Social and cognitive strategies for coping with accountability: conformity, complexity, and bolstering.
This experiment tested predictions derived from a social contingency model of judgment and choice that identifies 3 distinctive strategies that people rely on in dealing with demands for accountability from important interpersonal or institutional audiences. The model predicts that (a) when people know the views of the audience and are unconstrained by past commitments, they will rely on the low-effort acceptability heuristic and simply shift their views toward those of the prospective audience, (b) when people do not know the views of the audience and are unconstrained by past commitments, they will be motivated to think in relatively flexible, multidimensional ways (preemptive self-criticism), and (c) when people are accountable for positions to which they feel committed, they will devote the majority of their mental effort to justifying those positions (defensive bolstering). The experiment yielded results supportive of these 3 predictions. The study also revealed some evidence of individual differences in social and cognitive strategies for coping with accountability.
Tetlock
P E
PE
University of California, Berkeley.
Skitka
L
L
Boettger
R
R
D001290:Attitude; D002755:Choice Behavior; D003071:Cognition; D004644:Emotions; D006801:Humans; D008960:Models, Psychological; D010565:Persuasive Communication; D011057:Politics; D012925:Social Conformity; D012941:Social Responsibility