise that clothing is perceived in a symbolic as well as a physically overt manner. Therefore, clothing takes on a meaning uniquely distinct from its overt physical state. A change in clothing will communicate a message other than that the clothes are physically different. 45 Several researchers are cited who have shown that a distinctive relationship exists between clothing and the perception of the individual wearing them (Sommers 1973; Hoult 1954). Pertinent to the present study, it was found that high status, highly educated, and highly intelligent respondents were more aware of the symbolic meaning of clothing. College students should therefore be more likely to react to clothing differences as an independent variable (Rosencranz 1962; Douty 1963; Hamid 1968). Likewise, find- ings, by Vener and Hfoer (1959)38 show that by the time a child reaches 12th grade, approved rules relating to dress behavior have become habitual. It is felt that college students have already developed their own unique habitual dress behavior and are thus able to perceive "others" that are to be considered normative or negative comparative in relation to themselves. Other researchers went beyond the social classifica- tion of individuals by clothing behavior and established a relationship between clothing behavior and one's attitudes, beliefs, and behavior, i.e., a cognitive interpretation of clothing symbols (Kelly 1969). Likewise, several researchers have determined that clothing symbolizes ability and know- ledge, and results in differential source credibility rat- ings (Sanders and Pritchett 1971; Fulton 1970; Jensen and King 1972). In summary, Kelly's Personal Construct Theory and existent Reference Group Theory have been combined to 46 establish a newly formulated Reference Group Theory as a theoretic base for predicting and explaining communication effects. It has specifically been used as the basis for a set of hypotheses which generally state that the higher the perceived similarity of construal on one set of events, the greater the probability that the individual will perceive that referent as being similar on a number of other dimen- sions. A set of empirical hypotheses for testing have been derived from that general hypothesis, with the similar con- strual of events being operationalized as the perceived similarity of dress styles. Previous research has been reviewed which suggests the validity of using clothing as an operationalization for perceived similarity. The focus of this study is based on the extension of these previous findings which show that clothing takes on symbolic meaning, is used to classify an individual into social and attitudinal categories, and affects the credi- bility of the individual. Once an individual is socially and attitudinally classified and is perceived as being relatively credible based on clothing cues then what will be his effect as a message source? This study adds to the field of mass communication research and to Reference Group Theory formulations in two major ways: (1) It will test relative effects of normative and comparative referents when used as message sources, and 47 (2) It will test the generalized ability to identify a normative or negative comparative message source based upon one informational cue, such as clothing. 48 E. Footnotes to Chapter 1 1 George Kelly, A Theory of Personality: The ngcho« logy of Personal Constructs (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1955), p. 3. 2Ibid., pp. 9, 12. 3Ibid., p. 15. 4Ibid., pp. 72, 74. 5Ibid., p. 75. 6 Ibid., p. 100. 7 George Herbert Mead, Mind, Self, and Society (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1934), p. 134. 8 Ibid., p. 175. 9William H. Desmonde, "The Position of George Herbert Mead," in Social Psychology Through Symbolic Inter- action, ed. by Stone and Farberman (waltham, Mass.: Xerox College Publishing, 1970), pp. 60-61. 10George Herbert Mead, op. cit., p. 277. 11 Morton Deutsch and Robert Krauss, Theories in Social Psychology (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1965), p. 188. 12 , Theoretically, the initial self perception could be determinant 1f the env1ronmental variables were strictly controlled. However, humane and practical considerations limit the testability of this proposition. 13Lee Sechrest, "The Psychology of Personal Con- structs: George Kelly," in Concepts of Personality, ed. by wepman and Heine (Chicago: Aldive Publishing Co., 1963), pp. 218-219. 49 14William J. McGuire, "The Nature of Attitudes and Attitude Change," in The Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. by Lindzey, Gardner, and Aronson (Reading, Mass.: Addison- Wesley Publishing Co., 1969), p. 187. 15Ibid., p. 187. 16Edward E. Sampson and Chester A. Insko, "Cogni- tive Consistency and Performance in the Autokinetic Situa- tion," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psyghology, 68:2 (1964), p. 184. 7 . . . . Donn Byrne Robert K. Young, and W1111am Griffltt, "The Reinforcement Properties of Att1tude Statements " Journal of Expgrimental Research in Personality, l (1966), p. 266. Timothy Brock, "Communicator-Recipient Similarity and Decision Change " Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1 (1965 , p. 650. 9 Dennis C. Alexander, "A Construct of the Image and a Method of Measurement," Journal of Communication, 21 (June, 1971), p. 172. 20John J. Sherwood "Self Identity and Referent Others," Sociometry, 28 (1965), p. 81. 1 . . Dominic A. Infante, "Cognitive Structure As a Predictor of Past Speech Attitude and Attitude Change," Speech Monographs, 39:1 (March, 1972), p. 55. 22Walter Weiss, "Opinion Congruence with a Negative Source on One Issue as a Factor Influencing Agreement on Another Issue," Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 54 (1957), p. 183. 23Ezra Stotland and Martin Patchen, "Identification and Changes in Prejudice and Authoritarianism," JOurnal of Abnormal and Social Psycholggy, 62 (1961), p. 256. 24Ezra Stotland, Alvin Zander and Thomas Natsoulas, "Generalization of Interpersonal Similarity," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62 (1961), p. 256. 25Jurgen Ruesch and Weldon Kees, Nonverbal Communi- cation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1956), p. 190. 50 6 . Edward Grubb and Harrison Grathwohl, "Consumer Self-Concept Symbolism and Market Behavior: A Theoretical Approach," in Dimensions of Consumer Behavior, ed. by James McNeal (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969), p. 68. 7Francis Bourne, "Group Influence in Marketing and Public Relations," in Dimensions of Consumer Behavior, ed. James McNeal (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969), p. 201. 28Montrose Sommers, "Product Symbolism and Perception of Social Strata," in Toward Scientific Marketing ed. by Stephen A. Greyser (Chicago: AmeriEan Marketing Association, 1963), pp. 200-216. , 29R. Hoult, "Experimental Measurement of Clothing as a Factor in some Social Ratings of Selected American Men," American Sociolggical Review, 19 (1954), pp. 324-328. 30 . . M. L. Rosencranz "Clothing Symbolism," J0urnal of Heme Economics, 54:1 (1962), pp. 18-22. 31H. E. Douty, "Influence of Clothing on Perception of Persons," J0urnal of Home Economics, 55 (1963), pp. 197- 202. 32F. N. Hamid "Style of Dress as a Perce tual Cue in Im ression Formation," Perceptual and M0tor S ills, 26 (1968 , pp. 904-906. 33J. Kelley, "Dress as N0nverbal Communication," Paper presented to the annual conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, May, 1969. 34Keith Sanders and Michael Pritchett. "Some Influences of Appearance on Television Newscaster Appeal," J0urnal of Broadcasting, 15:3 (Summer, 1971), pp. 293-301. 35M. Venkateson, "Experimental Study of Consumer Behavior Conformity and Independence," in Psychological Ex eriments in Consumer Behavior, ed. by Stewart Henderson Britt (New York: JOhn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1970), p. 33. 36R. Barry Fulton, "The Measurement of Speaker Credibility," Journal of Communication, 20 (September, 1970), p. 275. 51 37Peter Anderson, Thomas Jensen, and Lyle King, "The Effects of HOmophilous Hair and Dress Styles on Credibility and Comprehension," Paper presented to the annual conference of the International Communication Association (April, 1972), pp. 9-10. 38Arthur Vener and Charles HOffer, Adolescent Orien- tations to Clothing, Michigan State UniverSity AgriCultural Experimental Station Technical Bulletin, 270 (March, 1959). CHAPTER 2 METHODOLOGY A. Design This study consisted of an after-only randomized design with data collected from a sample of University of Georgia students as message receivers. Four criterion measures were employed: (1) respon- dents' agreement with message source's positions on (a) three topics discussed and (b) five topics not discussed; (2) respondents' importance ratings of topics discussed; (3) respondents' ratings of the message source's credi- bility; and, (4) respondents' message comprehension scores. Three predictor variables consisted of: (1) a modally designated message source, identified as being either normative or negative comparative in dress; (2) respondents' level of identification with the dress of the message sources; and, (3) eight message topics, three dis- cussed and five not discussed. Control variables consisted of the respondents' sex, year in school, school of enroll- ment, and social class. Each subject received, through random distribution, one set for males and one for females, a questionnaire which 52 53 contained a two-page typed message. The message took the form of an article written by a student. It was explained to the respondent that the article was written so that the student author could exhibit his writing ability. The article involved an interview the student author had with C. T. Ritchie,1 a fictitious fellow student. The state- ments attributed to Ritchie remained constant. The sex and clothing of Ritchie were manipulated in a one-sentence statement in the second paragraph of the article. For each sex, there were two alternative clothing types which had been found, through pretest data, to typify the normative and negative comparative clothing behavior of this partic- ular college population. This study attempted to measure the degree to which the respondents accepted Ritchie's expressed point of view based upon their identification of Ritchie as being either a normative or negative comparative referent. B. ngulation and Sample Eight academic classes of students were used as a sample of respondents from all possible classes at the University of Georgia, four within the School of Journalism and four in Arts and Sciences, during Spring Term, 1973. The final sample for this study consisted of three hundred students (N=300). 54 Within the sample the breakdown on demographic characteristics (sex, year of school, school of enrollment, and social class) was in the same proportion as in the population from which they were sampled; and they were dis- tributed about equally between message source manipulation categories (See Appendix C). It is felt that the sample is representative of the universe from which it was drawn, the Schools of Journalism and Arts and Sciences,based on the characteristics noted above. V Randomization was achieved through assignment of the source-message treatment to subjects in each of the class- rooms of students used in the sample. While the source- message treatments were randomly assigned to subjects, each subject responded to items in the schedule which measured the degree of his personal identification with the clothing worn by the source. In any grouping of individuals, there is a range of identification exhibited to any particular dress type. The level of identification was recorded and used in the analysis which tested the second set of hypo- theses. For analytic purposes, subjects are categorized as being either high or low in their personal identification with the manipulated message source. This orientation toward the manipulated source is tapped within the study for each respondent, however, the propensity for orientation is antecedent to the experimental manipulation. Propensity to orient oneself to a message source exists within everyone {fl 55 as a theorized human trait. Any effect found by levels of positive or negative identification with message source would be expected to generalize, along "the identification of receiver with message source" dimension, to Other set- tings with other persons. C. Operationalization of Variables 1. Dependent Variables a. ,Agreement with Message Source Referent The first major dependent variable deals with the attitudinal "agreement" a respOndent holds with the referent message source concerning the three areas under discussion by the referent message source and the five topics not dis- cussed. It is hypothesized that the normative referent message source will be agreed with within each topical area whether discussed or not discussed. The author would expect respondents to express most agreement with a normative referent message source on topics relating to highly personalized and emotional topics, if differences in agreement were to exist. This prediction is made on the belief that personalized and emotion laden topics are most central to an individual's cognitive structure and belief system and of most importance in con- struing the similarities in "others" construct systems. In this study, these topics would be: busing for integration, politics, music, and views about birth control. The author uh ~--' ou'v -—~..—~_ —-—v -4 -7.- v Cu. uv—v v..— 0 ~— -o-s.‘ -v-—w 56 believes the other topics contain less centralized cogni- tive characteristics than do the four mentioned above. The respondents' "agreement" with the source is based on his response to the statements for both discussed and nondiscussed topics: For the discussed topics "C. T. Ritchie and I feel the same way about . . . (the University dorm policy changes), (the air pollution problem in Athens), (busing)." For the nondiscussed topics "I would probably agree with C. T. Ritchie's views about . . . (politics), (clothing purchases), (music), (style of automobile), (birth control)." Responses were recorded on a Likert-like five inter- val scale including "Strongly Agree," "Agree," "Neither Agree nor Disagree," "Disagree," and "Strongly Disagree." b. Importance Ratingyof Topics A second dependent variable was the "importance" rating given to topics under discussion. While a difference in the importance which respondents assign to each discussed topic is hypothesized between each type of referent, a difference in the non-discussed topics is not tapped. Since the message source has made no mention of the non-discussed topics, the respondents are not expected to react differen- tially for each referent type. 57 The "importance" to the respondent of each topic discussed by the message source is measured by the respon- dent's response to the statement: "The (University dorm policy change) (air pollution problem in Athens) (Busing) is an important issue to me." Responses were recorded on a ordinal scale which included the categories "Very Important," "Fairly Impor- tant," "Not Very Important," "Not Important At All." c. Source Credibility Ratings The author draws from research conducted by Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz (1969-70) which operationalizes a receiver's perception of a message source. The concept being measured is source credibility. Source credibility was found to be a function of three major conceptual com- ponents: safety, qualification, and dynamism. The author uses the same bipolar word pairs used by Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz in their research, since these word pairs are cited as being most representative of the three components of source credibility. Each word pair is scored along a semantic differential type seven-interval scale with non- anchored midpoints. The specific twelve word-pair used in this study are: (1) Safety - "Safe - Unsafe," "Just - Unjust," "Kind- Cruel," "Honest - Dishonest." 58 (2) Qualification - "Trained - Untrained " "Experienced - Inexperienced," "Qualified - Unqualified," "Informed - Uninformed." (3) Dynamism - "Aggressive - Meek," "Emphatic - Hesitant," "Bold - Timid," "Active - Passive." Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz state that their factors are not incompatible with source credibility factors earlier conceptualized by past researchers, notably Hovland, 3 Janis, and Kelly (1953). They define each factor in this manner: "Safety . . . includes a general evaluation of the affiliative relationship between source and receiver, as perceived by the receiver . . . Qualification . . . is a dimension of evaluative meaning that is peculiar to the situation in which information - transmission is involved . . . primarily follow Hovland's "expertise" dimension when the source's topic is provided, but are based more on general intelligence or ability in a topic-free situa- tion . . . also indicated that elements of prestige are involved . . . Dynamism . . . appears to tap an evaluative dimension that could be referred to as "disposable energy"; i.e., the energy available to the source which can be used to emphasize, augment, and implement his suggestions . . . the relative instability of Dynamism suggests that it may not be psychologically independent of the other two factors. . . . In other words, given an evaluation of a source as safe or unsafe qualified or unqualified, the polarity or intenSity of these evaluations of the source is inten- sified through perceptions of high dynamism. Under this assumption, low - energy source would seldom if ever be perceived as either extremely safe or unsafe, extremely qualified or unqualified."4 A factor analysis of the source credibility items closely parallels the loadings and factors found in Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz's research. (See Appendix D) When the twelve items used in source credibility ratings were analyzed in an orthogonally rotated factor matrix using a 59 three factor parameter, each item highly loaded on the factors determined by previous research. The totaled scores for each respondent on the twelve pairs of words which comprise the source credibility scale were used as the numerical basis for comparisons between respondents. Since each word pair was rated on a seven- point scale, with "1" given to the most favorable pole, the potential source credibility score ranged from "12," the most favorable credibility rating to "84," the least favor- able credibility rating, for each source. d. Comprehension of Discussed Topics A fourth dependent variable involved comprehension of the stimulus message. Comprehension was operationalized as correctly responding to fifteen true-false questions cover- ing the content in the stimulus message. Five true-false questions were asked for each of the three discussed topics. The message stimulus was designed to give equal space, amount of topical content, and intensity of discussion to each topic discussed. The true-false questions went through two pretesting stages. The first pretest determined the weak questions, either being too easy or too difficult. There were eighteen journalism students who participated in this pretest, ten of them reading the stimulus message and then responding to the questions and eight responding without reading the stimulus material. 60 Changes were made in five questions. Three ques- tions were determined to be too easy since 90% or more of the respondents in both the reading group and the control groups answered the questions correctly. These three questions were changed so that they would be more difficult. Two questions were either too difficult or too poorly worded so that as many in the reading group as in the con- trol group were answering incorrectly. The wording was changed for these questions. Likewise,the wording of the fifteen questions was structured so that the correct responses consisted of seven "true" responses and eight "false" responses. The second pretest consisted of twenty-three journa- lism student respondents, thirteen having read the stimulus message before responding to the questions and ten respond- ing without first reading the message. Only minor wording problems in two of the questions were needed to correct the problems uncovered after this second pretest. The second pretesting of the comprehension questions disclosed that slightly more than half of the respondents who read the message gave correct responses to each of the fifteen questions. Also, a far greater proportion of non- readers were apt to incorrectly respond to the final list of questions. Thus, the comprehension questions included in this study did measure the respondents recall of the stimulus message; as well as, discriminate between high and low levels of recall. The range of recall scores for 61 respondents' reading the message were eight to fifteen. This demonstrates that the test did discriminate levels of recall. 2. Independent Variables Analysis was made on the basis of the two predeter- mined modal referent types from which the message was received as well as on the individuals' high-low identifi- cation with each referent type. Likewise, the respondent's reaction to several topics was used to determine main or interacting effects of the topics upon the dependent variables. Since the respondent's identification with the dressing behavior of the message source contained data which has the greatest theoretical relevance, this variable will be discussed first. The predesignated modal dress types will be discussed next, and the topic areas last. a. Reference Source Dress Types The author operationalized the manner in which each message source is identified on the basis of a nonverbal cue, dressing behavior. The dressing behavior that typed the message source as either normative or negative compara- tive within this study was based on pretest data. Univer- sity of Georgia students attending the School of Journalism, Summer Quarter 1972 were the pretest subjects. The dress types which were eventually used as the predesignated referent sources in the study resulted from two pretests. 62 The first pretest questionnaire was self-administered by twenty-nine students in the School of Journalism, thir- teen males and sixteen females. They were chosen by quota within the hallways of the Journalism Building. Their responses to the open-ended question: "WOuld you please describe the style of clothing worn by college students?" resulted in the construction of the dress categories from which the final dress categories were chosen. The second pretest included the identification of forty-nine School of Journalism students, eighteen males and thirty-one females, with the six dress type categories each developed for males and females based on the first pretest's findings. (See Appendix B) Each respondent checked on a 5-point scale of agreement as to whether each style of dress described the way he liked to dress, or whether it was a worse way of dressing than the way he dressed. A modal normatively dressed source is the one with the style of dress which moves people to the highest level of agreement that the style "describes the way I would like to dress;" while a modal negative comparatively dressed source is the one with the style of dress which most people say is "a worse way of dressing than the way I dress." Based upon this conceptualization of referent types, a :normative dress type was operationalized by the respondent's Irating on the statement: "Describes the way I would like 63 to dress;" and, a negative comparative dress type was operationalized by the respondent's rating on the statement: "Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress." The normative referent case involves the identifica- tion of_high similarity between the dressing behavior of self and the observable dressing behavior of another. The negative comparative referent case involves making a com- parison of one's own dressing behavior with that of another, seeing that there is dissimilarity between self and other, and deciding that self is more desirable. For females, the dressing style described as: "A nice coordinated slack and top outfit, and stylish shoes" (Type #5 on the pretest questionnaire) received the highest mean agreement rating as a normative manner of dressing (2 = 3.97 on a scale with 5.00 as most favorable). The dressing style described as: "A halter top, bra-less, cut-off jeans, and bare feet" (Type #1 on the pretest questionnaire) received the highest mean rating as a nega- tive comparative manner of dressing (;'= 3.60 on a scale of 5.00 as highest agreement). For males, the dressing style described as: "A sport shirt, casual bell-bottom slacks, and casual shoes" (Type #3 on the pretest questionnaire) received the highest mean rating as a normative manner of dressing (2 = 3.94 on a scale of 5.00 as most liked). The dressing style described as "Highly unconventional patterns and color combinations, old worn shirt and jeans with designs on them, l .bdhlfifi ‘3‘, a... 0.4.. ’n, ¢..¢ —A. only. I u A A\l-¢ ‘4-.V.—~ ~_-— 64 beads and bracelets, and bare feet" (Type #1 on the pretest questionnaire) received the highest mean rating as a nega- tive comparative manner of dressing (E = 3.38 on a scale with 5.00 being the strongest negative comparative value). The correlations between the dress types chosen for use in the research project related differentially to one another for respondents in the second pretest. For males, the dressing behavior types displayed a moderate correlation to each other: normative to negative comparative, r = 0.47. Therefore, the male subjects do not see these dressing behaviors as being independent. A relationship existed for males between the way they scored themselves on one dress type and the way they scored themselves on another dress type. However, this moderate degree of correlation between perceived dress types does not exist for females, who also responded to the dress descriptions in the second pretest. The correlation score for females was: normative to nega- tive comparative, r:=0.06. Thus, females did tend to see these dress types as being independent. This information points to an interesting phenomenon. Females appear predisposed to more clearly relate to differing dress types than do males. Historically females have been stereotyped as being more fashion conscious than males in the clothing area. Likewise, data collected by the author show a stronger interest on the part of females to clothing choice. In the first pretest questionnaire, 65 females gave a slightly more favorable response than did males to the question concerning "the importance of cloth- ing to me" (E = 3.4 and 3.1, respectively, with 5.00 as most favorable). b. Respondent Personal Identification with Dress Types Each respondent scored his personal normative ("like me") and negative comparative ("worse than me") orientation to the two predesignated dress types on equal- appearing—interval Likert-type scales running from "Strongly Agree" to "Strongly Disagree." This, in general, validated the classification procedure as well as indicated the pri- mary effect a high-low identification message source had upon each individual, irregardless of which dress style was predesignated as normative modally or negative comparative. Means of the self-reported identification of clothing behavior scores were consistent with predetermined message source categorizations. (See Appendix E) The total mean score for all respondents on the rating of the predesig- nated normative type as being "like me" was 2 = 2.5 ("1" scored for "Strongly Agree," "2" scored for "Agree," to "5" for "Strongly Disagree"); on the other hand, the predesig- nated modal normative dress type was rated 2 = 3.67 on the statement "worse than me" ("EV'scored for "Neutral," "4" for "Disagree" and "5" for "Strongly Disagree"). For the predesignated modal negative comparative dressing type the average "like me" rating for all 66 respondents was 2 = 3.46, in the "disagree" area. The average "worse than me" rating for the predesignated modal negative comparative dressing type for all respondents was § = 2.44, in the "agree" area. It is clear that the respondents differentially per- ceived the two predesignated dress types. Respondent ratings support the predesignated typing of the dress styles. A majority of respondents "agree" that the pre- designated normative type is "like me." Concurrently, a majority of respondents "agree" that the predesignated negative comparative type is "worse than me." Based on this initial analysis of the data, the author believes that the predesignated dressing behavior styles tapped modal normative and negative comparative conceptual dress types for the population from which respondents were chosen. Although it was found that these were perceived as modal dress types, the degree to which any one respondent is high or low in personal identification with his message source on the "like me" scale is the basis for typing the normative clothing style for the individual, and, for analysis carrying the greatest theoretical significance. There was no significant difference between the eight sample respondent groups on their rating of either dress type as being either "like me" or "worse than me." Thus, one can conclude that the randomization procedure was successful in relation to perception of dress from the descriptions which were provided in the test instrument. 67 c. Message or Topic Choice Each respondent received a message consisting of three discussed topics, "University of Georgia dorm policy," "the air pollution problem," and "busing for inte- gration" from one of two message source referents. The three topical areas were chosen to cover a wide range of topical concern and personalized, emotional orientation. The first topical area relates to a local and personal issue for students, the University of Georgia dormitory policy. The second topical area relates to a community wide and environmental area which is not immediately personal, the air pollution problem in Athens. The third topical area relates to a national social issue which carries a great deal of emotional impact, busing for integration. A second group of topics not discussed by the referent message source also covers several areas with wide ranges of personalized, emotional orientation. The first topic deals with "politics"; the next "clothing purchases"; the next concerns "music"; the next concerns "styles of automobiles"; and the last topic concerns "views about birth control." The topics "politics" and "birth control" are topics believed to carry a high degree of emotional involve- ment. The topics "music" and "clothing purchases" are believed to be less emotionally involving; while "style of automobile" is believed to be the least emotionally involv- ing topic. 68 3. Demographic Variables Demographic data were collected from the respondents in order to check the randomization of treatment procedure, as well as a means of checking for possible interaction effects with the independent variables. The four demo- graphic variables tapped were: sex, year in school, school or college in which respondent is enrolled, and the occupa- tion of the head of the family. Year in school was divided into four categories: freshman, sophmore, junior, and senior/graduate. School or college in which a respondent is enrolled was divided into three categories: Arts and Sciences, Journalism, and other. Since sociology and journalism classes were used, a pre- dominant number of students should be enrolled in these two schools. The occupation of the head of the family was categorized into the appropriate social class level associ- ated with each occupation based upon the Index of Status Characteristics.5 The occupations were ranked on a one to five scale, one being of highest social class position. Although four items are used in the rating of an individual's "index of status" (occupation, source of income, house type, and dwelling area) occupation alone is considered a reliable measure of status. Miller (1970) in his discussion of this method of status measurement states: "The Occupation Scale is the best single pre- dictor of social class position within a seven-point range. The high correlation it exhibits with the evaluative participative method of social class 69 position (r = .91) commends occupation as a single dimension. Researchers will achieve a high degree of predictive efficiency by use of the one scale."6 The distribution of demographic data matched the universe from which the sample was drawn. Likewise, by random distribution of the questionnaire to respondents the author obtained two subsets which were quite similar in distribution on the demographic variables. Even though a slight between treatment group difference was noted in the top category of the socioeconomic status ratings, a collapsing of the top three categories would erase any be- tween group differences at this upper level. D. Data Collection 1. Instrument The questionnaire was organized in a manner which was most conducive to self-administration by the respondent while also entering the least biasing effect on following questions. The basic instructions for self-administration were included on the cover page. The two-page message was next, followed by the masking questions on page three. The first three questions asked of the subjects, page three of the test materials and questionnaire, were included to mask the intent of the study. The fourth page of the questionnaire included the first measurement scales of interest and use to the researcher. See Appendix A for a copy of the questionnaire. 70 Since it was believed that questions relating to the message might affect the respondent's perception of the message source, the source credibility measures were taken on page four. Page four also included the instructions on how semantic differential type response scales are used in tapping attitudinal responses. Pages five and six tapped the degree of agreement with source and the importance of each topic discussed in the message. Page seven included the fifteen true-false questions which measured the respondent's comprehension of the message. The non-discussed topics were presented on pages eight and nine. Here the respondent was asked to project his agreement responses and the items were purposely pre- sented after the message topics were recalled. It was be- lieved that by heightening the respondent's perception of the message source through agreement measures relating to topics included in the message the perception of the source was sharpened and potentially significant differences con- cerning projected topic agreement ratings would be realized. Once the dependent variable data were collected, the self—identification on the part of the respondent with the clothing behavior of the message source was gathered. The collection of these data was masked by telling respondents that the information was needed for another study. Pages ten and eleven contained the self-identification measurement scales. 71 Finally, also on the eleventh page, demographic data relating to sex, year in school, school of enrollment, and occupation of head of family were gathered for use as con- trol variables. 2. Administration The experimenter was introduced to the class by saying: "This is Professor Surlin from the School of JOurnalism who would like your cooperation for a current research project being undertaken by the School of JOurna- lism. I would like you to cooperate with him." In order to introduce as well as mask the thrust of the study, the author told each class: "We have an ongoing research project at the School of JOurnalism which attempts to develop indices for effective writing. These indices will help us identify effective writing behavior. Since it is important to write effectively in all areas of endeavor we are attempting to get many different types of students to respond to our questionnaire. In this instance we would like you to read what a student, applying for a position on the school newspaper, has written. Please read the front page of the questionnaire carefully. Then read the two-page report by the student. The student is not personally identified, therefore, you will not know which student wrote the article. Each of you will receive different articles to read. After reading the two-page article then continue through the qlest'ionna‘ire and answer the questions which relate to what you've read. Please work as quickly as possible, responding with the first thought that comes to mind, do not go back to the article once you have read it. The questions we ask are helpful in developing our indices of effective writing. One other thing, another Journalism professor is also currently conducting a research project and he has asked me to add it to this questionnaire. It is the last couple of pages in this questionnaire and it will not take you long to complete. Because of this other study, however, we do have to divide the questionnaires into male and female groups. 1.... I ”on“; y.‘ a... .9- 72 You will see the reason for this when you get to this last section. Thank you again for your cooperation and if you have any question then raise your hand and I will answer it." The appropriate questionnaires were then handed to each student based on whether they were male or female. The two experimental manipulations for each sex were alternately stacked, and distributed to the respondents, beginning at a randomly selected point to achieve randomiza- tion of treatment. It took between fifteen and twenty minutes for a respondent to complete the questionnaire. Very few ques- tions were raised by the respondents during the data collec- tion period, and there was no one consistent question raised by the respondents. Because of diligence exhibited by respondents during the self-administered testing period the author assumes that the experimental manipulation was given proper attention by the respondents. Within each classroom, the author was assisted by the same female graduate research assistant within the School of JOurnalism at the University of Georgia. After the author spoke to each class, the female graduate assistant would hand out the female-version of the questionnaire, while the author handed out the male-version of the question- naire. Both parties dressed in a subdued manner for data collection so as not to draw attention to their own dressing behavior. This was thought to be a possible source of inter- viewer bias since the study dealt with dressing behavior. 73 Therefore, dress remained a constant for the interviewers after a style of dress was chosen which approximated the pretest definition of modal normative. One may raise the question of contamination of message effects based upon the method of presenting the stimulus message, in this case a printed format. H0wever, past studies have shown that presenting a source in many different media had no effect upon the respondent's reac- tions to the source. Byrne and Clore (1966) state: ". . . the functional relationship between pro- portion of similar attitudes and attraction is examined under three different conditions of stimulus presenta- tion: a color movie with sound track, a tape recording, and written responses on a mimeographed attitude scale . . . the effect of attitude similarity on attraction is not limited to any specific method of presenting the stimulus person." Thus, it is not anticipated that the manner of pre- senting the message source had any contaminating effect upon the subjects' evaluations or perceptions of the source. E. Method of Statistical Analysis Three-way analysis of variance (F statistic), with an analysis of selected differences between group means (t-test) was the primary method of testing for significance of effect of the independent variables. The analysis of variance package of programs used in this study is included in the SOUPAC system (Statistically Oriented Users Program- ming and Consulting) developed by the Department of Computer Science at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana. 74 This SOUPAC system is now included in the set of systems within the University of Georgia's IBM 360 computer. The independent variables used in the analysis of variance consisted of self-rated identification scores by the respondent toward the message source's style of dress, the sex of the respondent, and repeated measures for the three measures on the message variable. Since respondents received the message from either a modal normative design- ated or modal negative comparative designated message source the data was analyzed in two major groupings. One set of independent variables and respondents consisted of respon- dent identification with a modal normative designated dressed source; while the other set of independent variables and respondents consisted of respondent identification with a modal negative comparative designated dressed source. Sex of respondents and topics were other variables included in both sets of analyses. A respondent was placed in either one group or another for analysis purposes based upon the message source manipulation which he had received. The SOUPAC analysis of variance program corrected for unequal cell sizes in analysis through the approximate method of unweighted means. 75 F. Footnotes to Chapter 2 l The name "C. T. Ritchie" is the modified version of a name which was found to hold neutral ratings on Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz source credibility rating scales. This name is also expected to initially hold neutral connotations for the respondents within the present study. See: Lemert, James B., "Status Conferral: The Modification of Source Credibility by the Act of Press Coverage," Ph.D. Disserta- tion, Department of Communication, Michigan State Univer- sity, 1964. 2The questionnaire included in the appendix is an example of the normative designated male message source referent manipulation. The second paragraph on the first page of the message, "What's Happening with UGA Students" is the only aspect of this questionnaire which is manipu- lated. 3Carl Hovland, Irving Janis, and Harold Kelly, Communication and Persuasion (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957), pp. 19-48. 4David Berlo James Lemert, and Robert Mertz, "Dimensions for Evaiuation Acceptability of Message Sources," Public OpinionQuarterly, 33 (Winter, 1969-70), 574-576. 5W. Lloyd warner, Marchia Meeker, and Kenneth Bells. Social Class in America (Chicago: Science-Research Associates, 1949), pp. 121-159. 6Delbert Miller, Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement (New York: DaV1d McKay Co., Inc., 1970), pp. 194-199. 7Donn Byrne and Gerald Clore, "Predicting Inter- personal Attraction Toward Strangers in Three Different Stimulus Modes," Psychonometric Science, 4 (1966), 239-40. CHAPTER 3 FINDINGS In reporting findings from this study, the results for each of the four criterion measures will be presented in the following order: (1) agreement with the position of the message source on each topic, (2) agreement on the importance rating of the topic, (3) comprehension of the content of the discussed topic, and (4) source credibility ratings, as compared across modally designated normative and negative comparative sources, as well as on high-low identi- fication with source based upon clothing of message source. A. Findings for Agreement on Attitude Measures When findings were analyzed on the basis of modally designated message sources, differences in respondent agree- ment were slight and not significant for hypothesized message source effects, nor was there a consistent pattern of response (See Appendices F, G and H which contain tabled data projecting the agreement scores for various demographic sub- groupings). However, when respondent agreement scores were analyzed on the basis of high-low identification with the 76 77 message source, support was found for the theoretically- derived hypothesis, but the findings are not as clear—cut as one might wish. Since high-low, source-respondent identification subgroupings give a better test of the theory; analysis will concentrate on this set of data. The respon- dent subgroups are determined by the level of respondent perceived similarity with the message source. (See Appendix I for the mean score array.) Analyses using the independent variable high-low identification with message source, also include one of the control variables, sex. This control variable was deemed to be important enough for further analysis based on "sex" effects elicited from prior computer runs. A three-way analysis of variance design using agree- ment scores for the topics discussed by the message source as the dependent measure, and with topics, sex, and high-low identification with the modal normative designated source as the independent variables, uncovered a significant "topics" by "high-low identification" interaction effect (p '4..Ol). The interpretation of the interaction effect lends support to the theoretic hypothesis. It was found that for respondents receiving a message from a modal normative designated source there was greater agreement with the UGA dorm policy topic when identification was high (t=2.72, dfnl40, p 41.02); while on the other hand, there was greater agreement with busing for integration when identification was low (t=l.99, df=l40, p 41.05). Identification did not 78 Table l Three-Way ANOVA for Agreement on Discussed Topics by Sex, Topics, and High-Low Identification with the Modal NOrmative Designated Source (N=l48) Source of Variance df SS MS F P Main Effects: Sex 1 0.64 0.64 0.58 0.45 Topics 2 70.57 35.28 37.17 0.0001 High-Low Identification 3 2.98. 0.99 0.90 0.44 Interaction: Sex x Topics 2 4.83 2.42 2.54 0.08 Sex x High-Low Identification 3 8.60 2.87 2.59 0.06 Topics x High-Low Identification 6 16.55 2.76 2.90 0.01 Sex x Topics x High-Low Identification 6 3.40 0.57 0.60 0.73 Error 124 154.68 1.10 Table 2 Agreement Mean Scores on Three Topics Discussed by the Modal NOrmative Designated Message Source for High-Low Respondent IdentificatiOn Subgroups Level of Identifi- Topics cation with Source's Dress UGA Dorm Policy Air Pollution Busing High 2.53 2.24 3.57 - 3.16 2.31 3.48 - 3021 2033 3049 Low 3.40 2.30 2.94 79 seem to affect agreement on the air pollution topic. (The reversal of direction on busing will be discussed later.) Also, a "topic" main effect was strongly evident, with the "air pollution" topic being agreed with the most, the "dorm policy" topic next most in agreement, and "busing for integration" exhibiting the least favorable agreement scores. The mean response scores on "agreement" for the respondents who were highest and lowest in identification with the modal normative designated message source on all eight topics, three discussed and five non-discussed, sup- ported the hypothesis for some topics. Given this initial finding, the mean scores for each topic were studied. Five of the eight topic subgroup comparisons were in the hypothe- sized direction, one topic showed no difference, and two topics were opposite to the hypothesized direction; however, there is an explanation for the opposite direction findings for these topics. Three of the five topics in the hypothe- sized direction exhibited significant between group differ- ences; the discussed topic "University of Georgia dorm policy," and two non-discussed topics "clothing choice" and "music preference." The findings that low identification receivers are more in agreement with modal normative dressed message source for two topics, "busing for racial integration" and "political beliefs," is not too surprising. This discrepancy could have been predicted in a university where the student body is generally conservative in its political belief and 80 Table 3 Mean Agreement Score Comparisons on Eight Topics for the Highest and Lowest Identification with the Modal Normative Designated Source (1 = Strongly Agree; 5 = Strongly Disagree) Mean Agreement Scores High Identi- Low Identi- Differ- Topics fication fication ence be- With Source's With Source's tween Dress Dress Means t (N=2.‘Il (N=2Q 1. UGA Dorm Policy 2.48 3.38 0.90 sig 2. Air Pollution Problem 2.14 2.29 0.15 ns 3. Busing for Integration 3.52 2.95 0.57 ns 4. Political Beliefs 3.38 2.95 0.43 ns 5. Clothing Choice 2.38 3.71 1.33 sig 6. Music Preference 3.10 3.86 0.76 sig 7. Automobile Style Preference 3.19 3.14 0.05 ns 8. Birth Control Views 2.81 3.00 0.19 ns opposition to busing for racial integration is high. There could very well have been an incongruity effect where the high identification respondents would not want to identify with the source's "liberal" views on busing; and based upon their knowledge of the source's stance on busing, perceive potential disagreement with the source's political beliefs. Thus, the data suggest that the higher the identifi- cation on one variable, such as dressing behavior, the greater the degree of agreement between the source and re- ceiver on a number of attitudinal variables. 81 Another interaction, "sex" by "high-low identifica- tion," approached being significant at the .05 level (p <1.06). Though it did not meet the criterion level for further analysis it does raise an interesting question for future research. Generally, it was found that the greatest agreement exists for males high in source clothing identi- fication; while, for females the greatest agreement exists in respondents lowest in identification with the source's clothing. Forementioned differences in the importance of clothing to each of the sexes may have something to do with those findings. If future research finds the same type of pattern, then one can explore whether females prefer not to be identified with the modally normative designated dressing style whereas males are more apt to identify with the modally designated style of dress. In the three-way analysis of variance table which includes agreement scores by sex, topics, and high-low identification with the modal negative comparative designated source, differences in agreement scores by "topics" were again evident. Although the F value was nonsignificant (p <1.10) all differences in agreement scores for the eight topics were in the predicted direction, for respondents who identified more highly with the source's dress also indicat— ing higher agreement with source's View on the topics. 82 Table 4 Three-way ANOVA for Agreement on Discussed Topics by Sex, Topics, and High-Low Identification with the Modal Negative Comparative Designated Source (N=152) Source of Variance df SS MS F P Main Effects: Sex 1 1.60 1.60 1.16 0.28 Topics 2 42.22 21.11 26.27 0.0001 High-Low Identification 4 10.81 2.70 1.97 0.10 Interaction: Sex x Topics 2 0.13 0.06 0.08 0.92 Sex x High-Low Identification 4 2.13 0.53 0.39 0.82 Topics x High-Low Identification 8 2.54 0.32 0.40 0.92 Sex x Topics x High-Low Identification 8 5.82 0.73 0.91 0.51 Error 122 195.08 1.37 Table 5 shows that for each of the eight topics, the message receiver who highly identifies with the message source designated as dressing in a modally negative compara- tive manner is more in agreement with the message source than the low identification message receiver. While some topics exhibit greater stability of consensus for identifi- cation-level group differences for both message source manipulations (such as clothing choice and music preference), the high-low identification respondents receiving a message from a modal normative designated source were significantly different for the University of Georgia dorm policy topic, while respondent subgroupings receiving a message from a modal negative comparative designated source were significantly 83 Table 5 Mean Agreement Score Comparisons on Eight Topics for the Highest and Lowest Identification with the Modal Negative Comparative Designated Source (1 = Strongly Agree; 5 = Strongly Disagree) Mean Agreement Scores High Identi- Low Identi- Differ- Topics fication with fication ence be- Source's with Source's tween Dress Dr Means—.15— (Nigi (M23) 1. UGA Dorm Policy 2.80 3.16 0.36 ns 2. Air Pollution Problem 1.60 2.08 0.48 ns 3. Busing for Integration 3.00 3.40 0.40 ns 4. Political Beliefs 3.00 3.60 0.60 sig 5. Clothing Choice 2.40 4.00 1.60 sig 6. Music Preference 2.60 3.56 0.96 sig 7. Automobile Style Preference 3.00 3.32 0.32 ns 8. Birth Control Views 2.00 2.72 0.72 sig different for the political beliefs and birth control views topics. There seems to be a topic to topic difference in the stability of consensus exhibited by respondents who differentially align themselves in their identification with the message source. The higher consistency of findings for respondents receiving a message from the modal negative comparative designated source could be explained by a greater degree of "cue clarity" exhibited by this dress style. Respondents, in this particular study, could be better able to "type" the message source dressed in this style. Also, this style could be seen as more likely to correctly present the 84 cognitive structure of the message source than would the modal normative designated dress style. Thus, this would lead to greater consistency in identification with source subgroup differences, as well as the greater number of significant subgroup differences. In summary, these findings depict different agreement scores between topics; and a tendency for individuals in higher identification with the dressing behavior of the message source to be in higher agreement with the source on beliefs regarding issues. It occurred either in consis- tently higher agreement for all topic areas irrespective of the topic, as with the modally negative comparative desig- nated source group; or in interaction with the topic with the hypothesized direction reversed on two topics of criti- cal social issues upon which the source took an unpopular stance for this population of respondents in the case of the modally normative designated source group. Clearly, the first part of the first hypothesis, stating: the attitudinal position stated by the normative source will be agreed with to a greater degree on all dis- cussed topics than will be the attitude position stated by the negative comparative source, is rejected. Here, the author attempted to designate sources as being normative and/or negative comparative based upon pre-tested dress styles rated by respondents as being "like me" or "not like me." Such a gross designation of a cue upon which inter- /d"" 1 personal similarity is to be decided did(not show differences 85 in message source agreement for a large sampling of respon- dents. Since some will, and some will not, identify with either message source, respondent agreement scores will regress toward the mean for either source. A better test of the theory developed from looking at high-low identifying respondents for each message source. This relationship is alluded to in the first part of the second hypothesis: the more similar is a referent to one's own behavior on a variable then the more similar will an individual perceive the referent concerning their cognitive structures on a number of attitudinal variables. This statement is supported,to some extent, by the findings. When a message receiver perceives a similarity in preference for clothing with a message source, the message source is perceived to have a common construal of the environment as does the receiver, which leads to the assumption by the receiver that he will be in agreement with the message source~ on several other variables, since they "commonly construe" their environment. It is this "common construal" relationship which theoretically leads to the use of one individual as being a normative referent for another. While it was found that a modal normative designated message source did not have a generalized effect for a population, it was shown that a personalized normative referent tended to evoke an increased agreement effect for respondents. 86 Once this normative referent has been perceived, will other message source effects be uncovered? The next several parts of the hypotheses test this question. B. Findings for Importance of Discussed Topics Topic importance was hypothesized to be directly related to perceived normativeness of message source. It was felt that the discussion of a topic by a normative source would legitimize the topic and heighten the perceived importance of the topic to the receiver. However, this source effect was not generally realized within this study, for either the modally designated message source or high-low identification with message source case. (See Appendix J) As in the case of "agreement" score analysis, a three-way analysis of variance design was used to test for interaction effects. The analysis was carried out for the independent variables of high-low identification with mes- sage source dress and topics, and the control variable, sex; the dependent variable was importance of discussed topics. For respondents receiving the message from a modally normative designated source, a significant "sex" by "topics" interaction effect is noted (p flpmnmmsou OCflwdm c0fl#3HHom hoeaom ocflwsm COfivdaaom kowaom Hopoz m npflz HH< EH00 Hfi< EH00 GOMvmoflmflvcmpH mmHmEmm mmamz “prcoammm AmocmeOQEH 304 u v .mUCMpHanH coax u H .mmHoom cmmzv Ammauzv V mmcflvmm mUGMvHOQEH OflQOH co mousom pvaCOflme m>flpmquEOU m>Hpmowz Have: one 39H? soapmowwfiwchH SOAISOflm pad .xmm .mofimoa pmwmdomfim mo wowmmm coflpomumwcH >m3|mmH£H one How mmnoom cow: m OHDMH 90 To summarize the "importance" ratings, differences among topics were evident. One could have expected that each topic would be initially differentially perceived by respon- dents. Also, a "sex" and "topic" interaction is consistently detected for both modal normative and negative comparative designated respondent groupings. This again could have been predicted based upon the belief that females would feel more "emotionally" involved in the issue ofbusing for racial integration than males. Only for respondents receiving the message from a modal negative comparative designated source did the high-low identification variable combine with other variables to produce a significant difference. Likewise, only for males were consistent differences found which sup- ported the hypothesis. Thus, on the basis of respondent ratings of topic importance there is no support for the first hypothesis which states that the topics discussed bya modally desig- nated normative source will be rated as being of greater importance. In one experimental condition, when the message is presented by a modally designated negative comparative source, there is partial support for the second hypothesis which states that the more similar a referent is to one's own behavior on a variable then the greater the perceived importance of the topics discussed by the referent. The fact that a message source was dressed in a modally normative designated manner, or that a respondent did or did not highly identify with a modally normative designated message source, 91 did not affect topic importance ratings. However, the degree of identification with a modally negative comparative designated message source did affect one's topic importance ratings for different topic areas. C. Findings for Source Credibility Measures Based on previous research, it seems justifiable in hypothesizing differential credibility ratings for each mes- sage source, especially when analyzed on the basis of high- low identification of respondent with the source's dressing behavior. Likewise, prior findings in this study resulted in the use of "sex" as the only control variable used in further dependent variable effect analysis. Significant differences in source credibility were noted for one subgroup analysis as an interaction effect be- tween "sex" and "high-low identification" with a modally designated normative message source but not for any other main or interaction effect conditions. Table 9 Two-way ANOVA for Totaled Source Credibility Factors by Sex and High-Low Identification with the Modal Normative Desig- nated Source (N=148) Source of Variance df SS MS F P Main Effects: Sex 1 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.99 High-Low Identification 3 66.06 22.02 0.22 0.88 Interaction: Sex x High-Low Identification 3 967.61 322.54 3.17 0.03 Error 140 14243.73 101.74 92 Table 10 Two-Way ANOVA for Totaled Source Credibility Factors by Sex and High-Low Identification, with the Modal Negative Compara- tive Designated Source (N=152) Source of Variance df SS MS F P Main Effects: Sex 1 1.10 1.10 0.01 0.92 High-Low Identification 4 398.17 99.54 0.90 0.46 Interaction: Sex x High-Low Identification 4 641.41 160.35 1.45 0.22 Error 142 15,667.49 110.33 The resulting subgroup mean scores shown in Table 11 show how males perceived the source as less credible as identification decreases, in both message source manipulation conditions. However, females perceive the source as more credible as identification decreases, especially in the situation where they identify with a modally normative designated message source. Both message sources were perceived as generally credible. The difference was not significant, but the modally designated negative comparative source was given a more favorable credibility rating than the modally designated normative source. In general, the respondents highly identi- fying with the modally normative designated message source did not rate the message source any more favorable on credi- bility ratings than did low identification respondents. waever, a trend of mean responses developed for respondents 93 Table 11 Respondent Mean Scores for Source Credibility by Sex of Respondent and Level of Source-Receiver Identification Sub- groupings (12 = high source credibility; 84 a low source credibility) Levels of Type of Message Source Identifi- Modal Normative Modal Negative Compara- cation Designated Source* ' ' With Males Females Males Females Source High 34.69 43.38 25.00 38.75 -- 36.32 38.15 36.50 32.50 -- 41.50 36.52 38.27 38.33 -- -- -- 39.43 36.13 Low 41.73 36.10 41.74 36.67 * Empty cells in analysis called for the collapsing of levels in the "Identification with the NOrmative Desig- nated Source" rating. receiving the message from a modally negative comparative designated source. The high identification respondents rated the source as more credible than did the low identifi- cation respondents. (See Appendix K) When the ratings for the perceived "Safety," "Quali- fication," and "Dynamism" of a source are totaled into a single "Credibility" rating the findings do not support the first hypothesis. Thus, a modally designated normative referent is not perceived as more credible than is a modally designated negative comparative referent. Findings only partially support the more theoretically- based second hypothesis which states: 94 ". . . the more similar is a referent to one's own behavior on a variable then the higher the credibility of the referent on the factors of 'Safety,' 'Qualification,‘ and 'Dynamism.'" The source was rated more credible by high identifi- cation males and less credible by high identification fe- males. The modal negative comparative source tended to be rated more credible by high identification respondents. Thus, an effect is detected, but not a totally systematic and parsimonious one. Further research should attempt to explain the negative correlation between female source-self identification scores and source credibility ratings. This lowered credibility rating by high identification females may be a consistent finding or it may change from group to group, or it may change when the message for the source changes. D. Findings for Comprehension Measures Although previous communication researchers have not found significant subgrouping differences in recall or com- prehension of message content, this author has hypothesized differences on the basis of unique methodological conditions. First, several topics were included in the message, whereas only one topic was covered in past research. This study may then take into account any topic effect. Second, the measurement instrument is refined so that an individual highly attentive to the message will have a greater chance of validly and reliably responding to the comprehension 95 questions. Third, respondents were given a written message; therefore, they could spend as much or as little time and effort as desired when reading the message. Finally, previous research heightened the message manipulation, while this study heightens the message source manipulation. Based on the same reasoning used in other analyses in this study, the predictor variables used in the analysis for "comprehen- sion" effects are sex and degree of source-respondent identification. Since significant male-female differences were noted for the importance of topic scores, the author first analyzed comprehension scores by male-female subgroupings for each individual topic, and found no significant differences in comprehension. Evidently, high importance ratings for a topic, which were noted for males and females in an earlier part of the study, do not differentially affect comprehension of the topic. The author believes that a lack of significant differences between males and females in comprehension for each topic justified the addition of the comprehension scores for all topics in further analysis. Analysis of message comprehension based upon totaled comprehension scores for all three topics resulted in totally nonsignificant main and interaction effects irrespective of the message source manipulation condition. Overall compre- hension scores do not significantly deviate based upon the modally designated message source from which the message was received, personal identification with the message source, or sex subgroupings. (See Appendix L) 96 Table 12 Two-way ANOVA for Comprehension of the Message by Sex and High-Low Identification with the Modal Normative Designated Source (N=148) Source of Variance df SS MS F P Main Effects: Sex 1 7.19 7.19 2.19 0.14 High-Low Identification 3 11.99 4.00 .122 0.30 Interaction: Sex x High-Low Identification 3 10.43 3.48 1.06 0.37 Error 140 458.64 3.28 Table 13 Two-Way ANOVA for Comprehension of the Message by Sex and High-Low Identification with the Modal Negative Comparative Designated Source (N=152) Source of Variance df SS MS F P Main Effects: Sex 1 4.22 4.22 0.94 0.33 High-Low Identification 4 10.63 2.66 0.59 0.67 Interaction: Sex x High-Low Identification 4 29.31 7.33 1.63 0.17 Error 142 637.28 4.49 Based upon the findings concerning "comprehension" in this study, the first hypothesis which posited that a modally normative referent source will increase comprehension of the message, is rejected. Likewise, the more theoretic- ally-based second hypothesis which stated that the more 97 similar is a referent to one's own behavior on a variable then the higher the comprehension of the topics discussed by the referent, is also rejected. Although secondary data have shown a positive rela- tionship between perceived interpersonal similarity, familiarity, and liking, and perceived similarity in con- strual of one's environment; there is no support for the belief that high perceived similarity and perceived common construal will lead to greater attention being paid to a communicated message which, in turn, leads to increased comprehension of the message. Comprehension of a message is -.—q..—~....—.‘-———-V ,rnotyaffected by the source of the message, whether the source be modally normative or personally normative, or modally negative comparative or personally negative compara- tive. Two possible problems in this and other studies con- cerning the comprehension variable should be systematically studied in future research. First, the messages have been delivered within a forced attention situation. A more natural setting and more natural respondent behavior may lead to significant between group differences. Second, the discriminating power of the test instrument needs to be documented. Although difficult to accomplish, a near normal distribution of comprehension scores would be the basis for accepting the ability of the test instrument to accurately discriminate the degree of "comprehension" on the part of each subject. Again this problem may be repressing true source and message effects. 98 E. Summary of Findings 1. Findings When looking at the degree of personal identification one has with a message source on a particular variable, such as clothing: the higher the identification, the greater will be his tendency to agree with the source's stance on many topics. Degree of identification does not affect, or affects to a lesser degree, other source effect measures, such as perceived importance of topic, source credibility ratings, and message comprehension. Notably, "sex" interacts with "identification" for the source credibility dependent vari- able, while "sex" also affects "importance" scores. When high-low source identification scores are ignored and the source is defined as being either modally normative or negative comparative for the respondent group, the between group differences are not evident, most likely because of an averaging effect. Based on findings in this study, one cannot use a message source which is deemed to be normative for the group as a whole and expect significant message source effects, since there will always be varying degrees of identification by members in the group with the source 0 2. Interpretation When message receivers are able to identify the message source on a clearly visible cue which is believed to be symbolic of the source's construal of the environment, 99 i.e., cognitive structure; then the receiver will tend to rate himself to be in greater "topic" agreement with the source the greater the receiver's identification with the source on the visible cue and for some topics but not for others. Significant between source-receiver identification "agreement" scores are noted for the type of topics one does not take a strongly held position. Also, the receiver will project similar degrees of agreement-disagreement with the source concerning topics not discussed by the source. The importance of the topicS discussed by a source identified as being personally normative is affected for some people and for some topics. An individual enters a communicative situation with generally well-defined notions of the importance of different topics. These importance notions are based upon previous experiences and information the individual has accumulated concerning the topics over an extended period of time. These notions of topic impor- tance are not always affected by the fact that a particular message source has chosen to communicate a message concerning the topic. A message source perceived as similar on an identi- fying cue to some message receivers is rated as having higher credibility than by some message receivers not per- ceiving the source as similar. This finding could be related to the self-concept of the message receiving group. One would assume that individuals within a particular group that viewed themselves as having a favorable self-concept 100 would rate a message source perceived as being "similar" to themselves much more credible than would a group of indi- viduals holding a less favorable self-concept view. This could be the basis for the male-female differences in rating the credibility of a modal normative designated source. The females who were at a high level of identification rated the source significantly less credible. Finally, message comprehension scores were not affected by the degree of one's identification with the mes- sage source. Comprehension was not found to improve when receiving a message from an individual with whom one feels he has a similar cognitive structure. Comprehension may not be affected by source manipulations or there may have been methodological problems in carrying out this measure which may have interfered in properly measuring this variable. Further research is needed in this area and will be dis- cussed in the next chapter. CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Summary 1. Theory, Hypotheses. and Review of Literature The author has drawn from a personality theory explicated by George Kelly which is premised on the funda- mental postulate that, "A person's processes are psycho- logically channelized by the ways in which he anticipates events." The anticipations one has for events within the environment are based upon previous experience. Over a period of time an individual develops a cognitive structure within which his construal of his environment is channelized. In other words, one learns that based upon previous experi- ences, the best way to cope with the environment is to correctly anticipate events. One's overall cognitive structure, based upon his construal of the environment, is his means of best anticipating future events as well as explaining previous events. Kelly's personality theory has been integrated with principles related to reference group identification (Hyman, 1942; Merton and Rossi, 1949; H. Kelley, 1952; Sherif and Sherif, 1953; Shibutani, 1955). The author has integrated 101 102 these principles into a Reference Group Theory for communi- cation research and practice. This theory is based on the fundamental postulate that "Men act in a social frame of reference yielded by the groups of which they are a psycho- logical part." Based upon Mead's formulations within Symbolic Interaction Theory, Reference Group Theory is like- wise derived from the relating of oneself through language to others in the environment. Others will be perceived as being either a normative referent, "others sharing a relatively consistent cognitive structure with oneself," or in a comparative manner, "others possessing a relative inconsistent cognitive structure with oneself." Of most importance to the author in this study is the case of the negative comparative referent, "others possessing a cognitive structure least similar to the indi- vidual." The author was interested in testing the validity of the Effect Corollary of the Reference Group Theory, which was synthesized from other research which documented a positive relationship between perceived interpersonal similarity and message source effects (Byrne, 1961; Brock, 1965; Sechrest, 1963; weiss, 1957; Stotland and Patchen, 1961), and states, "The closer the psychological similarity between an individual and a referent then the greater the referent's effect upon the individual." Besides testing theoretic corollaries, this study also is aimed at develop- ing a practical means of identifying message sources as 103 being either normative or negative comparative for particu- lar individuals. The first set of hypotheses dealt with message source effects based on a modally derived referent orientation. It was hypothesized that a referent rated, on the average, by the group as a normative referent would be more agreed with, would enhance the importance of discussed topics, would be rated more credible, and would increase message comprehension more than would a message source rated, on the average, by the group as being a negative comparative referent. The second set of hypotheses was felt to be a better test of the theoretic formulation. A group is not expected to uniformly react to a message source, although the source is, on the whole, rated as being a normative referent. Thus, message source effects could be expected to average out for the two types of message sources. H0wever, when the per- sonal identification ratings with each message source are measured for each respondent and analyzed according to types of individuals based on level of message source iden- tification, the hypothesized source effects are expected to be more evident. Thus, the hypothesis states that a referent personally rated as being normative for an indi- vidual, based on some identifiable cue, will be more agreed with, would enchance the importance of discussed topics, would be rated more credible, and would increase message comprehension more than would a message source personally 104 rated as being negative comparative for an individual, based on some identifiable cue. The cue used for message source identification was clothing. One's clothing has been found to be a highly visible nonverbal cue which is an effective and consistent means of communicating information about an individual (Grubb and Grathwohl, 1969; Sommers, 1963; Bourne, 1969; Venkateson, 1970). An individual is capable of taking this behavioral cue and judging the degree of self—identity with others. It was assumed that once self-identification decisions were made concerning a particular source then the source was classified for that individual as being either normative or comparative. Theoretically, the source would have a differential effect upon the receiver based upon the manner by which the source was classified by the receiver. 2. Methodology for Testing of Hypotheses College students attending the University of Georgia were used as subjects (N=300). They responded to a question- naire which contained a two page "message" at the beginning. The "message" consists of a student's viewpoint concerning three different topics. The stated views were held constant while the description of the source's clothing was manipu- lated. The source's clothing type was derived from initial responses from University of Georgia students describing 105 their dress. These descriptions were then integrated to form well-defined dress typologies. These typologies were then rated by a sampling of University of Georgia students on the degree which each type was "like me" in the way I dress and "worse than" the way I dress. The dress type which rated, on the average, highest on "like me" for the group, was designated as the modally normative dress for University of Georgia students. The type that rated, on the average, highest on "worse than me" for the group, was designated as the modally negative comparative dress type for University of Georgia students. The topics discussed concerned the University of Georgia dormitory policy, first; the air pollution problem in Athens, Georgia, second; and, busing for racial inte- gration, third. After a subject read the message, he con- tinued through the questionnaire. The respondent was asked to state his degree of agreement with the message source for each of the three dis- cussed topics on a scale ranging from "Strongly Agree" to "Strongly Disagree." Also, respondents were asked to rate the perceived importance of each topic, ranging from "Very Important" to "NOt Important At All." Perceived degree of agreement scores were also collected on five topics not discussed by the message source as a means of measuring the generalizability of normative referent effects. Twelve bipolar word-pairs on a semantic differential scale were responded to by subjects as a means of measuring 106 the subject's perceived credibility of the source. The final dependent measure, comprehension, was derived from each respondent's response on fifteen true-false statements which tapped the amount of information correctly recalled from the printed message. Beside the source's dress type manipulation, another independent variable consisted of the self-identification ratings of the subjects to the modally designated normative, and negative comparative dress types. These self-identifi- cation scores were tapped by scales which asked for the degree of agreement that the modally designated normative and negative comparative dress types "describes the way I would like to dress." Data on the subject's sex, year in school, school or college of enrollment, and occupation of the head of the family also were obtained as control variable data. Analyses primarily consisted of 3-way analyses of variance. 3. Findings Differences in message source effects were not found when using modally designated message sources as the basis for analysis. Obviously, the relative differences in the degree of personal identification with the message source dress style on the part of the subjects resulted in responses for both groups which tended to regress toward the mean and, thus, not be significantly different. This lack of 107 differential source effect was evident for all of the measured dependent variables. Hypothesized differences in source effects were noted when the respondents who received a message from a source dressed in the style with which they highly identi- fied were compared to respondents who did not highly identify with the same source. The identification was based on clothing style. These significant differences were noted for the message agreement variable. Less consistent and significant differences were noted for the other dependent variables. The significant difference for agreement scores is highly supportive of the Effects Corollary in Reference Group Theory. In this study a message source perceived as dressing in a manner with which a number of students closely identify is perceived as being in greater agreement with these message receivers on selected topics than did receivers not identifying with the source. The greater the perceived similarity of dressing behavior, the greater the perceived cognitive similarity between the source and receiver. However, the other hypothesized dependent variable effectswdid_not consistently_materialize;‘ This does not lend total support to the theoretical structure of Reference Group Theory. Even though a source may be perceived as commonly construing the environment as does the receiver, the source will not always be rated significantly more credible, or the message topics will not be rated as more 108 important. Comprehension of the message seemed totally unaffected by level of identification differences. Thus the Effect Corollary range of applicability has been documented in this study. Although the hypothesized effect was supported for agreement on issues, it was not supported in several other instances. Most likely, other variables beside perceived interpersonal cognitive simi- larity are affecting source credibility ratings, message importance, and comprehension ratings. B. Conclusions The Effect Corollary of Reference Group Theory has been supported in this study. The individuals who highly identified with the message source on a psychologically revealing behavioral cue, clothing behavior, were signifi- cantly more apt to be in agreement with the attitudinal stance of the message source on discussed topics as well as on non-discussed topics. Since the fundamental postulate of Reference Group Theory states that men act in a social frame of reference yielded by the groups of which they are a psychological part, it follows that individuals who identify with one group of people will believe themselves to be psychologi- cally tied to this group of people. Likewise, the Choice Corollary states that as a person perceives a referent as more similar to himself psychologically he will take this --—~- \I\ ,AH- 109 referent as a normative referent. Therefore, it follows that a person identified by an overt nonverbal cue as belong- ing to a group which another person believes to contain individuals who have similar ways of construing the world, will be affected by what this normative reference group individual says. The message source receiver will be more apt to agree with what the normative referent source states as well as believing that the normative referent source would be in agreement concerning topics not discussed. As shown by the findings in this study, the exact normative referent effects need to be determined and deline- ated. A normative referent is not always rated as being of higher source credibility than a negative comparative referent. Also, the message topic discussed by a normative referent is not always given a greater importance rating than if the topic was discussed by a negative comparative referent. Likewise, the message topic is not comprehended to a greater degree because it is communicated by a norma- tive, as compared to a negative comparative, referent. The author believes that other research studies using Reference Group Theory as the basis for hypothesizing com- municator effects is both necessary and feasible. The effects hypothesized should continue to deal with source- receiver agreement, concerning facts and information; as well as, persuasion measures. This seems to be the area of greatest effects. 110 Once an individual perceives a cognitive similarity between himself and another individual, his reaction to a message communicated by this other individual most likely will be limited to the cognitive area. Thus, similarity in cognitive structure will lead to similarity in point of view, importance of particular information, the relation of one fact to another, etc. On the other hand, the noncogni- tive aspects of interpersonal relations would seemingly be less affected. Therefore, the credibility of the referent, how he feels about issues, what action should be taken, etc., are not as affected by a normative referent source. This hypothesized cognitive versus noncognitive effect should be pursued in further research to see whether it will support the initial findings in this study, namely, that cognitive effects result from normative referent com- munication. Male-female differences also seem to be of importance, at least when source identification is made on the basis of clothing behavior. The importance of topics and perceived source credibility seem to be the dependent variables most affected by sex subgrouping differences. It may not be the source identification cue which is precipitating these differences, however. There may be some basic differences in the manner in which males and females differentially react to personalized normative referents. This subgrouping analysis would be pursued in future research. 111 Likewise, a stated objective of this study was to identify a personalized normative referent that would have a consistent effect across several topic areas. This objective was not realized. Strong differences among topics were evident for both "agreement" and "importance" dependent variables. There will most likely always be topic to topic differences across broad topic areas. However, the author believes future research should attempt to use clustered topics and measure normative referent effects within each of these topic clusters. There is a possibility that there is some range of topics within which one personalized normative referent source may be of greatest effect. C. Recommendations 1. Application of Findings in a Communication Setting Since the findings suggest that the clothing cue was utilized in making judgments of agreement on topics, com- municators should take this into account in selecting sources to present messages to given audiences. Based on the find- ings, Some tentative recommendations are offered to communi- cators. When communicating within a mass communication situation one should acquire as much knowledge as possible about the clothing behavior cues perceived by the target audience and the symbolic interpretations of these cues concerning the cognitive structure of individuals dressed in 112 this manner. The communicator should become aware of the generally accepted clothing behavior of the group as well of the clothing behavior of subgroups within this group. Depending on his target group or subgroup he should dress in a manner which clearly identifies him as following the group (subgroup) norm of dress. It must be clearly stated, at this point, there are limitations inherent in modally identifying the normative clothing styles for a group. Personal clothing style pre- ferences vary within groups and, in turn, these preferences are symbolic of differential cognitive structures. The potential for obtaining a unified and homogeneous use of one type of clothing style as the basis for choosing a normative referent within a group seems to be small, at least within the population studied. It is best to obtain the personal dress style preferred by each individual in the group and use a personalized source to communicate the message. wa- ever, the logistical limitations evident in this procedure would seem to rule out the practicality of this approach. Most likely, the next best alternative to a person- alized message source is one with whom a vast majority of the group highly identify as a normative source, based upon some identifying cue, such as clothing style. As long as there is a group consensus of the dressing type with which most of the group highly identify then there is a greater potential of source effects. H0wever, by finding the "averaged" group consensus on preferred clothing style, one 113 will not be tapping the manner by which a truly normative source can be identified. The normative referent must be perceived as having a highly similar cognitive structure; it is an either-or decision and not an "averaged" decision, on the message receiver's part. Once the communicator has clearly identified his cognitive structure through his dressing behavior he can expect to have a greater effect upon the individuals in his audience who highly identify themselves with this type of dress behavior and, therefore, this type of cognitive struc- ture. The effect will entail greater agreement. Since an interaction effect between message source and topics can be expected, one should only discuss one particular topic,or topic cluster, if possible. On the other hand, if the source is aware of a topic upon which his audience already agrees he should begin his message by discussing this topic and agreeing with the stance accepted by the receiver. This should increase source agreement on other topics, but the full ramification of this technique is not completely understood, so it should be used cautiously. 2. Future Research a. Modification of Present Research One limitation of the present study, which should be modified in future research, is the generalizability of this study's findings. The results are limited in that clothing 114 behavior changes from group to group and that the author only dealt with a narrow group of respondents. Likewise, the importance or significance of clothing changes from group to group. Thus, one group may have very definite ideas as to how a person should dress as well as what it symbolizes when an individual dresses a particular way. Furthermore, for some groups clothing may be a more important cue in identifying one's cognitive structure while in other groups other cues may be more salient. These differences between groups in reacting to and interpreting clothing styles may make a difference in hypothesized message source effects based upon the source's dressing behavior. Another modification involves the use of clothing as a cue for identifying cognitive structure without validating this by measuring perceived cognitive structure. Without previous data to draw upon, the author assumed\that clothing behavior would be an effective method of accurately project- ing one's attitudinal structure. Many external pressures affect one's clothing behavior, therefore, it may not be an accurate criterion for judging an individual's cognitive structure. An individual dressed in a particular way may not be accurately projecting his "true" structure through his clothing. This was not measured by the author. Also, a more useful finding for most communication researchers is attitude change rather than attitude agreement on the part of the respondent. There was no measure in this study of attitude change that results from a message 115 emanating from a normative referent. Thus, future research should be undertaken using a before-after experimental design so that attitude change as well as attitude agreement may be measured. Another potential modification of this study would be the use of measures which tap the interactive effect that could possibly have occurred between the initial perception of the message source, one's expectations of what stance this individual would take on certain issues, and the actual message communicated by this source. The respondent's per- ception of the message source's cognitive structure could drastically change when the new information about the mes- sage source is revealed via the message. Also, different topics used for discussion by the message source also may have a differential effect upon how the message source is perceived. Analysis has uncovered a strong topic effect within this study. As could be expected, in any communication situation, message receivers may have fairly well developed attitudes toward the topic or topics under discussion. These initial topic-oriented attitudes may have some inter- acting effect upon the initial perception, and subsequent effect, of the message source. Main topic effects in analysis showed that the topics were differentially perceived. Likewise, interaction effects determined that agreement with the message source differed among the various topics. On the whole, the topics, air 116 pollution and birth control views are agreed with; while the University of Georgia dorm policy, clothing, music, and automobile styles are neutral in agreement; and busing for integration and political views are negatively agreed with. It is interesting to note that topics discussed and not discussed are in each category. Thus, by knowing one's stance on the University of Georgia dorm policy, air pollu- tion and busing for integration, the respondents may assume that they will tend to agree with the source's views on birth control and that they will disagree with their views on politics. There could very well be a strong relationship between knowing where a source stands on one topic and how that will affect one's predictions of where he stands on other topics which relate to the topic discussed by the source. Future research should delve into the "type" of topics which may be so related. The relative effect of message source compared to topic effects had not been dealt with in this study, there- fore, one cannot analyze the findings on this basis. How- ever, this study has pointed out this interacting relation- ship between source and topic which should be controlled and/or accounted for in future research. Finally, and of great importance, is the necessity to test the operationalization of referent group identifications. The author is attempting to have the respondent relate his cognitive "self" to the cognitive "self" of the referent individual. In this study the perception of the "self" 117 cognitive structure was matched with particular dress styles through the statements, "Describes the way I would like to dress" (normative operationalization) and "Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress" (negative comparative operationalization). There are several ways in which this identifying statement could be made. Changes in wording for these identifying statements should be matched against changes in one's scores. For example, the normative statement could have been, "Describes the way I dress," "This is the dress style that expresses the 'real me,'" "This is the dress style I feel most comfortable in," etc. The same type of statements, but at the opposite end of continuum, could be made for opera- tionalizing the negative comparative referent identification. b. Related Studies (1) Clarity of Identifyingggue The results of this study clearly point to a positive relationship between perceived similarity on a "cue" item for two individuals and the ability of one of these indi- viduals to affect agreement scores of the other individual. The "cue" in this case was dress behavior. As previously noted, others have found dress behavior to be a highly per- sonal and psychologically identifying behavior cue. One aspect of identifying cues which should be measured is the variability of the perceived cognitive structure which is symbolically expressed by the cue. The 118 cue which is most effective is one which is homogeneously perceived by the target audience group and an accurate reflection of cognitive structure. It is an efficient cue when the cue can immediately be perceived to be a cue to the referent's cognitive structure. Studies should discriminate between the two aspects of cue effectiveness. First, the ability of a cue to have a relatively homogeneous meaning to a large group of individuals needs to be documented. Second, the degree with which this cue accurately represents the cognitive structure of the individual must also be docu- mented. Cue effectiveness combines these two character- istics. Future research should tap these two areas of "cue clarity" which relate to effectiveness and efficiency. A cue may quickly be perceived as a method of expressing one's cognitive structure, but it may not be effective in projecting a "true" cognitive structure. However, a cue that may be very effective in projecting a "true" cognitive structure may not be efficiently communicated by the referent and lead to a lack of information concerning the referent's perceived cognitive structure. 119 Examples of the types of cues discussed here as "effective cues" would be past behavioral experiences; attitude toward salient interpersonal relationships such as parenthood, husband, consumer, etc.; the procedures one would follow to solve various types of problems; etc. These cues are believed to be highly effective in communi- cating cognitive structure, but not very efficient. In- depth communication is needed to elicit these cues. Examples of the types of cues discussed here as "efficient cues" would be length and style of one's hair; the amount of money an individual earns; one's friends and acquaintances, etc. Here again, these cues are believed to be highly efficient in communicating cognitive structure, but not very effective. Clarity of the identifying cognitive cue becomes a most important condition. Once an individual can clearly be identified as to his cognitive structure then another indi- vidual can either closely identify with him and be affected according to Reference Group Theory predictions, or not identify himself with this referent and not be affected by him. In this study clarity of cue identification was not tested. However, the author believed clothing behavior to be both an effective and efficient means of cognitive structure identification. 120 (2) Multiple and Conflicting Cues Future research should delve into the use of multiple verbal and/or non-verbal cues as effective and efficient methods of projecting one's cognitive structure. Any one cue or some combination of cues may be the most effective and efficient method. For some groups, certain clothing styles may be the best. Other cues, as alluded to in the previous section, could very well include: nonverbally, the purchasing or possessing of specific products such as house style, furniture, automobile; the method in which problems are approached and solved; the type of friends with whom one associates; the ways in which an individual spends his leisure time; verbally, the opinions, beliefs, and attitudes one holds about the vast number of topics which we must con- sider in our lives. If verbally tapping cues, then one can look for the topical area, or areas which are most revealing concerning one's cognitive structure. The author would expect cognitively related cues to be both most efficient in identifying normative referents and most effective in bringing about normative message source effects. One's values, attitudes, and beliefs would be the cognitive cues most efficient and effective in com- municating overall cognitive structure. The communication of multiple, parallel, and reinforcing values, attitudes, and beliefs would be expected to be that much more reflective of one's true cognitive structure. 121 One interesting experimental study could involve the use of multiple, and conflicting, cognitive struchxre cues. In reality, we all give off many cues simultaneously and some of them may be conflicting. The manner in which others sort out these cues and assimilate them would tell us a great deal about the perception of referent others. In a conflicting cue situation, the cognitive-based cue would be expected to be the dominant cue in hypothesizing source effects. (3) Personal vs. Societal Norms There may very well be two types of "orientations" which each individual evaluates when interacting with others. There may be the "personal referent orientation" as well as the "societal referent orientation." In the "personal" sense the other individual's cognitive structure is compared to one's own structure. In the "societal" sense the other's cognitive structure is compared to what is perceived to be the immediate group's or general society's "cognitive structure." In this study, the negative comparative-designated referent was identified as not dressing "the way I would" (as an averaged individual statement), but very clearly could have been representing the accepted societal cognitive structure, or the normative beliefs of the college student population. This concept would then help explain both find- ings in this study: (1) a trend for the total sample to be 122 in greater agreement with the negative comparative referent on topics discussed and not discussed by the referent (societal normative referent), and (2) a high degree of agreement by high identification respondents (personal normative referent that projects a "clear cue" concerning structure). This possible conflicting effect of societal versus personal norms effect, has, likewise, not been controlled within this study. Therefore, the degree to which a respon- dent was reacting to a message source in a "personal" versus a "societal" sense may be affecting the research findings. More research needs to be done in order to differentiate the basis upon which a referent other is perceived to be norma- tive on a personal and/or societal manner. (4) Delineation of Cognitive Structure Further research must deal with the more specific delineation of cognitive structure. Not only must sensitive scales of measure be devised but the various aspects of cognitive structures should be categorized, measured separately, and be given weights of importance and effect. Initially, cognitive structure could be dichotomized as relating to the "evaluative aspect" (on which end of the construct does one channelize his construing of an event) or the "structural aspect" (what is the superstructure of constructs formed to construe an event). Once measuring these two aspects of cognitive structure the relative "importance" of each aspect of perceived cognitive structure 123 could then be measured, manipulated, and evaluated. Also, a change in the experimental situation may effect results, therefore, future research should occur in other communication settings, both interpersonal and mass media. This will test the robustness of the theoretical formulations. Each of these forementioned modifications and areas for related research will be systematically studied by this author in future research projects. BI BLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Adams, J0hn B. "Effects of Reference Group and Status on Opinion Change." J0urnalistuarterly, 37:3 (Summer, 1960), 408-412. Alexander, Dennis C. "A Construct of the Image and a Method of Measurement." J0urnal of Communication, 21 (June, 1971), 170-178. Anderson, Peter; Jensen, Thomas; King, Lyle. "Effects of H0mophilous Hair and Dress Styles on Credibility and Comprehension." Paper presented to the annual con- ference of the International Communication Associa- tion, Atlanta, Georgia (April, 1972). Asch, S. E. "Effects of Group Pressure on the Modification and Distortion of Judgments." Readings in Social Psychology. Edited by E. E. Maccoby, et al. New York: H01t, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1958. Bannister, D. and Mair, J. M. The Evaluation of Personal Constructs. New York: Academic Press, 1968. Bercheid E. "Opinion Change and Communicator - Communicatee Similarity and Dissimilarity." J0urnal of Personality and Social Psycholggy, 4 (1966), 670-680. Berlo, David; Lemert, James; Mertz Robert. "Dimensions for Evaluating the Acceptability of Message Sources." Public Opinion Quarterly, 33 (Winter, 1969-70), 563- 567. ' Bott, Elizabeth. "The Concept of Class as a Reference Group." Human Relations, 8:3 (1954), 259-285. Bourne, Francis. "Group Influence in Marketing and Public Relations." Dimensions of Consumer Behavior. Edited by James McNeal. New Y0rk: Appleton-Century- Crofts, 1969. Brock, Timothy. "Communicator - Recipient Similarity and Decision Change." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1 (1965), 650-654. Byrne, D. "Interpersonal Attraction and Attitude Similarity." J0urnal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 62 (1961), 713-715 0 125 126 Byrne, D.; Nelson, D. "Attraction as a Function of Attitude Similarity-Dissimilarity: the Effect of Topic Importance." Psychonometric Science, 1 (1964), 93-94. Byrne, D.; Clore, G. L. "Effectance Arousal and Attraction." Journal of Pergonalityyagd Social_Psychology, 6:4 Monograph supplement, Part 2 (1967), 1-18. Byrne, D.; Clore, G. L. "Predicting Interpersonal Attrac- tion Toward Strangers Presented in Three Different Stimulus Modes." Psychonometric Science, 4 (1966), 239-240. Byrne, D.; Young, Robert K.; Griffitt, William. "The Rein- forcement Properties of Attitude Statements." Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1 (1966), 266-267. Byrne, D.; Griffitt, W. "A Developmental Investigation of the Law of Attraction." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4 (1966), 699-702. Charters, W. W.; Newcomb, Theodore M. "Some Attitudinal Effects of Experimentally Increased Salience of a Membership Group." Readings in Reference Group Theory and Research. Edited by Hyman and Singer. New York: The Free Press, 1968, pp. 95-102. Cohen, Arthur. Attitude Change and Social Influence. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1964. Coser, Lewis A.; Rosenberg, Bernard. Sociological Theory: A Book of Readings. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1964. Couch, Carl. "Self-Attitudes and Degree of Agreement with Immediate Others." American Journal of Sociology, 63 (March, 1958). Cronkhite, Gary. Persuasion: Speech and Behavioral Change. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc., 1969. Denzin, Norman. "The significant Others of a College Popu- lation," Sociological Quarterly (Summer 1966), 298- 310. Desmande, William H. "The Position of George Herbert Mead." Social Psychology Through Symbolic Interaction. Edited by Stone and Farberman. waltham, Mass.: Xerox College Publishing, 1970. Deutsch, Morton; Krauss, Robert. Theories in Social Psy- chology. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1965. 127 Douty, H. I. "Influence on Clothing on Perception of Persons." J0urnal of Home Economics, 55 (1963), 197-202. Duke, Marshall P.; N0wicki, Stephen. "A New Measure and Social-Learning Model for Interpersonal Distance." J0urnal of Experimental Research in Personalityi 6 (December, 1972), 119-132. Duncan, Hugh Dalziel. Communication and Social Order. London: Oxford University Press, 1962. Eisenstadt, S. N. "Studies in Reference Group Behavior: I. Reference Norms and the Social Structure." Human Relationg, 7 (1954), 191-216. Fendrich, James. "Perceived Reference Group Support: Racial Attitudes and Overt Behavior." American Sociological Review, 32:6 (1967), 960-970. Festinger, Leon. "Experiments in Group Belongingness." Readings in Reference Group Theory and Research. Edited by Hyman and Singer. New York: The Free Press, 1968. Fishbein, Martin. "The Perception of N0n-Members: A Test of Merton's Reference Group Theory." Sociometry, 25:3 (1963), 271-286. Fulton, R. Barry. "Measurement of Speaker Credibility." Journal of Communication, 20 (September, 1970), 270- 279. Grubb, Edward; Hupp, Gregg. "Perception of Self, General- ized Stereotypes, and Brand Selection." J0urnal of Marketing Research, 5 (1968), 58-63. Grubb, Edward; Grathwohl, Harrison. "Consumer Self-Concept Symbolism and Market Behavior: A Theoretical Approach." Dimensions of Consumer Behavior. Edited by James McNeal. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969. Hamid, P. N. "Style of Dress as a Perceptual Cue in Impres- sion Formation." Perceptual and Motor Skills, 26 (1968), 904-906. Hartley, Ruth E. "N0rm Compatibility, N0rm Preference, and the Acceptance of New Reference Groups." Journal of Social Psychology, 52 (1960), 87-95. Hartley, Ruth B. "Personal Characteristics and Acceptance of Secondary Groups as Reference Groups." J0urnal of Individual Psychology, 13 (1957), 45-55. 128 Holden, David. "Associations as Reference Groups: An Approach to the Problem." Rural Sociology, 30:1, (1965)’ 63-740 Hoult, R. "Experimental Measurement of Clothing as a Factor in some Social Ratings of Selected American Men." American Sociological Review, 19 (1954), 324- 328. Hovland, Carl; Janis, Irving; Kelley, Harold. Communication and Persuasion. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957. Hyman, Herbert H. "The Psychology of Status." Archives of Psychology, 269 (1942). Hyman, Herbert H.; Singer, Eleanor. Readings in Reference Group Theory and Research. New York: The Free Press, 1968. Infante, Dominic A. "Cognitive Structure As a Predictor of Post Speech Attitude and Attitude Change." Speech Monggraphs, 39:1 (March, 1972), 55-61. Kelley, Harold H. "Salience of Membership and Resistance to Change of Group-Anchored Attitudes." Human Relations, 3 (1955), 275-289. Kelley, Harold H. "Two Functions of Reference Groups." Readings in Social Psychology. Edited by Swanson, Newcomb, and Hartley. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1952. Kelley, J. "Dress as Nonverbal Communication." Paper pre- sented to the annual conference of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, May, 1969. Kelly, George. A Theory of Personality: The Psychology of Personal nggtructs. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1955. Kelly, George. "Europe's Matrix of Decision." Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Edited by M. R. J0nes. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1962. Kemper, Theodore D. "Reference Groups, Socialization, and Achievement." American Sociological Review, 33:1 (1968), 31-45. King, T. R. "An Experimental Study of the Effect of Ethos Upon the Immediate and Delayed Recall of Information," Central States Speech J0urnal, 17 (1966), 22-28. 129 Kuhn, Manford H. "Major Trends in Symbolic Interaction Theory in the Past Twenty-five Years." Sociological Quarterly, 5 (Winter, 1964), 61-84. Kuhn, Manford H. "The Reference Group Reconsidered." Sociological Quarterly, 5 (1965), 5-24. Lemert, James B. "Status Conferral: The Modification of Source Credibility by the Act of Press Coverage." Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Communication, Michigan State University, 1964. Linn, Erwin L. "Reference Group: A Case Study in Conceptual Diffusion." Sociological Quarterly, 7:4 (1966), 489- 499. Lorimer, E. S.; Dunn, S. W. "Reference Groups, Congruity, Theory and Cross-Cultural Persuasion." Journal of Communication, 18 (1968), 354-368. Maddi, Salvatore. Personality Theories: A Comparative Analysis. Homewood, 111.: The Dorsey Press, 1968. Manis, Jerome; Meltzer, Bernard. Symbolic Interaction: A Reader in Social Psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1967. Mannheim, Bilha F. "Reference Groups, Membership Groups and the Self Image." Sociometry, 29:3 (1966), 265-279. McGuire, William J. "The Nature of Attitudes and Attitude Change." The Handbook of Social Psycholggy. Edited by Lindzey, Gardner and Aronson. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1969. Mead, George Herbert. MindeSelf. and Society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1934. Merton, Robert. Social Theory ang_Social Structure. Glen- coe, 111.: Free Press, 1957. Merton, Robert; Rossi, Alice Kitt. "Contributions to the Theory of Reference Group Behavior." Readin s in Reference Group Theory and Research. Edited by Hyman and Singer. New York: The Free Press, 1968. Miller, Delbert. Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. New York: Dav1d McKay Co., Inc., 1970. Miller, Gerald R. Speech Communication: A Behavioral Approach. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc., 1966. 130 Newcomb, Theodore M. "An Approach to the Study of Communi- cative Acts." Psychological Review, 60 (1953), 393- 404. Newcomb, Theodore M. "Attitude Development as a Function of Reference Groups: The Bennington Study." Readings in Social Egycholggy. Edited by Maccoby, Newcomb, and Hartley. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1958. Newcomb, Theodore M. Social Psychology. New York: Holt, 1950. Newcomb, Theodore M. The Acquaintance Process. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1961. Patchen, Martin. "The Effect of Reference Group Standards on Job Satisfactions." Human Relations, 11 (1958), 303-314. Paynton, Clifford T. "A Suggestion for Reference Group Theory: Ideational Referents and Group Referents." Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 3:4 (1966), 214-223. Petrie, C. R. "Informative Speaking: A Summary and Bibliography of Related Research." Speech Mono ra hs, 30 (1963), 81-88. Pettigrew, Thomas. "Social Evaluation Theory: Convergences and Applications." Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Edited by David Levine. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1967. Pollis, Nicholas. "Reference Group Re-examined." British Journal of Sociology, 13:3 (1968), 300-307. Riley, John W.; Riley, Matilda W. "Mass Communication and the Social System." Readings in Reference Group Theory and Research. Edited by Hyman and Singer. New York: The Free Press, 1968. Rosencranz, M. L. "Clothing Symbolism." Journal of Home Economics, 54:1 (1962), 18-22. Ruesch, Jurgen; Kees, weldon. N0nverba1 Communication. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1956. Runciman W. G. "Problems of Research on Relative Depriva- tion." The European J0urnal of Sociology, 2 (1961), 315‘323 o 131 Sampson, Edward E.; Insko, Chester A. "Cognitive Consis— tency and Performance in the Autokinetic Situation." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 68:2 (1964), 184-192. Sanders, Keith; Pritchett, Michael. "Some Influences of Appearance on Television Newscaster Appeal." Journal of Broadcasting, 15:3 (Summer, 1971), 293-301. Schmitt, Raymond L. The Reference Other Orientation. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1972. Sechrest, Lee. "The Psychology of Personal Constructs: George Kelly." Concepts of Personality. Edited by Wepman and Heine. Chicago: Aldive Publishing Co., 1963. Sherif, Muzafer. Social Interaction. Chicago: Aldive Publishing Co., 1967. Sherif, Muzafer; Sherif, Carolyn. An Outline of Social Psychology. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1956. Sherif, Muzafer; Sherif, Carolyn. Groups in Harmony and Tension. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1953. Sherif, Muzafer; Sherif, Carolyn. Reference Groups. New York: Harper and Row, 1964. Sherif, Muzafer; Wilson, M. 0. Group Relations at the Crossroads. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1953. Sherwood, John J. "Self Identity and Referent Others." Sociometry, 28 (1965), 66-81. Shibutani, Tomatsu. "Reference Groups as Pers ectives," American Journal of Sociology, 60 (1955 , 562-569. Siegal, Alberta; Siegal, Sidney. "Reference Groups, Member- ship Groups, and Attitude Change." J0urnal of Abnormal and Social ngchology, 55 (1957), 360-364. Simmons, Roberta G. "The Experimentally-Increased Salience of Extreme Comparative Reference Groups." Sociology and Social Research; 53:4 (1969), 490-499. Sommers, Montrose. "Product Symbolism and Perception of Social Strata." Toward Scientific Marketipg. Edited by Stephen A. Greyser. ChiCago: American Marketing Association, 1963. Stone, Gregory P.; Farberman, Harvey A. Social Psychology Through Symbolic Interaction. Waltham, Mass.: Xerox College Publications, 1970. ”A ”A A 4 ”0%” 132 Stotland, Ezra; Zander, Alvin; Natsoulas, Thomas. "General- ization of Interpersonal Similarity." Journal of Abnormal and Social ngchology, 62 (1961), 250-256. Stotland, Ezra; Patchen, Martin. "Identification and Changes in Prejudice and in Authoritarianism." Journal of Abnormal and Social ngchology, 62 (1961), 265-274. Stouffer, Samuel; et al. The American Soldier: Adjustment During Army Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1949. Thompkins, P. K.; Samovar, L. A. "An Experimental Study of the Effects of Credibility on the Comprehension of Content." Speech Monographs, 21 (1964), 120-132. Turner, Ralph. "Role-Taking, Role Standpoint, and Reference- Group Behavior." The American J0urna1 of Sociology, 61 (1956), 316-328. Vener, Arthur; Hoffer, Charles. Adolescent Orientations to Clothing. Michigan State University Agricultural Experimental Station Technical Bulletin, 270 (March, 1959). Venkateson, M. "Experimental Study of Consumer Behavior Conformity and Independence." £§ychological Experi- ments in Consumer Behavior. Edited by Stewart Henderson Britt. New York: J0hn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1970. Warner, W. Lloyd; Meeker, Marchia; Eells, Kenneth. Social Class in America. Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1949. Weiss, walter. "Opinion Congruence with a Negative Source on One Issue as a Factor Influencing Agreement on Another Issue." J0urpal of Abngrmal Sogial Psychg- logy, 54 (1957), 180-186. Williams, Margaret A. "Reference Groups: A Review and Commentary." Sociological Quarterly, 11:4 (1970), 545-554. Witt, Robert E. Group Influence on Consumer Brand Choice. Austin: University of Texas, Bureau of Business Research, Studies in Marketing No. 13, 1970. APPEND ICES APPENDIX A COPY OF QUESTIONNAIRE While attempting to serve the informational needs of students at the University of Georgia it is necessary to anonymously and objectively judge the writing ability of students applying for positions with the school newspaper. Within this booklet you will find an article written by a prospective reporter concerning an interview this reporter has had with a student at the University of Georgia. First, we would like you to read the two-page article beginning on the next page, then we would like you to respond to the questions which evaluate the article and its contents. Please do not go back and look at the article after you have read it all the way through once and do not change your responses to any of the questions. Your full participation in this endeavor is greatly appreciated. Thank you. 134 135 "What's Happening with UGA Students" Time moves on and so do the attitudes of University of Georgia students. It is necessary to stop every once in a while and document "the state of the campus." Therefore, lengthy interviews have been conducted with randomly chosen students on campus. This particular interview involves C. T. Ritchie, a University of Georgia student chosen at random for the interview. Mr. (Miss) Ritchie is dressed in a sport shirt, casual bell-bottom slacks, and casual shoes. He (she) is quite willing to present his (her) point of view concerning campus, local community, and national topics of the day. The campus issue discussed at greatest length con- cerned the recent University dorm policy changes. Ritchie states, "I believe that many of the graduate resident assistants deserved to get fired. Most of them were too permissive. However, I do not think that the University administrators of the dormitory system should have been fired. There were a couple of new high-level administrators brought on campus, such as Dr. Charles Kozell, the new Assistant Dean of Men, who were not familiar with the Univer- sity and instigated the firing of staff members before they really knew the situation." Ritchie continued, "Of course, they now point to greater efficiency and profits, in the run- ning of the dormitory system. So what if it is now 10% more profitable, the spirit has gone out of dormitory living. Before, the grad assistants were too permissive while the 136 administrators were not permissive, but were inefficient. However, there was a certain degree of closeness which does not seem to exist in the dormitories at this time. Dorm living is becoming too impersonal, not because the University is too large but because of the personality of current administrators at the University." Ritchie also feels strongly about public service activities. "Yes, I feel that the students and residents in Athens are aware of the immediacy of the air pollution prob- lem. Even though it is a moderate problem in the city of Athens, as much of a problem as taxes, employment, or crime, in the next ten years it is going to be the major area of concern. Few people know it, but in Athens the ecological balance between plant and animal is now beginning to deterio- rate because of air pollution. I believe most people are looking for things to get involved in, and air pollution con- trol is one of the most important. Everyone can do his own thing in solving the problem, all the way from boycotting the products put out by polluting industries or joining the "Save the Air" group in Athens, to attending city council meetings and speaking for air pollution control legislation or giving money to run advertisements alerting the public to the prob- lem. I participate in all these as often as I can." On the national scene, Ritchie takes up the busing issue. "To be honest, I am for busing in order to achieve racial balance in our schools. That is, as long as the bus ride is less than a half-hour one way. Otherwise, I see 137 nothing wrong with busing and I see it accomplishing a lot of good. I say this mainly because I believe our racial problems will never be solved unless black and white children go to school together and get to know one-another. Although I feel that school boards are now efficient in their use of money and teachers, having black and white children go to the same schools will put pressure on the predominantly white-controlled school boards to allocate equal amounts of money and qualified teachers to all the schools, instead of only giving the most to predominantly white schools. This equal distribution of funds and teachers would be a secondary favorable result of busing. If busing was fully implemented around the country, it would only have to be in effect for ten years or so. Because by then racial relations will have been improved to the point where there will no longer be any written or unwritten laws about racial integration. There- fore, there would no longer be a societal need for busing. But the longer we put off busing, the worse the problem becomes." 138 N0w that you have read the article, please respond to these questions about the author's reporting ability. This article was interesting. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree This article was well written. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree I would be interested in reading more articles written by the author of this article. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 139 Likewise, we will need more in-depth information con- cerning your feelings and understanding toward the subject matter discussed in this article in order to determine the ability of the author. Please respond to these next ques- tions to the best of your ability. Check the space which best describes your feelings toward the person interviewed, C. T. Ritchie. For example, if you feel Ritchie is very "good," you would check: Good: x : : : : : : :Bad and if you feel Ritchie is very "bad" you would check: Good: : : : : : : x :Bad and if you feel "neutral" towards Ritchie you would check: Good: : : : x : : : :Bad Please fill in all of the rating scales rating C. T. Ritchie (the student interviewed) as: C. T. Ritchie Safe: : : : : : : :Unsafe Unjust: : : : : : : :Just Kind: : : : : : : :Cruel Dishonest: : : : : : : :Honest Trained: : : : : : : :Untrained Inexperienced: : : : : : : :Experienced Qualified:___: : : : : : :Unqualified Uninformed: : : : : : : :Informed Aggressive: : : : : : : :Meek Hesitant:___:___: : : : : :Emphatic Bold: : : : : : : :Timid Passive: : : : : : : :Active 140 For these next questions we would like to know how you feel about the topics discussed by C. T. Ritchie: C. T. Ritchie and I feel the same way about the University dorm policy changes. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree The University dorm policy change is an important issue to me. Very important Fairly important Not very important Not important at all C. T. Ritchie and I feel the same way about the air pollution problem in Athens. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree The air pollution problem in Athens is an important issue to me. Very important Fairly important Not very important Not important at all 141 C. T. Ritchie and I feel the same way about busing. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Busing is an important issue to me. Very important Fairly important N0t very important N0t important at all 142 An indication of how much you remember from the article will result from your responses to these next true- false questions: C. T. Ritchie believes that the graduate assistants deserved to get fired. T F The University administrators which were fired were seen as not too permissive by Ritchie. T F The new administrator brought to campus who instigated the firing of dormitory staff members was named Dr. James Kilbourne. T F The dorms were quoted as being about 25% more profitable under the new administration. T F Ritchie believes that dorm life is too impersonal because the University is too large. T F Concerning air pollution in Athens, Ritchie believes that students and residents are now aware of the immediacy of this problem. T F Even though air pollution is a problem, Ritchie admits that it is not as much a problem as either taxes, employment, or crime. T F Ritchie states that in 10 years the ecological balance be- tween plant and animal will begin to deteriorate in Athens because of air pollution. T F There is currently a "Save the Air" group in Athens. T F Attending city council meetings was a method mentioned by Ritchie as a means of solving the air pollution problem. T F Ritchie is pro-busing as long as the bus ride is an hour or less one-way. T F Ritchie feels that school boards are now efficient in their use of money and teachers. T F Busing would only be needed for 10 years according to Ritchie in order to achieve its goals. T F Ritchie believes that even if busing is not implemented, over time, racial relations problems will eventually be solved. T F Ritchie is for busing mainly because with busing the school system would be more economically efficient. T F . ,r- ~u.-.—a-»-- --.-. —~-.,......_ --.—..—-.--v .,.-.—-~ ' "' ">. i V 4 ,,-_ ,_.—.y._..an -ara. nu- ,— .1.._..-.—- -.- -- . A-.- .-, _---~ A — Ah““-"" Afia.rt_ 143 These last questions attempt to give us a deeper understanding of how you relate to the individual, C. T. Ritchie, based upon the information contained within the article. Most likely you don't know this individual, so just make a guess as best as possible. I would probably agree with C. T. Ritchie's views about politics. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree I would probably agree with C. T. Ritchie's clothing pur- chases. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree I would probably enjoy the same music as C. T. Ritchie. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 144 I would probably like C. T. Ritchie's style of automobile. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree I would probably agree with C. T. Ritchie's views about birth control. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 145 You have now completed the section dealing with the rating of the student journalist. On the basis of a request from a Journalism professor at the University of Georgia we have added another short section to this questionnaire. Your responses on this set of questions will also be greatly appreciated. These questions attempt to measure how you rate your dressing behavior. There are no right or wrong answers. Your personal feelings are what count. Be as open and honest as possible with your answers. Read the description of each dress type and respond to each rating scale below the description in terms of how this type oderessing relates to you--on a mild spring day. (Females) Type : A halter top, braless, cut-off jeans, and bare feet. (Males) Type 1: Highly unconventional patterns and color combinations, old worn shirt and jeans with designs on them, beads and bracelets, and bare feet. ‘ Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 146 (Females) Type 2: A nice coordinated slack and top outfit, and stylish shoes. (Males) Type 2: A sport shirt, casual bell-bottom slacks, and casual shoes. Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Finally, we would like to know something about you: Sex: Male Female Year in school: Freshman Sophmore Junior Senior School or college: Arts and Sciences Journalism Other Occupation of head of family: APPENDIX B PRETEST OF DRESS TYPES Males Type 1: Highly unconventional patterns and color combina- tions, old worn shirt and jeans with designs on them, beads and bracelets, and bare feet. Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 147 148 Type 2: A loose-fitting shirt, comfortable jeans, and beat- up sandals. Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Type 3: A sport shirt, casual bell-bottom slacks, and casual shoes. Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor Disagree Strongly disagree 149 way of dressing than the way I dress. disagree Type 4: A knitted sweater-shirt, casual knitted slacks, and buckle moc-toed shoes. Describes the way Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor Disagree Strongly disagree I would like to dress. disagree way of dressing than the way I dress. disagree 150 Type 5: A nice dress shirt, a rib-knit sleeveless sweater, stylish slacks, and dress boots. Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Type 6: A dress shirt, tie, and sport jacket, dress slacks, and color-coordinated two-tone shoes. Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor Disagree Strongly disagree Type 1: A halter Describes the way Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor Disagree Strongly disagree 151 way of dressing than the way I dress. disagree Females top, bra-less, cut-off jeans, and bare feet. I would like to dress. disagree way of dressing than the way I dress. disagree 152 Type 2: A loose comfortable sweater, no-bra look, well-worn jeans, and old sneakers. Describes the way Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor Disagree Strongly disagree Type 3: A blouse Describes the way Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor Disagree Strongly disagree I would like to dress. disagree way of dressing than the way I dress. disagree or sweater, mini-skirt, and sandals. I would like to dress. disagree 153 Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Type 4: A comfortable and conventional dress and shoes. Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Type 5: A nice coordinated slack and top outfit, and stylish shoes. Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 154 Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Type 6: A highly fashionable pant-suit outfit, and very stylish shoes. Describes the way I would like to dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Describes a worse way of dressing than the way I dress. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 155 AmooHv com Amoo-thma AmooHv ova Hmpoe AuoHv om AmoHv ca A863 ta Amv 303 Ammav om Anode ma Ammav mm Ave Mmomw Ho Mummw mm Mao-w mm xmv 8mm cc 8mm mo mod «N Amv Aummv ooH xuomv ct Au-vv 06 way roar paonmwsom M0 0603 H0 Goewmmsooo GOOD 00mmm wmmHO Hofloom .v Amoo-v com AmooHv mmH AeooHv mva H8968 Ammmv cc Auomv om Aewmv om Hmcpo Ammmv oma Aummv om Amvmv on smaamcusoo Ammmv mo Aummv mu Aummv mm mmocmaom 6:6 an< deHHOO H0 Hoosom .m Auoo-v oom AmooHv mm- AmooHv ova Hmpoe Amway av Ammav mm Amway ma mwoaomu0\uoacmm Ammmv on Ammmv mm Aummv av “cacao Aummw no Mummw mm Muomw om mnosroom Amom oHH mom on 80¢ 06 coermmuu Hoosom Ga How» .m AeooHv com AeooHv mm AmooHv mwa H6968 Auvvv mma Amoco no Auwwv mo mHoEmu Amcmv mod Amcmv mm Amcmv mm mam: xmw .H HmpOH 0>HPmHMQEOU m>flpoEHoz mmflmdomvmu 0>Hpmowz Oflnmmumosma mondom moommmz mo COMPQMHOmOQ mmmHQ Aoomnzv .mQSOHO PcmswmeH 006mmmz 039 m0 £06m How mmfluoomemu OflQQMHOOEmQ Hmum>mw H0 £06m ca mpcmpcoammm M0 mmmvcmoumm 000 HwDEdz U XHDmem< APPENDIX D Primary Loading From Factor Analysis of Source Credibility Items (Orthogonally Rotated) Factor Item 1 2 3 Safe - Unsafe .76 Just - Unjust .71 Kind - Cruel .79 Honest - Dishonest .70 Trained - Untrained .68 Experienced - Inexperienced .83 Qualified - Unqualified .80 Informed - Uninformed .67 Aggressive - Meek .79 Emphatic - Hesitant .82 Bold - Timid .84 Active - Passive .76 Factor 1 = Safety Factor 2 = Qualification Factor 3 = Dynamism 156 APPENDIX E Mean Scores of Self-Reported Dress Description Ratings for the Two Treatment Sets: Predesignated N0rmative and Nega- tive Comparative Message Source Two Sample Sets Based on Message-Source Treatment Received ’Negative N0rmative Comparative Source . Source (N=l48) (N=152) (A) Self Identification with Predesignated Normative Dress Description Most like me (1) 2.44 2.56 Least like me (5) W0r t in relation to me 1) 3.63 3.71 Least "worse" in relation to me (5) (n=148) (n=152) (B) Self Identification with Predesignated Negative Comparative Dress Descrip- tion M0st like me (1) 3.42 3.47 Least like me (5) W0rst in relation to me (1) 2.45 2.44 Least "worse" in relation to me (5) 157 APPENDIX F Respondent Mean Scores for Agreement* and Perceived Agree- ment* with Source's Position by Topic and Control Variable Subgroups (l = Strongly Agree; 5 = Strongly Disagree) Mean Scores for Agreement and Perceived Agreement for Males- Females and Topics by Designated Source Subgroups Type of Message Source Modal Normative Modal Negative Designated Comparative Source Designated Source (N=148) (N=152) gey (Combined Discussed Topics) Male 2.87 2.57 Female 2.96 2.77 Topic Discussed: UGA Dorm Policy 3.08 2.89 Air Pollution 2.30 1.96 Busing 3.37 3.16 Non-Discussed: Political Beliefs 3.20 3.20 Clothing Choice 3.12 2.99 Music Preferences 3.12 3.08 Automobile Style Preferences 3.07 3.01 Birth Control Views 2.78 2.66 Mean Scores for Combined Discussed Topic Agreement by Con- trol Variable Subgroupings Sex, School of Enrollment Male 2.72 Arts & Sciences 2.76 Female 2.87 Journalism 2.82 Other 2.80 i 1 Year in School Highest 2.87 Freshman 2.81 -- 2.94 Sophmore 2.81 -- 2.78 Junior 2.74 -- 2.77 Senior/Graduate 2.83 Lowest 2.93 *"Agreement" refers to respondent agreement ratings on topics discussed by the source, while "perceived agreement" refers to respondent agreement ratings on topics n0t dis- cussed by the source. 158 APPENDIX G Respondent Mean Scores for Agreement with Source on Each of Three Topics for Each of Two Types of Sources, by Sex and Social Class of Respondent (N=300) (l = Strongly Agree; 5 = Strongly Disagree) Type of Message Source Modal Negative Topic Social Modal Normative Comparative Class Designated Designated Level Source Source Male Female Male Female UGA Dorm Policy Highest 2.91 3.07 2.88 2.86 -- 3.23 3.64 3.21 2.91 -- 3.12 2.82 3.00 2.77 -- 3.36 3.00 2.73 3.00 Lowest 3.20 3.50 3.27 3.00 Air Pollution Highest 2.06 2.39 2.25 2.14 Problem -- 2.46 2.91 2.16 2.04 -- 2.06 2.27 2.10 2.31 -- 2.18 2.09 1.64 2.00 Lowest 2.40 2.50 2.27 2.17 Busing for Racial Highest 3.78 3.04 3.58 3.46 Integration -- 2.85 3.54 3.21 3.17 -- 3.53 3.91 3.05 2.46 -- 3.27 3.09 3.54 3.33 Lowest 3.80 2.75 2.45 3.83 159 160 oo.m om.m mm.m no.v 6m.m mm.m duodenu0\uoacmm mm.m oo.m oo.¢ uo.m oo.m mw.m HOHcao om.m mw.m mm.m om.m oe.m ve.m muosraom coaemnomece mm.m m6.m wo.m oo.m mo.m oo.m engender Hoe ochsm om.m mm.m ac.H oo.m mH.m mm.m memsomH0\Hoacmm mm.m mH.m oo.m no.H mo.m 6H.m HoHcdo amenonm «H.m ma.m mH.m oe.H ov.m mm.m muoscoom :oHp mo.e mm.m om.e ca.m om.m Hm.m emssmmuu naeHom HH< om.m no.m no.m mm.m Ho.m oo.m memsomH0\H6Hcmw oo.w uo.m mm.m oo.m mm.m om.m HoHcso 6m.m oo.m 6w.m om.m oo.m mm.m mnoecaom aoHHou co.m oo.m cm.m NH.m ¢H.m eH.m coecmouu anon <0: Hmnwo EmHHMCHSOW mocwmom H0390 EmHHMCHdop mocwHom (floonom UHQOH w mHH< w mHH< Cfl HMO? moHdom pmvmcmflmmm moHdom 0>HHmHMQEOO 0>meomz H6002 UmvmcmHmwQ 0>HpMEHoz H6002 moHdom wmdmwmz m0 00>H AmeOMmHQ AHOCOHHm u m umem< SHOCOHHm n av Aoomuzv pamEHHOHcm m0 Hoonom 0cm Hoonom CH How? an .mmoHsom M0 wahH 03H m0 £06m How mOHQOH mmHnH m0 £08m so onsom QPHB pamEmem< How me00m 0602 vcwpcoammm I XHQmem¢ 161 O¢.m mo.m 0H 304 om.m I: In mH.m 0¢.m II ob.m wv.m In GOHHmHomPGH OO.m mm.m OH SOHI HdHomm How ocstm mO.N om.m QH 304 mm.m In In MH.N mm.m II mb.H Om.m I: oc.H wH.m oH roHr amHnoHu soapseeom HH< 0H.m wm.m OH 304 mo.m II In 00.m Om.m II wo.N mH.m II om.m m¢.m be ron aoHHom Smog <0: “mmHuzv Hoveuzw mUHSOW‘ **00H50w (MUHSOMQMHHw (mmmmfl meMCOHmmn pmHMGOHme COHHmUHMHpCmUH 0>HH6H6QEOO 0>H968Hoz H6002 M0 Hm>0q 0>Hpmmmz H6002 moHsom MWmemz no make WWCHQSOHmndm GOHHmoflmfivcmpH H0>HmommumoHsom an vamEmmHm< UHQOH pmmmdowflm How mmHoow new: AmmHmmmHQ kHOCOHPm u m ammHm< kHOGOHHw u av mQSOHmDsm GOvaoHHchpr H0>HwowmI00Hsom H0 Hw>mq an GOHPHmom m.moH:0m QPHS *PcwewwHo< 00>H00Hmm 0cm *pcwemeo¢ How mmHoom 0602 vampcoamwm H XHQmem< 162 mm.m ¢H.m 0H 302 OH.m II II mo.m mH.m In om.m No.m In mmocmHmHmHm oo.m 6H.m oH roar mHaHm mHHnoeoese 0m.m om.m DH 304 mm.m II I: ob.m m¢.m In Om.N vo.m I: 00.N OH.m DH £OH$ mwocmHmmmHm 0Hm52 oo.v Ho.m 0H 303 hm.m u: I: mo.m wH.m I: hm.m wh.m II ov.m mm.m 6H roam moHoco oceceoeo Oo.m mo.N OH 304 mo.m In I: mH.m Hm.m In 0w.m Hm.m In oo.m mm.m gH roar mmmeemm HmoHeHHom ammHuzL HwVHu moHdom **00 50m moHdom :HHS OHQmH 00vmcmHme 0memcmemo GOHHMUHHHHGm0H 0>HponQEOO 0>HHMEHOZ H0002 m0 Hm>0q 0>Hummmz H0002 ondom wmmmmw2 M0 mQMH mmchSOHmndm COHHmUHMHpcm0H H0>HmommlmUH50m 2D HG¢E¢0HO< 00>H00H0m UHQOH 00mm50mHQICOZ How me00m 0002 Aowachcoov H xHozmmme .OCHH6H =00H30w 0096C0Hm0a 0>HH6EHOZ 0MH CHHB C0HH60HMHHC00H= 039 CH mH0>0H M0 mCHmQ6HH00 0C9 How 00HH60 mHth6C6 CH mHH00 Haem** .00Hdom 02H 23 006050 an0 HOC moHQOH C0 mmCHH6H HC0E00H06 HC00C0Q00H 0H wH0H0H :HC0800H06 00>H00H0Q: 0HHC3 .00Hsom 0:9 29 0mmmdomH0 mOHQOH C0 mOCHH6H HC0800H06 HC00C0Qm0H 0H mH0H0H :HC0800H0<:* 80.N Ho.m HH6H0>O 50.N ww.m DH 304 mm.m II In vm.m Ho.m II me.m 66.6 .. noHeoH om.m mn.m oH coH: ommmsonao owcHeeoo AmmHuzv Ameuzv 00H50w *00H50m 00H50m CHHS 00H6C0dmmm 0096C0H60Q C0HH60HMHHC00H 0>HH6H6mEOO 0>HH6EHOZ H6002 m0 H0>0A 0>HH600Z H6002 00H50m 0m6mmm2 no 0028 mmCHQSOHUDCm C0HH60HHHHC00H H0>H000m I00Hdom an 9C0800H0< OHQOH 0wmmdowHQ 00CHQEOU How meoom C602 163 Nh.m OO.m OH 304 wb.m II In v¢.N bo.m II om.m Oo.N II OO.N Hm.m DH COHE 030H> HOHHCOO CHHHm AmmHuzv .(hmeuzv 00H30m **00Hdcm 00H30w CHHS‘ UHQOH 00H6C0Hm0m 0096COH000 C0HH60HMHPC00H 0>HH6H6QEOO 0>HH6EH02 H6002 m0 H0>0A 0>HH600Z H6002 00H30m 006m602 Ho moHH mOCHCCOHUDSm C0HH60HHHHC00H H0>H000m|00H50m >0 HC0800H0< 00>H00Hmm UHQOH 0mmwdomHQ|Coz Hon m0H00m C602 A005CHHCOUV H XHDmem< I‘ll“) \ ’14.!)2I’ ‘4)- \I.‘QII'\‘I'-)‘ 164 06.H bo.H OH 304 No.H II II mO.N wO.N II oo.m 66.H II coHemuomecH oo.H m6.H be roar Hmeomm How ochom 66.6 mo.m 0H 363 mm.m II II HO.N ON.N II HH.N 0H.N II oH.m mo.H QH 20H: 80HQ0Hm COHHSHHom HH< ob.m N0.m DH 304 oh.m II II mm.N vh.m II NN.N ©0.N II Hm.m 66.6 oH roam aoHHom smog <0: AmmHHZN AmvHuzv 00Hdom *00H30m 00H50m SHHS OHQOH 00H6C0Hm00 00H6C0Hm0m C0HH60HHHHC00H 0>HH6H6QEOU 0>HH6EHOZ H6002 m0 H0>0A 0>HH6002 H6002 00H30m 0066602 no meNH wmmHmeHmnsm C0HH60HMHHC00H H0>H000m I00H50m kn moHQOH m0 00C6HH0QEH 00>H00H0m How 60H00m C602 A00C6HH0QEH 304 u w «00C6HHOQEH COHE u Hv mQCOHonsm 0HQ6HH6> HOHHCOO 0C6 HC00C0Q00CH 0C6 C0HH60HHHHC00H H0>H000mI00H30m m0 H0>0q he mUHQOH 00mmdomHQ 00HCH m0 00C6HH0QEH 00>H00H0m Hom m0H00m C602 HC00C0Qm0m 0 XHQmem< 165 .OCHH6H :00Hsom 0096C0H600 0>HH6EHOZ 0:9 CHHB COHH60HMHHC00H: 00H CH 6H0>0H m0 OCHmQ6HH00 009 How 00HH60 mehH6C6 CH mHH00 Apaem* mm.m #00300 66.6 memsomuo\uoH666 6H.6 I- Hm.m H0HC30 NN.N II mH.6 0H08£00m 66.6 II vH.N C68060Hm 0N.N Hm0anz Hoocow CH H602 mm6H0 H6H00m 6H.m H0000 hm.m EmHH6CH500 mH.m 0H680u mN.N 000C0H0m 0C6 mHH< mm.m 0H62 HC05HH0HC0 H0 Hoonom X0m mmCHmSOHm Indw 0H06HH6> HOHHCOO 20 mmCHH6m 00C6HH008H 00>H00H00 UHQOH 00CHQEOO How w0H00m C602 wo.H OCHmsm 00.N COHHSHHom HH< 66.6 aoHHou suoo <0: UHmOH 0H.N 0>HH6H60800 0>HH6O0Z bN.N 0>HH6EHOZ AOHQOH 00CHDEOOV 00H50w 0 60602 009 C H600 mmCHQCOHUQCm 0H06HH6> HC00C0000CH 20,0mmHH6m 00C6HH000H 00>H00H00 OHQOH How m0H00m C602 A00SCHHCOUV 0 XHQmem¢ APPENDIX K RespOndent Mean Scores for Source Credibility Ratings by Sex of Respondent and Source-Receiver Identification Subgroups (12 = high source credibility; 84 = low source credibility) Mean Scores for Source Credibility by Sex Subgroup; Type of Message Source MOdaITNegative Modal NOrmative Comparative Designated~ Designated Source Source (N=148) (N=152) sees Male 38.56 36.19 Female 38.54 36.48 Overall 38.55 36.33 Mean Scores for Source Credibility by Source-Receiver Identi- fication Subgroupings Iype of Message Source Modal Negative Level Of Modal N0rmative Comparative Identification Designated Designated Wee Source* Source (N=148) (N=152) High ID 39.03 31.88 -- 37.24 34.50 -- 39.01 38.30 -- -- 37.78 Low ID 38.91 39.20 *Empty cells in analysis called for the collapsing of levels in the "Identification with the Normative Designated Source" rating. 166 "11111111101111(is