Individuality or Conformity? The Effect of Independent and Interdependent Self‐Concepts on Public Judgments

When both independent and interdependent self-concepts are available, priming either self-concept will increase the accessibility in memory of the motivations and cognitions associated with it. Thus, priming the interdependent self may activate motivation to maintain harmony and conform to others’ opinions, whereas priming the independent self is likely to activate motivation to be independent and to withstand social pressure. Two experiments investigated implications of these possibilities for judgments of risk when participants anticipated (or not) explaining their judgments to others. Participants relied on others’ beliefs only when their interdependent self was primed and they expected they might have to explain their judgments to others. When their independent self was primed, expectations to communicate theirjudgments had no effect. Culture-based differences in individualism vs. collectivism had no impact on these effects.

[1]  David Trafimow,et al.  How Priming the Private Self or Collective Self Affects the Relative Weights of Attitudes and Subjective Norms , 1998 .

[2]  I. Simonson,et al.  Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects , 1989 .

[3]  N. Mandel.  Shifting Selves and Decision Making: The Effects of Self-Construal Priming on Consumer Risk-Taking , 2003 .

[4]  J. Gotlieb,et al.  The Moderating Effects of Message Framing and Source Credibility on the Price-perceived Risk Relationship , 1994 .

[5]  J. Jacoby,et al.  Components of perceived risk in product purchase: A cross-validation. , 1974 .

[6]  A. Drolet,et al.  Choice and self-expression: a cultural analysis of variety-seeking. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  Brad J. Sagarin,et al.  Dispelling the illusion of invulnerability: the motivations and mechanisms of resistance to persuasion. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  The additive nature of chronic and temporary sources of construct accessibility. , 1986 .

[9]  Terence A. Shimp,et al.  Warranty and Other Extrinsic Cue Effects on Consumers' Risk Perceptions , 1982 .

[10]  M. Kuhn,et al.  An empirical investigation of self-attitudes. , 1954 .

[11]  J. Bargh,et al.  Automaticity of chronically accessible constructs in person x situation effects on person perception: it's just a matter of time. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[12]  C. Chiu,et al.  Multicultural minds. A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. , 2000, The American psychologist.

[13]  J. Jacoby,et al.  The Components of Perceived Risk , 1972 .

[14]  G. Dowling.  Perceived risk: The concept and its measurement , 1986 .

[15]  C. McCann,et al.  Self-monitoring in communicative interactions: Social cognitive consequences of goal-directed message modification , 1983 .

[16]  Shelly Chaiken,et al.  Accuracy motivation attenuates covert priming: The systematic reprocessing of social information. , 1994 .

[17]  B. Hannover,et al.  The semantic--procedural interface model of the self: the role of self-knowledge for context-dependent versus context-independent modes of thinking. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[18]  Lisa Peñaloza,et al.  Immigrant Consumer Acculturation , 1989 .

[19]  D. Maheswaran,et al.  The Effects of Self-Construal and Commitment on Persuasion , 2005 .

[20]  Jennifer Aaker,et al.  “I” Seek Pleasures and “We” Avoid Pains: The Role of Self-Regulatory Goals in Information Processing and Persuasion , 2001 .

[21]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  Coordination of knowledge in communication: effects of speakers' assumptions about what others know. , 1992, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[22]  B. Hannover,et al.  The semantic--procedural interface model of the self: the role of self-knowledge for context-dependent versus context-independent modes of thinking. , 2001 .

[23]  D. Trafimow,et al.  Some tests of the distinction between the private self and the collective self. , 1991 .

[24]  Michael W. Morris,et al.  Reasons as Carriers of Culture: Dynamic vs. Dispositional Models of Cultural Influence on Decision Making. Рассуждения как носители культуры: динамическая и диспозитная модели культурного влияния на принятие решений , 2000 .

[25]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  Social psychological models of interpersonal communication , 1996 .

[26]  Margaret C. Campbell,et al.  The Moderating Effect of Perceived Risk on Consumers’ Evaluations of Product Incongruity: Preference for the Norm , 2001 .

[27]  P. Tetlock,et al.  Accounting for the effects of accountability. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[28]  H. Markus,et al.  Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. , 1991 .

[29]  Robert S. Wyer,et al.  The Effect of Group Membership Salience on the Avoidance of Negative Outcomes: Implications for Social and Consumer Decisions , 2002 .

[30]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[31]  Ann E. Schlosser,et al.  Effects of an Approaching Group Discussion on Product Responses , 1999 .

[32]  E. Higgins,et al.  Motivational science : social and personality perspectives , 2000 .

[33]  R. Batra,et al.  When Corporate Image Affects Product Evaluations: The Moderating Role of Perceived Risk , 2004 .

[34]  E. Higgins.  Achieving 'Shared Reality' in the Communication Game: A Social Action That Create; Meaning , 1992 .

[35]  E. Higgins,et al.  Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. , 1996 .

[36]  Automaticity of chronically accessible constructs in person x situation effects on person perception: it's just a matter of time. , 1988 .