Situated Identities, Attitude Similarity and Interpersonal Attraction Author(s): John C. Touhey Source: Sociometry, Vol. 37, No.

3 (Sep., 1974), pp. 363-374 Published by: American Sociological Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2786388 . Accessed: 02/01/2011 19:28
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asa. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Sociometry.

http://www.jstor.org

Sociometry 1974, Vol. 37, No. 3, 363 374

Situated Identities, Attitude Similarity and Interpersonal Attraction

Florida Atlantic University

JOHNC. TOUHEY

attraction This study examines the attitude similarity-interpersonal paradigm from the standpoint of Alexander's situated identitytheory. Subjects acting as observers predicted P's attraction to 0 for three proportions of similar attitudes and ascribed personality traits as ratings of P's attraction to 0. explanations of five orthogonally vazried Findings of the attraction paradigm were accurately simulated. In addition, subjects' ratingsof theirown attractionto P and the favorability of P's situated identity were highest for the predicted outcomes. Comparisons among the most frequently ascribed traits revealed two to P's who consistentsets of undesirable personalityattributions internally displayed inappropriatelyhigh or low ratingsof attractionfor specific are discussed in termsof the proportionsof similarattitudes. The findings subjects' definition of the paradigm and are explicitly related to social exchange theory and symbolic interactioniststatements of attraction phenomena.

examined have increasingly In recent years, social psychologists behaviorand social interaction. attribution processesin self-referent in have been reinterpreted of severalestablished paradigms Findings of the experimental situationand termsof the subjects' definition the meaningsthey ascribe to theirown acts and those of others. phenomena as diverseas person perception Althoughsubstantive (Jones and Davis, 1965; Alexanderand Epstein, 1969), risk-taking (Mixon,1972), and attitude (Alexanderand Weil,1969), conformity change (Bem, 1967; Alexander and Knight, 1971) have been have few investigators theories, approachedfromvariousattribution examined the relevance of these statementsfor the dominant in the experimental attraction. studyof interpersonal paradigm studies(see Byrne, Duringthe past decade, over 50 experimental of 1971) have established attitude similarityas a determinant replicated Thisfinding has been consistently attraction. interpersonal 363

364

SOCIOMETRY

over a wide variety of populations and settings,and several of therelationship have been proposed.In additionto interpretations the learning theoryapproachadvocatedby Byrneand his associates, other formulations have focused on the role of cognitivebalance (Newcomb, 1961) and impliedliking(Aronsonand Worchel, 1966) of the similarity-attraction as mediators findings. The presentstudy,however, approachesthe similarity-attraction paradigmfrom a somewhat different theoreticalperspective. By focusing on the context of social interaction, rather than intraindividual processeswithinthe subject,Mead (1934), Goffman (1963) and othersymbolicinteractionists have proposedthat social of identitiesand action providesentitlements for the attribution traitsto oneselfand others.These theorists further thatthe suggest creation, maintenance, and transformation of social identity depends on consensusamongothersabout the meanings of specificacts and the circumstancessurroundingtheir occurrence. Given these assumptions, Alexander'ssituatedidentity theoryis unique (among variousstatements of attribution processes)in its explicitemphasis on the response choices confronting the subject in the typical experimental situation:"Behavior can be predictedif the situated that resultsfromthe choice of one action is more socially identity desirablethan those associatedwithalternative actions" (Alexander and Knight, 1971:66). thatthe similarity-attracThereare severalreasonsforsuspecting tion paradigmmightbe amenable to analysisin termsof situated identitytheory.First,the attraction paradigmprovidesone of the most establishedand consistently in contemreplicated findings porary social psychology; hence, the very pervasiveness of the raisesthe possibility relationship that subjectsare awareof and alert to relations between similarity and attractionin everydaylife. Second, severalstudiesreportedby Jones(1964) have examinedthe exchange of attitudesand sentiments in a varietyof experimental and the extentof agreement settings, betweensubjectsappearsto be a crucial variablein the management of impression. For example, subjectsassignedto play subordinate roles in such studiestend to on important agreewithsuperiors on less attitude issuesand disagree importantissues, enabling them to fosterimpressionsof independencerather thaningratiation. In additionto the opportunities provided by attitude exchangefor the negotiation of identity, the consensual aspects of the have been more directly examinedin a similarity-attraction findings successful "interpersonalsimulation" reported by Scott (1969).

IDENTITIES, SIMILARITY AND ATTRACTION

365

Following procedures similar to those in Bem's (1967) classic simulationsof cognitivedissonance phenomena,Scott found that of attitudesimilarity different between scripts depicting proportions P and 0 enabled independentgroups of observersto reproduce estimates of attraction that were virtuallyidentical to ratings obtained fromthe experimental paradigm.Successful interpersonal of behavior are simulations raisethe possibility thatthe determinants equally accessibleto observers and subjects,and thatboth subscribe to of identity to consensualdefinitions that impart similar meanings the subjects' behavior. However, neither Scott's nor any other has attempted to identify the specific identities thatmay simulation in the attraction be commonto the actorand the observer paradigm. is to provide The principal concern of the presentinvestigation of the identities thatare attributed to a subject detailedspecification to othersis systematically variedin the contextof whose attraction of attitude different proportions similarity. the present study comprisestwo parts. First, an Accordingly, interpersonalsimulation of the similarity-attraction findingsis conducted in order to establishconditionsunder which observers reproduce the expected findings of the paradigm.Following the varied simulation, observers are provided with systematically attraction and are asked to ascribeidentities and personality ratings of thesubject'sresponses. traits as explanations METHOD Since the study consisted of an interpersonal simulationof an established paradigm and an examination of the identities situatedin various experimental outcomes,proceduresreportedby Alexander and Knight (1971) were closely followed. Subjects were 180 in several enrolled undergraduates lowerdivision social scienceclasses of Tulsa. Written at the University to simulate scripts wereprepared of similar threeproportions attitudes betweena naivesubject,"Bob Downing" (P), and a second subject, "Tom Travis" (0). All scripts to a social psychology depict Bob and Tom reporting experiment, and both subjects fill out a 12-item attitude scale (Byrne and measures are completed, attitude Bob and Rhamey,1965). Whenthe. Tom exchangescales, and Bob learnsthatTom's attitudes are similar to his own forone, six, or elevenof the twelveitems.Next, Bob is is to measurecompatibility told that the purposeof the experiment between people, and he is asked to indicatehis probablelikingfor and willingness to participate in an experiment with Tom on two

366

SOCIOMETRY

of attraction seven-point measures taken fromthe last two itemsof Scale (Byrneand Rhamey,1965). After the Interpersonal Judgment reading these scripts,half of the subjects in each of the three treatment conditionsturnedto the last two itemsof the similarity Interpersonal Judgment Scale and estimatedBob's probable liking in an experiment to participate withTom. forand willingness Up to thispoint,our experiment is an interpersonal simulation of the similarity-attraction paradigm with half of the subjects estimating Bob's attraction to Tom forthreeproportions (.08, .50, .92) of similar attitudes. Following the simulation,all subjects receivedinformation about Bob's actual attraction to Tom presented on a completedcopy of the Interpersonal Judgment Scale. Subjects learnedthat Bob's attraction to Tom was either4, 6, 8, 10, or 12 points, presentedas the sum of the two seven-point attraction measures. Next, subjectswere asked to rate theirimpression of Bob on 20 bipolar adjective scales and to circle the ten of the forty adjectivesthat were most characteristic of Bob. Finally, subjects rated their own attraction to Bob on a final copy of the Interpersonal Judgment Scale.
Pre-testing

Pre-testing was conductedto resolve two principal methodological problems.First,while several theoreticalconsiderations suggested thatthe similarity-attraction one study findings mightbe simulated, evidencein supportof (Scott, 1969) providesless than compelling such a contention.Therefore, a numberof scriptsdepictingthe attraction to paradigmwere presentedin interpersonal simulations severalclasseswhichdid not participate in the experimental sessions. the Scripts that provided outcomes most closely approximating of the paradigm findings wereselectedforuse in the finalstudy. A second methodological of problem concernedthe possibility bias in the selectionof adjectivesto describeBob in each of the 15 treatmentcombinations.Since it seemed importantto measure situatedidentities to thedefinitions withtraitascriptions relevant of the subjectsratherthan the preconceptions of the investigator, the following procedurewas employed.Of the more than 1,250 words whichappear on traitlistscompiledby Goughand Heilbrun (1965), Anderson(1968), and Rosenberg and Jones(1972), redundant and of 120 irrelevant traitswere eliminated, and a final pre-test listing Pre-test of the adjectiveswas constructed. subjectsthenheardseveral 15 scripts and circledthe ten adjectives thatweremostdescriptive of

IDENTITIES,

SIMILARITY

AND ATTRACTION

367

TABLE 1
Mean Estimates of P's Attraction to 0 for Three

Proportionsof SimilarAttitudes

Proportionof Similar Attitudes .08 M S N

**p < .001 *p < .01

.50 9.63 2.17 30

.92 11.40 2.79 30

Comparison .08 vs. .50 .08 vs. .92 .50 vs. .92

t 3.97** 6.07** 2.69*

7.23 2.43 30

Bob for each of the 15 treatmentcombinations.Of the 120 the 23 traits adjectives, mostfrequently endorsedas characteristic of Bob were used to construct 60-pointbipolaradjectivescales. Six of the 23 adjectives (trusting-suspicious, and responsive-indifferent, dominant-submissive) already comprised antonym pairs. The remaining 17 adjectiveswere paired with theirantonymsto form additional bipolar scales. Thus, a total of 20 adjectivescales iwas used in the finalstudy. RESULTS Before examinationof the identities situatedin each of the 15 treatment combinations, it is necessary to determine if the interpersonal simulationreproducesthe predictedoutcomes of the attitude similarity-interpersonal attraction paradigm. Table 1 provides the subjects'estimates of Bob's (P's) attraction to Tom (0) for the three proportionsof similar attitudes.Mean attraction estimates are seen to be orderedin the expecteddirection with.08, .50, and .92 proportionsof similar attitudesyieldingattraction scores of 7.23, 9.63, and 11.40, respectively (maximumpossible= 14). In addition,the standarddeviationsfor the threetreatments, presented in the second row of Table 1, are comparable with previously reportedmeasuresof dispersion forthisparadigm (Byrne, 1971). All three differencesamong the similaritytreatmentswere significant simulation (all df = 58); thus the interpersonal appearsto havesuccessfully the findings of the paradigm. reproduced

368

SOCIOMETRY
TABLE 2 of P's Situated Identityfor Three Mean Desirability Proportionsof SimilarAttitudesand Five Ratings of Attractionto 0

Attitude Similarity .08 .50 .92

4 30.27 24.54 20.69

6 35.70 30.22 24.13

to Oa P's Attraction 10 8 33.91 33.19 28.82 27.42 36.57 34.41

12 21.78 28.13 38.35

Pb .01 .01 .005

aThere are 12 subjectsper cell. Higherscoresindicatemoredesirableidentities. bBased on one-wayANOV, df = 4/55

was computedfromthe of P's situatedidentity The favorability least sociallydesirable and the most 0 for to of averageratings 60 identity P's situated of mean desirability The each of pair. adjective 2. Table in is presented combinations 15 treatment of the each for is P's situatedidentity of attitudesimilarity, For each proportion ratings the attraction when he reproduces seen to be most favorable it willbe recalledthat by the subjects.Moreover, that werepredicted were asked combination only halfof the subjectsin each treatment to predict P's attractionto 0, and comparisonof the identities attributedby subjects who estimated and did not estimate P's for any of the differences attractionto 0 revealed no significant combinations. treatment relatedto is directly of P's situatedidentity Since the desirability the extenthe reproducesthe outcomespredictedby the attraction paradigm,it mightalso be asked if the subjects' own ratingsof evaluations. toward P follow theiridentity attraction interpersonal possible= 14) to P (maximum the mean attraction Table 3 provides of the and thedirection combinations, foreach of the 15 treatment identical to that of the situated is seen to be virtually findings to attraction mostinterpersonal Subjectsreport evaluations. identity of subjectswho and ratings the expectedfindings, P's who reproduce different to 0 were again not significantly estimatedP's attraction of subjectswho did not makethe estimates. from ratings The last findingof interestin the present study involves a thatwerecircled of the adjectives amongthe frequencies comparison the ten most of of P. Examination characteristic as most of three classifications revealed traits descriptive characteristically the among attraction and attitude similarity between the discrepancy

IDENTITIES, SIMILARITY AND ATTRACTION

TABLE 3 Mean Attractionto P for ThreeProportionsof Similar Attitudesand Five Ratingsof P's Attractionto 0 Attitude Similarity .08 .5.0 .92 P's Attractionto 0a 8 10 12.67 11.25 9.25 9.92 12.58 10.67

369

4 10.33 6.17 5.75

6 11.08 8.42 7.33

12 7.58 8.83 12.83

p .02 .01 .01

aSee notes to Table 2.

15 treatment combinations. These discrepancies are defined in terms of treatment combinations in which: (1) attraction is greater than and similarity are not discrepant, similarity, (2) attraction and (3) is greater similarity thanattraction. Each treatment combination was into one of thesethreediscrepancy classified conditions according to the following procedure: (1) for each proportion of attitude the two levelsof P's attraction to 0 thatfellclosestto the similarity, subjects' predictions were classified as nondiscrepant; (2) treatment in which P's attraction combinations to 0 was at least two points higher than that predicted by the subjects were classified as in the directionof greater discrepant attraction than similarity; and in whichP's attraction (3) treatment combinations to 0 was at least two pointslowerthan predicted in the were classified as discrepant than attraction. directionof greatersimilarity Table 4 showstne percent of subjects whoascribed specific traits to P foreach of the threediscrepancy of ascripconditions. Frequencies tion arenotonlyseento differ significantly amongconditions for19 of the 40 traitwordsbut personality attributions show appreciableinternal consistency withineach discrepancy condition.P's who show for example, are most often unpredictably high attraction ratings, described as submissive,dependent, passive, trusting, and naive. on the other low ratingsof interpersonal Unpredictably attraction, hand, lead to traitascriptions such as cold, dominant, indifferent, and suspicious.Finally,subjectswho respondas predictedare most oftenseen as fair, and sensitive. intelligent, responsive, DISCUSSION Although situated identitytheory appears to offera plausible of the basic findings of the attraction it is interpretation paradigm,

370

SOCIOMETRY
TABLE 4 Percentof Subjects AscribingTraitsto P by Discrepancy Similarity-Attraction Discrepancy Attraction GreaterThan Similarity 19% 8 11 61 53 28 36 19 50 19 33 17 47 11 36 28 14 42 17
36
2

Traits Cold Dominant Indifferent Submissive Dependent Fair Insecure Intelligent Passive Responsive Sensitive Suspicious Trusting Arrogant Fearful Forgiving Hostile Naive Sociable
aBased on X2, df

No Discrepancy 21% 18 14 28 22 54 15 54 15 44 49 19 33 14 18 10 12 19 38

Similarity GreaterThan Attraction 67% 61 51 14 17 22 8 25 31 17 18 46 14 33 14 11 33 17 17

pa .001 .001 .001 .001 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01 .05 .05 .05 .05 .05 .05

72

72

of the presentanalysis to emphasizeseveralimplications important studiesof interpersonal that may be especiallyrelevantfor further thatsubjectsactuallyparticipating attraction.First,the assumption ratings attraction reportthe predicted paradigm in the experimental of on the validity in orderto presentfavorableidentities-depends studyand Scott's (1969) our simulation. Yet apart fromthe present to simulatethe there have been few efforts unpublishedfindings, the specific paradigm,and no simulationhas sought to identify the subjects' aspects of the laboratoryproceduresthat determine situation. of theexperimental definition followsfromthe In part,thisabsence of detail in the simulation reportedby Byrne(1971) and others. very natureof the findings While the results of cognitive dissonance research and other show an abundanceof interactions, simulatedparadigms frequently studieson the attraction reversals, and significant failures, replication

IDENTITIES, SIMILARITY AND ATTRACTION

371

conditionsfor the main effectof paradigmseldom reportlimiting to of these severalexperiments Thus, the failure attitudesimilarity. on attraction of similarity conditionsof the effects limiting identify in the simulations; impoverishment yieldsa corresponding necessarily would interactions reported of previously an explicitconsideration between provide a more definitiveassessmentof isomorphisms subjects and observers.Of course, it would also be advisable to in that subjectsascribeto themselves the identities examinedirectly setting. the experimental Second, it should be emphasizedthat, while situated identity theory can predict the attraction responses of observers (and neitherthe of subjects) in termsof social desirability, presumably conditions antecedent specifies simulation supporting theorynor its responses. several of desirable most to choose the subjects lead that It is at this juncture, perhaps, that the social desirability might be relatedto theories of the attraction paradigm interpretation (cf. of interpersonal attraction on the antecedents focusing explicitly level, for example, it is Murstein,1971). At the intraindividual of socially desirableidentities entirelypossible that presentations 1971) consequences(e.g., Byrne, tend to be followedby reinforcing imbalancewithinthe subject (e.g., or by a reductionof cognitive Newcomb,1961). theoriesof attraction Althoughit is not our purposeto criticize such as reinforcement determinants that invoke intraindividual implication to note one important be appropriate it might processes, for these theories.In the case of Byrne's of the presentfindings theory, for example, the logic of explanation reinforcement of similar between statements relationship presumesan invariant of social thatis independent attitudes and subsequentreinforcement forthe may be appropriate context.Whilesuch a conceptualization to similarity, is directly proportional manycases in whichattraction approach explains the few it is not apparenthow a reinforcement and attractionare either unrelatedor cases in which similarity theorycan related. Nor would it seem thatreinforcement inversely specify such limitingconditions in advance of empiricalstudy. about cognitivebalance theoryapproachesto Similar reservations have been expressedby Curryand Emerson attraction interpersonal (1970). not the studyof social interaction However,theoriesderivedfrom but may findings, an alternative approachto the present onlyprovide of the attraction conditions paradigm. also shed lighton the limiting For example, recent longitudinalstudies reportedby Curryand

372

SOCIOMETRY

two limiting Emerson(1970) and Dohertyand Secord (1971) suggest conditionsthat mightbe understoodin termsof social exchange in of attraction statements Viewing theoryand symbolicinteraction. thatrulesof fair the contextof social exchangeraisesthe possibility exchange dictate permissiblelimits of attractionin response to specific proportionsof attitude similarity;examination of the high specifictraitsascribedto subjectswho showed inappropriately or low attraction ratings provides some support for this In both cases, observersappear to have attributed interpretation. to thosewho violatenormsof similar to the traitsascribed identities reciprocityin social exchange. Further,given that relations of attraction in ongoing interactiontend to be characterizedby expressionsof similar attitudes may lead increasingreciprocity, to them.However, subjectsto expect that otherswill be attracted of the attraction paradigm since the implied likinginterpretation a complete 1966) does not appearto provide (Aronsonand Worchel, Curryand Emersonhave explanationof the effectsof similarity, suggested that residual effects of attitude similaritymight be attitudes that presentations of similar explainedby the hypothesis induce othersto like lead subjectsto feel thattheycan successfully them. While exchange theory identifiesthe prospect of successful interactionas a limitingcondition of the attractionparadigm,a study(Dohertyand Secord, 1971) has provided second comparative approach to the support for an explicitlysymbolicinteractionist of theirlimiting conditions. and the specification presentfindings of interpersonal FollowingSecord and Backman's(1961) statement for theory,Dohertyand Secord found that agreement congruency yielded the most important aspects of theirsubjects' self-concepts forgeneral If attraction than similarity attitudes. greater appreciably identitycan be assumed to be an importantaspect of self,then validationof subjectivepublic identityappears to specifyone of several congruencyprocesses that mediates similarity-attraction findings.In addition, the validation of identityin experimental settings might assume special importance insofar as subjects withotherswho and stable interactions anticipatemorepredictable see them as they see themselves. At present, however, no compared eithersuccess or study has systematically experimental of as determinants withattitudesimilarity congruency interpersonal of such indicate the advisability attraction.Our presentfindings investigation.

IDENTITIES, SIMILARITY AND ATTRACTION

REFERENCES

373

Alexander,C. N., Jr.and J. Epstein 1969 "Problems of dispositional inferencein person perception research." Sociometry32 (4):381-95. Alexander,C. N., Jr.and H. G. Weil 1969 "Players, persons,and purposes: Situationalmeaningand the prisoner's dilemmagame." Sociometry32 (2):121-44. Alexander,C. N., Jr.and G. W. Knight 1971 "Situated identities and social psychological experimentation." Sociometry34 (1):65-82. Anderson,N. H. words." Journal of 1968 "Likableness ratings of 555 personality-trait and Social Psychology9 (3):272-9. Personality Aronson,E. and P. Worchel 1966 "Similarity versus liking as determinantsof interpersonalattractiveness." PsychonomicScience 5:157-8. Bem, D. J. of cognitivedissonance 1967 "Self-perception:An alternativeinterpretation phenomena." PsychologicalReview 74:183-200. Byrne,D. Paradigm.New York: Academic Press. 1971 The Attraction Byrne,D. and R. Rhamey of as determinants 1965 "Magnitude of positiveand negativereinforcements and Social Psychology2:884-9. attraction."Journalof Personality T. J., and R. M. Emerson Curry, attraction?"Sociometry33 1970 "Balance theory: A theoryof interpersonal (2):216-38. Doherty,E. G. and P. F. Secord congruency."Representative 1971 "Change of roommate and interpersonal Research in Social Psychology2 (2):70-6. E. Goffman, 1963 Behaviorin Public Places. New York: The Free Press. Jr. Gough,H. G. and A. B. Heilbrun, 1965 The Adjective Check List Manual. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Press. Psychologists Jones,E. E. 1964 Ingratiation: A Social Psychological Analysis. New York: Appleton, CenturyCrofts. Jones,E. E. and K. E. Davis 1965 "From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception." Pp. 219-267 in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Social Psychology.Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press. Experimental Mead, G. H. of Chicago Press. 1934 Mind,Self, and Society. Chicago: University Mixon, D. 1972 "Instead of deception." Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 2 (2): 145-79.

374

SOCIOMETRY

Murstein, B. I. (ed.) 1971 Theoriesof Attraction and Love. New York: Springer. Newcomb, T. M. 1961 The Acquaintance Process. New York: Holt, Rinehart& Winston. Rosenberg,S. and R. A. Jones 1972 "Ratings of personality trait words on nine semantic properties." JournalSupplementAbstractService 2:21-2. Scott, W. C. 1969 "Response prediction and interpersonal attraction." Paper read at the of the Southwestern meetings PsychologicalAssociation. Secord, P. F. and C. W. Backman 1961 "Personality theory and the problem of stability and change in individualbehavior: An interpersonal approach." PsychologicalReview 68:21-32.

MANUSCRIPTS FOR THE ASA ROSE SOCIOLOGY SERIES

Manuscripts (100 to 300 typed pages; threecopies) are solicitedfor publication in the ASA Arnoldand Caroline Rose Monograph Series in Sociologyto the Series Editor, Professor Ida Harper Simpson, Department of Sociology, Duke University, Durham, NorthCarolina 27706.