Touhey - Situated Identities, Attitude Similarity and Interpersonal Attraction.pdf

7/30/2019 Touhey - Situated Identities, Attitude Similarity and Interpersonal Attraction.pdf

1/13

Situated Identities, Attitude Similarity and Interpersonal AttractionAuthor(s): John C. TouheySource: Sociometry, Vol. 37, No. 3 (Sep., 1974), pp. 363-374Published by: American Sociological AssociationStable 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 [email protected].

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

Sociometry.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2786388?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asahttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asahttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2786388?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asa


2/13

Sociometry1974, Vol. 37, No. 3, 363 374

Situated Identities,AttitudeSimilarityand Interpersonal AttractionJOHN C. TOUHEYFloridaAtlanticUniversity

This study examines the attitude similarity-interpersonalttractionparadigmfrom the standpoint of Alexander's situated identitytheory.Subjects acting as observerspredicted P's attraction to 0 for threeproportions of similar attitudes and ascribed personality traits asexplanations of five orthogonallyvazried atings of P's attractionto 0.Findings of the attraction paradigm were accurately simulated. Inaddition, subjects' ratings f their wn attraction oP and thefavorabilityof P's situated identity were highest for the predicted outcomes.Comparisons among the most frequentlyascribed traitsrevealed twointernally onsistent etsof undesirable ersonality ttributionsoP's whodisplayed inappropriatelyhigh or low ratingsof attractionfor specificproportionsof similar ttitudes.The findingsre discussed n terms f thesubjects' definitionof theparadigmand are explicitlyrelated to socialexchange theory and symbolic interactionist tatementsof attractionphenomena.

In recentyears, social psychologists ave increasinglyxaminedattributionrocesses n self-referentehavior nd social interaction.Findings f several stablished aradigms ave been reinterpretedntermsof the subjects'definition f the experimentalituation ndthe meanings hey ascribe to theirown acts and those of others.Althoughsubstantive henomenaas diverseas person perception(Jonesand Davis, 1965; Alexander nd Epstein,1969), risk-taking(Alexander nd Weil, 969), conformityMixon,1972), andattitudechange (Bem, 1967; Alexander and Knight, 1971) have beenapproachedfromvarious ttributionheories, ew nvestigatorsaveexamined the relevance of these statementsfor the dominantparadigmntheexperimentaltudy f nterpersonalttraction.Duringthepastdecade,over 50 experimentaltudies see Byrne,1971) have establishedattitude similarity s a determinant finterpersonalttraction. his finding asbeenconsistentlyeplicated363


3/13

364 SOCIOMETRYover a wide varietyof populations and settings, nd severalinterpretationsftherelationshipavebeenproposed. n addition othelearningheory pproach dvocatedby Byrne nd hisassociates,other formulations ave focusedon the role of cognitive alance(Newcomb, 1961) and implied iking Aronson ndWorchel, 966)as mediators fthesimilarity-attractionindings.The present tudy,however, pproaches he similarity-attractionparadigmfrom a somewhat different heoreticalperspective.Byfocusing on the context of social interaction,rather thanintraindividualrocesseswithin he subject,Mead (1934), Goffman(1963) and other ymbolicnteractionistsaveproposedthatsocialaction providesentitlements orthe attribution f identities ndtraits o oneself nd others.Thesetheorists urtheruggest hat thecreation,maintenance, nd transformationfsocial dentity ependson consensus mongothers bout the meanings f specific cts andthe circumstances surrounding heir occurrence. Given theseassumptions, lexander's ituated dentity heorys unique (amongvarious tatements f attribution rocesses) n itsexplicit mphasison the responsechoices confrontinghe subject in the typicalexperimental ituation:"Behavior can be predicted f the situatedidentity hat resultsfrom he choiceof one action s moresociallydesirable han thoseassociatedwithalternativections"(AlexanderandKnight, 971:66).Thereare several easonsforsuspectinghat the similarity-attrac-tion paradigmmightbe amenableto analysis n termsof situatedidentity heory.First, he attraction aradigm rovides ne of themost establishedand consistently eplicatedfindingsn contem-porary social psychology;hence, the verypervasiveness f therelationshipaises hepossibility hat subjects reawareofandalertto relationsbetween similaritynd attraction n everyday ife.Second,several tudiesreported y Jones 1964) have examined heexchangeof attitudes nd sentimentsn a variety f experimentalsettings,nd theextentofagreement etween ubjects ppears o bea crucialvariable n the managementf impression. or example,subjects assigned o play subordinate oles in such studiestend toagreewithsuperiors n importantttitude ssues nd disagree n lessimportant ssues, enabling them to foster mpressions f inde-pendence atherhan ngratiation.In addition o theopportunitiesrovided yattitude xchange orthe negotiation of identity,the consensual aspects of thesimilarity-attractionindings ave been moredirectlyxamined n asuccessful"interpersonal imulation"reportedby Scott (1969).


4/13

IDENTITIES, SIMILARITY AND ATTRACTION 365Following procedures similarto those in Bem's (1967) classicsimulations f cognitivedissonancephenomena,Scott found thatscripts epicting ifferentroportionsfattitude imilarityetweenP and 0 enabled independentgroups of observers o reproduceestimates of attraction that were virtually dentical to ratingsobtainedfrom he experimental aradigm. uccessful nterpersonalsimulations aise hepossibility hatthedeterminantsfbehavior reequally accessibleto observers nd subjects, nd thatboth subscribeto consensualdefinitionsf identityhat mpart imilarmeaningsothe subjects' behavior. However,neither Scott's nor any othersimulation as attempted o identifyhe specificdentities hatmaybe commonto the actorand the observerntheattraction aradigm.The principalconcern of the present nvestigations to providedetailedspecificationfthe dentitieshat re attributed o a subjectwhoseattractiono others s systematicallyaried n thecontextofdifferentroportionsfattitude imilarity.Accordingly, he present study comprises wo parts. First,aninterpersonal imulation of the similarity-attractionindings sconductedin order to establish onditionsunder which observersreproduce the expected findings f the paradigm.Following thesimulation, observers are provided with systematically ariedattraction atingsnd are askedto ascribe dentities nd personalitytraits s explanations f thesubject'sresponses.

METHODSince the study consistedof an interpersonalimulation f anestablished aradigm nd an examination f the dentities ituated n

variousexperimental utcomes, procedures eportedby Alexanderand Knight (1971) were closely followed. Subjects were 180undergraduatesnrollednseveral owerdivision ocial science lassesat theUniversityf Tulsa.Writtencriptswereprepared o simulatethreeproportions f similar ttitudes etween naive ubject, BobDowning" (P), and a second subject, "Tom Travis" 0). All scriptsdepictBob and Tom reportingo a social psychology xperiment,and both subjects fill out a 12-itemattitude scale (Byrne andRhamey,1965). When he. ttitudemeasures recompleted, ob andTom exchange cales,and Bob learns hatTom'sattitudes re similarto hisown forone, six,or eleven of thetwelve tems.Next,Bob istold that thepurposeof theexperiments to measure ompatibilitybetweenpeople, and he is askedto indicatehis probable ikingforand willingnesso participaten an experimentwith Tom on two


5/13

366 SOCIOMETRYseven-pointmeasures f attraction akenfrom helasttwo itemsoftheInterpersonal udgmentcale (Byrne nd Rhamey, 965). Afterreadingthese scripts,half of the subjects in each of the threesimilarityreatment onditions urnedto the ast two itemsof theInterpersonal udgment cale and estimatedBob's probable ikingfor ndwillingnesso participatenan experiment ithTom.Up to thispoint,ourexperiments an interpersonalimulation fthe similarity-attractionaradigm with half of the subjectsestimating ob's attraction o Tom forthreeproportions.08, .50,.92) of similar attitudes.Followingthe simulation, ll subjectsreceived nformationboutBob's actual attraction o Tompresentedon a completed opyof the Interpersonal udgmentcale. Subjectslearnedthat Bob's attraction o Tom was either , 6, 8, 10, or 12points,presentedas the sum of the two seven-point ttractionmeasures.Next, subjectswereasked to rate their mpression fBobon 20 bipolar adjectivescales and to circle the ten of the fortyadjectivesthat were most characteristic f Bob. Finally, subjectsrated their own attractionto Bob on a final copy of theInterpersonal udgmentcale.Pre-testing

Pre-testing as conducted o resolve woprincipalmethodologicalproblems. First, while several theoretical onsiderations uggestedthat the similarity-attractionindingsmightbe simulated, ne study(Scott, 1969) provides ess thancompelling vidence n support fsuch a contention.Therefore, numberof scriptsdepicting heattraction aradigmwerepresentedn interpersonalimulations oseveral lasseswhichdidnotparticipaten theexperimentalessions.Scriptsthat providedoutcomes most closely approximatinghefindingsftheparadigmwere electedforuseinthefinal tudy.A second methodological roblemconcerned the possibility fbias in the selection f adjectives o describeBob in each ofthe 15treatment ombinations. Since it seemed important o measuresituated dentitieswithtrait scriptionselevanto thedefinitionsfthe subjectsrather han thepreconceptionsf the investigator,hefollowing rocedurewas employed. Of themorethan1,250 wordswhich ppearon trait istscompiledby Gough nd Heilbrun1965),Anderson 1968), and Rosenbergnd Jones 1972), redundant ndirrelevant raitswereeliminated,nd a finalpre-testisting f 120adjectiveswas constructed.re-testubjects henheard everal fthe15 scripts ndcircled he tenadjectives hatweremostdescriptivef


6/13

IDENTITIES, SIMILARITY AND ATTRACTION 367TABLE 1

Mean Estimates of P's Attraction to 0 for ThreeProportions fSimilarAttitudesProportionofSimilarAttitudes

.08 .50 .92 Comparison tM 7.23 9.63 11.40 .08 vs. .50 3.97**S 2.43 2.17 2.79 .08 vs. .92 6.07**N 30 30 30 .50 vs. .92 2.69***p < .001*p < .01

Bob for each of the 15 treatment ombinations.Of the 120adjectives, he 23 traitsmostfrequentlyndorsed s characteristicfBob were used to construct 0-pointbipolaradjective cales.Six ofthe 23 adjectives (trusting-suspicious,esponsive-indifferent,nddominant-submissive)lready comprised antonym pairs. Theremaining 7 adjectiveswerepairedwiththeirantonyms o formadditionalbipolarscales. Thus,a total of 20 adjectivescales iwasused n thefinal tudy.

RESULTSBeforeexamination f the identities ituated n each of the 15treatmentcombinations, it is necessary to determineif the

interpersonalimulation eproduces he predictedoutcomes of theattitude similarity-interpersonalttraction paradigm. Table 1provides he subjects'estimates f Bob's (P's) attractiono Tom (0)for the three proportionsof similarattitudes. Mean attractionestimates re seento be ordered n theexpected directionwith 08,.50, and .92 proportionsof similarattitudesyielding ttractionscoresof 7.23, 9.63, and 11.40, respectivelymaximumpossible=14). In addition,the standarddeviationsfor the threetreatments,presentedin the second row of Table 1, are comparable withpreviouslyeportedmeasures fdispersion or hisparadigmByrne,1971).All three differences mong the similarity reatmentsweresignificantall df = 58); thusthe nterpersonalimulationppears ohavesuccessfullyeproducedhefindingsf theparadigm.


7/13

368 SOCIOMETRYTABLE 2

MeanDesirability fP's Situated dentityforThreeProportions fSimilarAttitudes nd FiveRatingsofAttraction o 0

Attitude P's Attraction o OaSimilarity 4 6 8 10 12 Pb.08 30.27 35.70 33.91 27.42 21.78 .01.50 24.54 30.22 33.19 36.57 28.13 .01.92 20.69 24.13 28.82 34.41 38.35 .005aThere are 12 subjectspercell. Higher cores ndicatemoredesirable dentities.bBased on one-wayANOV, df= 4/55

The favorabilityf P's situated dentitywas computedfrom heaverageratings f 60 to 0 forthe mostand least sociallydesirableadjectiveof each pair.The mean desirabilityf P's situateddentityforeach of the 15 treatmentombinationss presentedn Table 2.For each proportion f attitude imilarity,'s situated dentitysseento be mostfavorablewhenhe reproduces he attractionatingsthatwerepredicted ythe subjects.Moreover,twillbe recalled hatonlyhalfof thesubjects n each treatmentombinationwereaskedto predictP's attraction o 0, and comparisonof the identitiesattributedby subjectswho estimatedand did not estimateP'sattraction o 0 revealedno significant ifferencesor any of thetreatmentombinations.Sincethedesirabilityf P's situated dentitys directly elated othe extenthe reproduces heoutcomespredicted y theattractionparadigm, t might lso be asked if the subjects' own ratings finterpersonalttraction owardP followtheir dentity valuations.Table 3 provides he mean attractiono P (maximum ossible= 14)foreach ofthe 15 treatmentombinations,nd the direction fthefindingss seen to be virtuallydenticalto that of the situatedidentityvaluations. ubjectsreportmost nterpersonalttractionoP's whoreproduce heexpectedfindings,ndratingsfsubjectswhoestimatedP's attraction o 0 were againnot significantlyifferentfrom atingsfsubjectswhodidnot makethe estimates.The last findingof interest n the presentstudy involvesacomparison mongthefrequenciesf theadjectives hatwere ircledas most characteristicof P. Examination of the ten mostcharacteristicallyescriptive raitsrevealedthree classificationsfthediscrepancyetween ttitude imilarityndattractionmong he


8/13

IDENTITIES, SIMILARITY AND ATTRACTION 369TABLE 3

Mean Attraction oP for ThreeProportions f SimilarAttitudes nd Five Ratingsof P's Attraction o 0Attitude P's Attraction o 0aSimilarity 4 6 8 10 12 p

.08 10.33 11.08 12.67 9.92 7.58 .02

.5.0 6.17 8.42 11.25 12.58 8.83 .01

.92 5.75 7.33 9.25 10.67 12.83 .01aSee notes to Table 2.

15 treatment ombinations. hese discrepanciesre defined n termsof treatment ombinations n which: (1) attraction s greater hansimilarity,2) attraction nd similarityre not discrepant, nd (3)similaritys greater han ttraction. ach treatmentombinationwasclassifiednto one ofthese hreediscrepancy onditions ccording othe following procedure: (1) for each proportionof attitudesimilarity,hetwo levelsofP's attractiono 0 thatfell losest o thesubjects' predictionswere classified s nondiscrepant;2) treatmentcombinationsn whichP's attraction o 0 was at least two pointshigher than that predicted by the subjects were classified asdiscrepantn thedirection fgreater ttraction han similarity;nd(3) treatmentombinationsn whichP's attraction o 0 was at leasttwo points owerthanpredictedwere classified s discrepantn thedirection f greater imilarityhan attraction.Table 4 shows nepercent fsubjectswho ascribed pecific raits oP for ach ofthe threediscrepancy onditions. requencies fascrip-tionarenot only eento differignificantlymong onditions or 9 ofthe 40 traitwordsbut personality ttributionshow appreciable n-ternal consistencywithin ach discrepancy ondition.P's whoshowunpredictably igh attraction atings, orexample,are mostoftendescribed as submissive,dependent, passive, trusting,nd naive.Unpredictablyow ratings f interpersonalttraction,n theotherhand, lead to trait ascriptions uch as cold, dominant, ndifferent,and suspicious.Finally, ubjectswhorespond s predicted re mostoften een as fair, ntelligent,esponsive,ndsensitive.DISCUSSION

Althoughsituated dentity heory appearsto offer plausibleinterpretationf the basic findingsftheattraction aradigm,t is


9/13

370 SOCIOMETRYTABLE 4

Percentof SubjectsAscribingTraits o P bySimilarity-AttractioniscrepancyDiscrepancy

Attraction SimilarityGreaterThan No Dis- GreaterThanTraits Similarity crepancy Attraction paCold 19% 21% 67% .001Dominant 8 18 61 .001Indifferent 11 14 51 .001Submissive 61 28 14 .001Dependent 53 22 17 .01Fair 28 54 22 .01Insecure 36 15 8 .01Intelligent 19 54 25 .01Passive 50 15 31 .01Responsive 19 44 17 .01Sensitive 33 49 18 .01Suspicious 17 19 46 .01Trusting 47 33 14 .01Arrogant 11 14 33 .05Fearful 36 18 14 .05Forgiving 28 10 11 .05Hostile 14 12 33 .05Naive 42 19 17 .05Sociable 17 38 17 .05N 36 72 72 -

aBased on X2, df 2

important o emphasizeseveral mplications f the present nalysisthat maybe especiallyrelevant or furthertudiesof interpersonalattraction. irst, heassumption hatsubjects ctuallyparticipatingin theexperimentalaradigm eport hepredicted ttraction atingsin orderto presentfavorabledentities-depends n the validity four simulation. et apartfrom hepresenttudy nd Scott's 1969)unpublishedfindings,here have been feweffortso simulate heparadigm, nd no simulationhas soughtto identify he specificaspects of the laboratoryprocedures hatdetermine he subjects'definitionf theexperimentalituation.In part,thisabsenceofdetailin the simulation ollowsfrom heverynatureof the findingseportedby Byrne 1971) and others.While the results of cognitivedissonance research and otherfrequentlyimulatedparadigmshowan abundanceof interactions,replication ailures,ndsignificanteversals,tudies n theattraction


10/13

IDENTITIES, SIMILARITY AND ATTRACTION 371paradigm eldom report imiting onditionsfor the main effect fattitude imilarity.hus,thefailure f theseseveral xperimentsoidentifyimitingonditions f the effects f similarityn attractionnecessarily ields correspondingmpoverishmentn thesimulations;an explicitconsideration f previously eportednteractions ouldprovide a more definitive ssessmentof isomorphisms etweensubjects and observers.Of course,it would also be advisabletoexaminedirectlyhe identitieshat subjects scribe o themselvesnthe experimentaletting.Second, it should be emphasizedthat,while situated dentitytheory can predict the attraction responsesof observers andpresumably f subjects) n termsof social desirability, either hetheorynor tssupporting imulationpecifies ntecedent onditionsthat ead subjects o choose themostdesirable f several esponses.It is at this juncture, perhaps, that the social desirabilityinterpretationftheattraction aradigmmight e related o theoriesexplicitly ocusing n the antecedentsf nterpersonalttractioncf.Murstein, 971). At the intraindividualevel, for example, t isentirely ossible that presentations f socially desirable dentitiestend to be followedbyreinforcingonsequencese.g.,Byrne, 971)or by a reduction f cognitivembalancewithin he subject (e.g.,Newcomb, 961).Although t is not our purposeto criticize heories f attractionthat invoke intraindividual eterminants uch as reinforcementprocesses,t might e appropriateonote one importantmplicationof the presentfindings or these theories. n the case of Byrne'sreinforcement heory, for example, the logic of explanationpresumesan invariant elationship etweenstatements f similarattitudes nd subsequent einforcementhat s independentf socialcontext.While uch a conceptualizationmaybe appropriate orthemanycases in which ttractions directly roportionalo similarity,it is not apparenthow a reinforcementpproachexplainsthefewcases in which similaritynd attraction re eitherunrelatedorinverselyelated. Nor wouldit seem thatreinforcementheory anspecify such limiting onditionsin advance of empiricalstudy.Similarreservations bout cognitivebalance theory pproachestointerpersonalttraction avebeen expressed y Curry nd Emerson(1970).However, heories erived rom hestudy fsocial nteractionotonly provide n alternativepproach o thepresent indings,utmayalso shedlight n thelimitingonditions ftheattraction aradigm.For example, recent longitudinal tudiesreportedby Curry nd


11/13

372 SOCIOMETRYEmerson 1970) and Doherty nd Secord 1971) suggestwo imitingconditionsthat mightbe understood n termsof social exchangetheory nd symbolic nteraction. iewing tatementsf attractionnthe contextof social exchange aisesthepossibility hatrulesof fairexchangedictate permissible imitsof attraction n response tospecific proportionsof attitude similarity; xaminationof thespecific raits scribed o subjectswho showed nappropriatelyighor low attraction ratings provides some support for thisinterpretation.n both cases, observers ppear to have attributedidentitiesimilar o thetraits scribed o thosewhoviolatenorms freciprocity n social exchange. Further,given that relationsofattractionin ongoing interaction end to be characterizedbyincreasingreciprocity, xpressionsof similar attitudesmay leadsubjectsto expect thatotherswill be attracted o them. However,since the implied iking nterpretationf the attraction aradigm(Aronson nd Worchel, 966) doesnotappear o provide completeexplanationof the effects f similarity, urry nd Emersonhavesuggestedthat residual effects of attitude similaritymight beexplainedby the hypothesis hatpresentationsf similar ttitudeslead subjects o feelthattheycan successfullynduceothers o likethem.While exchange theory identifiesthe prospect of successfulinteraction s a limiting onditionof the attractionparadigm,second comparativetudy Doherty nd Secord, 1971) has providedsupportfor an explicitly ymbolic nteractionistpproachto thepresentfindings nd the specification f their imiting onditions.FollowingSecord and Backman's 1961) statementf interpersonalcongruencyheory,Dohertyand Secord found thatagreementorthe mostimportant spectsof their ubjects'self-concepts ieldedappreciably reaterttraction hansimilarityorgeneral ttitudes.fidentity an be assumedto be an important spectof self,thenvalidationof subjectivepublic identity ppearsto specify ne ofseveral congruencyprocesses that mediates similarity-attractionfindings. n addition,the validationof identity n experimentalsettingsmight assume special importance insofar as subjectsanticipatemorepredictable nd stable nteractions ith otherswhosee them as they see themselves. At present,however, noexperimentaltudyhas systematicallyomparedeither uccessorinterpersonalongruency ithattitude imilaritys determinantsfattraction.Our presentfindingsndicatethe advisability f suchinvestigation.


12/13

IDENTITIES, SIMILARITY AND ATTRACTION 373REFERENCES

Alexander,C. N., Jr. ndJ. Epstein1969 "Problems of dispositional inference n person perceptionresearch."Sociometry32 (4):381-95.Alexander,C. N.,Jr. nd H. G. Weil1969 "Players,persons, nd purposes:Situationalmeaning nd theprisoner'sdilemmagame." Sociometry32 (2):121-44.Alexander,C. N., Jr. nd G. W.Knight1971 "Situated identities and social psychological experimentation."Sociometry34 (1):65-82.Anderson,N. H.1968 "Likableness ratings of 555 personality-traitwords." Journal ofPersonalitynd Social Psychology (3):272-9.Aronson,E. and P. Worchel1966 "Similarityversus liking as determinants f interpersonal ttractive-ness." Psychonomic cience 5:157-8.Bem,D. J.1967 "Self-perception:An alternative nterpretationf cognitivedissonancephenomena."PsychologicalReview74:183-200.Byrne,D.1971 The Attraction aradigm.New York: AcademicPress.Byrne,D. and R. Rhamey1965 "Magnitudeof positiveand negativereinforcementss determinantsfattraction."Journal fPersonalitynd Social Psychology :884-9.Curry, . J.,and R. M. Emerson1970 "Balance theory:A theory f interpersonalttraction?"Sociometry33(2):216-38.Doherty,E. G. and P. F. Secord1971 "Change of roommateand interpersonal ongruency."RepresentativeResearch nSocial Psychology (2):70-6.Goffman, .1963 Behavior nPublicPlaces. New York: The Free Press.Gough,H. G. and A. B. Heilbrun,Jr.1965 The Adjective Check List Manual. Palo Alto, California:ConsultingPsychologists ress.Jones,E. E.1964 Ingratiation:A Social PsychologicalAnalysis. New York: Appleton,CenturyCrofts.Jones,E. E. and K. E. Davis1965 "From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in personperception." Pp. 219-267 in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances inExperimental ocial Psychology.Vol. 2. New York: AcademicPress.

Mead,G. H.1934 Mind,Self,and Society.Chicago: Universityf ChicagoPress.Mixon,D.1972 "Instead of deception." Journalfor the Theory of Social Behavior2(2): 145-79.


13/13

374 SOCIOMETRYMurstein, . I. (ed.)1971 Theories of Attraction nd Love. New York: Springer.Newcomb,T. M.1961 The AcquaintanceProcess. New York: Holt, Rinehart& Winston.Rosenberg, . and R. A. Jones1972 "Ratings of personality trait words on nine semantic properties."Journal upplementAbstract ervice2:21-2.Scott, W. C.1969 "Response predictionand interpersonalttraction."Paper read at themeetings f theSouthwestern sychologicalAssociation.Secord,P. F. and C. W. Backman1961 "Personality theory and the problem of stability and change inindividualbehavior:An interpersonalpproach." PsychologicalReview

68:21-32.

MANUSCRIPTSFOR THEASA ROSE SOCIOLOGY SERIESManuscripts100 to 300 typedpages; threecopies) aresolicitedforpublication ntheASA Arnold nd CarolineRoseMonograph eries in Sociologyto theSeriesEditor,Professorda HarperSimpson, epartmentf Sociology,DukeUniversity,urham, orthCarolina 27706.

Documents

Touhey - Situated Identities, Attitude Similarity and Interpersonal Attraction.pdf