| Summary: | Why do some shared beliefs and behaviors spread across a given population and
persist over time, whereas other beliefs and behaviors do not? Different perspectives
that help provide an answer to this question are critically reviewed. These perspectives
fall under two broad headings: those that focus on the degree that norms correspond to
some kind of objective reality, and others that focus on the degree that norms
correspond to some kind of subjective reality. An attributional perspective is introduced
that suggests that whether a norm will likely be communicated in a given context or not
is partially determined by the degree that it is perceived to be objectively tied to reality.
The present four studies focus on two psychological cues that tend to influence these
attributional processes. Across all studies, participants read stories about a normative
behavior and then answered questions about those stories. Studies 1 and 2 focused on
an "impression management" cue. Study 1 provides evidence that the presence of a
member of a positively stereotyped group reduces the intention to communicate a
positive impression of that group later on. Study 2 provides weaker evidence that this
same process occurs for a negatively stereotyped group. Studies 3 and 4 focus on an
authority figure's command cue, both providing evidence that the explicit command of an
authority figure can, under some circumstances, decrease the likelihood that persons
will endorse a normative behavior. Study 3 suggests that this effect is moderated by the
level of control the authority figure has over the participant. Study 4 suggests that this
effect is moderated by the expertise of the authority figure in the area of knowledge
relevant to the norm. Theoretical and practical implications of the attributional
perspective are discussed.
|
|---|
