Novel argumentation and attitude change: The case of polarization following group discussion

This study is concerned with attitude polarization as a function of two properties of a persuasive message: (a) its validity or acceptability and (b) its novelty. The latter is defined as the extent to which the message contains new arguments unlikely to have been already considered by the individual. Acceptability is assumed to be a necessary condition for inducing attitude change; the impact of novelty, therefore, was expected to be most pronounced for arguments of high validity. This hypothesis was tested in two related studies using arguments produced in response to choice dilemma items, widely used in research on polarization. First, it was shown that arguments rated as both valid and novel were perceived as more persuasive than arguments rated either as highly valid but obvious (non-novel) or as low in validity (non-valid) but novel. Second, when subjects read samples of valid arguments, their attitudes polarized in the direction advocated by the novel arguments rather than by the non-novel ones. These findings are considered relevant to the polarization of attitudes in groups. Other research demonstrates that this phenomenon is the result of persuasive arguments raised during group discussion, The present study suggests why such arguments may be persuasive.