Getting at the truth or getting along: Accuracy- versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic processing
Getting at the truth or getting along: Accuracy- versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic processing
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.262
复制
发表时间：
1996-08-01
影响因子：
7.6
通讯作者：
Chaiken, S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chen, S;Shechter, D;Chaiken, S
两项研究考察了期望与被认为对讨论问题持有赞成或反对意见的伙伴进行讨论的准确性与印象驱动的个体的启发式和系统化处理。考虑到进行愉快的互动的目标，两项研究中以印象为动机（相对于以准确性为动机）的参与者特别有可能表达与伴侣意见一致的态度，这反映了他们选择性地使用“配合以凝聚”启发式。研究 2 提供了更有力的证据，证明了启发式和系统性处理在准确性与印象目标服务中的独特性质。在这项研究中，印象驱动的参与者不费力地应用“相处相处”启发式的评估含义使他们更加努力、系统地处理，导致态度与伴侣的观点一致；相比之下。考虑到确定准确的问题意见的目标，以准确性为动机的参与者表现出相对公平的系统处理，从而导致态度不受合作伙伴意见的影响。结果强调了双过程方法在理解动机认知方面的实用性。
Two studies examined the heuristic and systematic processing of accuracy- versus impression-motivated individuals expecting a discussion with a partner believed to hold either a favorable or unfavorable opinion on the discussion issue. Given the goal of having a pleasant interaction, impression-motivated (versus accuracy-motivated) participants in both studies were particularly likely to express attitudes that were evaluatively consistent with the partner's opinion, reflecting their selective use of a ''go along to gel along'' heuristic. Study 2 yielded stronger evidence for the distinct nature of heuristic and systematic processing in the service of accuracy versus impression goals. In this study, the evaluative implication of impression-motivated participants' low-effort application of a ''go along to get along'' heuristic biased their more effortful, systematic processing, leading to attitudes consistent with the partner's views; In contrast. given the goal of determining an accurate issue opinion, accuracy-motivated participants exhibited relatively evenhanded systematic processing, resulting in attitudes unbiased by the partner's opinion. The results underscore the utility of a dual-process approach to understanding motivated cognition.