Ambivalence and evaluative response amplification

Charles S Carver, Frederick X. Gibbons, Walter G. Stephan, David C. Glass, Irwin Katz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Each subject evaluated an interviewee on the basis of information in a transcript. The interviewee was portrayed either favorably or unfavorably; he was labeled as “handicapped” or “Chicano,” or he was not labeled. Half the subjects were exposed to a pretreatment designed to induce ambivalent affect toward the physically handicapped. These subjects subsequently evaluated the favorably portrayed handicapped interviewee more positively, and the unfavorably portrayed handicapped interviewee more negatively, than did control subjects. Moreover, this effect generalized to Chicano and nonstigmatized stimulus persons. Independent of this finding, subjects’ evaluations of the handicapped were more favorable than evaluations of the other stimulus persons.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)50-52
Number of pages3
JournalBulletin of the Psychonomic Society
Volume13
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1979

Fingerprint

Amplification

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Catalysis
  • Chemistry(all)

Cite this

Ambivalence and evaluative response amplification. / Carver, Charles S; Gibbons, Frederick X.; Stephan, Walter G.; Glass, David C.; Katz, Irwin.

In: Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, Vol. 13, No. 1, 1979, p. 50-52.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Carver, CS, Gibbons, FX, Stephan, WG, Glass, DC & Katz, I 1979, 'Ambivalence and evaluative response amplification', Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 50-52. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335009
Carver, Charles S ; Gibbons, Frederick X. ; Stephan, Walter G. ; Glass, David C. ; Katz, Irwin. / Ambivalence and evaluative response amplification. In: Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society. 1979 ; Vol. 13, No. 1. pp. 50-52.
@article{51f9f276c7344d189308f32514ccecd5,
title = "Ambivalence and evaluative response amplification",
abstract = "Each subject evaluated an interviewee on the basis of information in a transcript. The interviewee was portrayed either favorably or unfavorably; he was labeled as “handicapped” or “Chicano,” or he was not labeled. Half the subjects were exposed to a pretreatment designed to induce ambivalent affect toward the physically handicapped. These subjects subsequently evaluated the favorably portrayed handicapped interviewee more positively, and the unfavorably portrayed handicapped interviewee more negatively, than did control subjects. Moreover, this effect generalized to Chicano and nonstigmatized stimulus persons. Independent of this finding, subjects’ evaluations of the handicapped were more favorable than evaluations of the other stimulus persons.",
author = "Carver, {Charles S} and Gibbons, {Frederick X.} and Stephan, {Walter G.} and Glass, {David C.} and Irwin Katz",
year = "1979",
doi = "10.3758/BF03335009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "50--52",
journal = "Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society",
issn = "0090-5054",
publisher = "Psychonomic Society Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ambivalence and evaluative response amplification

AU - Carver, Charles S

AU - Gibbons, Frederick X.

AU - Stephan, Walter G.

AU - Glass, David C.

AU - Katz, Irwin

PY - 1979

Y1 - 1979

N2 - Each subject evaluated an interviewee on the basis of information in a transcript. The interviewee was portrayed either favorably or unfavorably; he was labeled as “handicapped” or “Chicano,” or he was not labeled. Half the subjects were exposed to a pretreatment designed to induce ambivalent affect toward the physically handicapped. These subjects subsequently evaluated the favorably portrayed handicapped interviewee more positively, and the unfavorably portrayed handicapped interviewee more negatively, than did control subjects. Moreover, this effect generalized to Chicano and nonstigmatized stimulus persons. Independent of this finding, subjects’ evaluations of the handicapped were more favorable than evaluations of the other stimulus persons.

AB - Each subject evaluated an interviewee on the basis of information in a transcript. The interviewee was portrayed either favorably or unfavorably; he was labeled as “handicapped” or “Chicano,” or he was not labeled. Half the subjects were exposed to a pretreatment designed to induce ambivalent affect toward the physically handicapped. These subjects subsequently evaluated the favorably portrayed handicapped interviewee more positively, and the unfavorably portrayed handicapped interviewee more negatively, than did control subjects. Moreover, this effect generalized to Chicano and nonstigmatized stimulus persons. Independent of this finding, subjects’ evaluations of the handicapped were more favorable than evaluations of the other stimulus persons.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0008420559&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0008420559&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3758/BF03335009

DO - 10.3758/BF03335009

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 50

EP - 52

JO - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society

JF - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society

SN - 0090-5054

IS - 1

ER -