Sticky Priors - The Perseverance of Identity Effects On Judgment

Sticky Priors: The Perseverance of Identity Effects on Judgment
Author(s): Lisa E. Bolton and Americus Reed II

Source: Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 41, No. 4 (Nov., 2004), pp. 397-410
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/30164705
Accessed: 15-01-2019 00:50 UTC
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.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of Marketing Research
This content downloaded from 128.59.222.107 on Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:50:13 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
LISA E. BOLTON and AMERICUS REED II*
This research examines the perseverance of identity-based judgments

by exploring the effectiveness of various corrective procedures that are
intended to neutralize identity effects on judgment. The authors explore
these effects in a series of studies that involve different kinds of identities
(e.g., parent, teenager, businessperson, environmentalist) linked to dif-
ferent objects and issues (e.g., Internet censorship, pollution credits,
electronic books). Moreover, they test the effectiveness of various cor-
rective procedures, including feature-based analysis, counterfactual rea-
soning, counteridentification, and social influence. The authors find that
identity-driven thinking leads to judgment that resists change, that is, a
procedural bias or "sticky prior" in favor of an initial identity-based judg-
ment. The findings attest to both the power of identity and the efficacy of
analytic and nonanalytic corrective techniques.
Sticky Priors: The Perseverance of Identity

Effects on Judgment
This research investigates identity-based judgments, that evenhandedly about the issue (i.e., analytic thinking). Simi-
is, judgments made while bringing to mind the perspective larly, a new product may be judged with analytic or
of an identity. For our purposes, identity is defined as a self- identity-driven thinking, such as by conducting a feature-
relevant social category (see Deaux et al. 1995). Through- based analysis of hybrid cars or by adopting the perspective
out the course of life, many social categories are potential of an environmentalist (BusinessWeek 2002). Engaging in
bases for self-definition of a permanent (e.g., female, Asian identity-driven and/or analytic thinking as part of a con-
American, parent) or transitory (e.g., teenager, college stu- structive process of judgment formation may have conse-
dent) nature. When such social categories are perceived as quences for both managers and consumers.
self-relevant, they serve as identities that make up a per- In this research, we examine the perseverance of identity-
son's self-concept. When an identity is salient, it is thought driven thinking despite various corrective procedures (such
to guide thinking, judgment, and behavior (Tajfel and as analytic thinking) that are intended to improve judgment.
Turner 1979). Although identity research continues to grow, Given that all judgments must have a starting point, our
its implications for judgment and decision making are only research addresses the following questions: What are the
beginning to garner conceptual and empirical attention (see implications of initial identity-driven thinking for judg-
Flemming and Petty 1999). Moreover, most previous ment? More specifically, to what extent can the effects of
research has investigated the impact of identity in isolation preliminary identity-driven thinking be neutralized by cor-
from other kinds of judgment processes. rective procedures?
For example, consider how people form judgments about
controversial issues, such as the recent debate over oil IDENTITY-BASED JUDGMENT
drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife refuge (The New Prior research on identity has demonstrated its influenc
York Times 2003). A person may form such judgments by on judgment, behavior, and performance (see Reed 2004).
considering the matter as a Republican versus Democratic For example, black women for whom gender (ethnic) identi
issue (i.e., an identity-based judgment) or by reasoning was salient had more unfavorable (favorable) perceptions
O.J. Simpson's innocence (Newman et al. 1997). Furthe
more, a recent study of women's affirmative action judg
*Lisa E. Bolton is Assistant Professor of Marketing (e-mail:
boltonl@wharton.upenn.edu), and Americus Reed II is Assistant Professor ments demonstrates that the heightening of the salience of a
of Marketing (e-mail: amreed@wharton.upenn.edu), The Wharton School, identity increases the alignment of a person's attitudes wi
University of Pennsylvania. For data collection assistance or comments on the membership group (Cohen and Reed 2001). LeBoeuf an
a draft, the authors thank Marissa Aiken, Karl Aquino, Wes Hutchinson, Sharif (2003) find that differential salience of various ident
Nancy Kim, Morgan Lopez, Karen Reed, and Marcus Stewart. The authors
ties can lead to preference reversals in a range of choice task
also thank the Alfred P. West Jr. Learning Lab for support and assistance
with Study 4. In addition to the salience of identity, the strength of
identification (the centrality of the identity within the sel
Journal of Marketing Research

397 Vol. XLI (November 2004), 397-410
398 JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, NOVEMBER 2004
concept) also affects judgment. Prior research

objective suggests
and evenhanded that
manner. We examine two types o
the self is composed of multiple,analytic tools-feature-based
hierarchically analysis and counterfactu
ordered
identities (Deaux et al. 1995; Stryker
reasoning-as
1980). By information-based
implication, corrective procedures. In
addition,
this ordering suggests that a person's judgments, we proposecognitions,
and explore two corrective procedur
and behaviors are more likely to be consistent
that are relatively with identi-
nonanalytic in nature.1 These procedure
ties that are more important to his attempt
or her to self-concept
improve judgment by thanprompting consideration
to other identities. For example, people
alternative
with social
a strongly
perspectives through
held counteridentificatio
gender identity are more likely to andhavesocial influence.
"male" or "female"
as part of their self-schemata (Bem 1981).
In a seriesAsof studies
a result,
(illustrated
iden-
in Figure 1), we examine
tity effects on judgment should the arise particularly
perseverance when
of identity effects on judgment despite the
identity is both salient and strong; use
that of these
is, the four corrective
strength procedures.
of In all studies,
identification moderates the effects people initially wereon
of identity asked to think about a judgment object
judgment.
or issueidentity
Research in marketing has investigated by taking the perspective
effects onof a salient identity
(measured in including
judgment and behavior in several contexts, terms of strength). We examine various kinds
adver-
tising effectiveness (Deshpande and Stayman
of identities 1994; Fore-
(e.g., environmentalist, businessperson, parent,
hand and Deshpande 2001; Grier teenager)
and Deshpande 2001;target judgments (e.g.,
that are linked to different
Meyers-Levy 1988; Meyers-Levy and Sternthal
electronic books, pollution 1991) and censorship). We
credits, Internet
consumption preferences (Stayman then and Deshpande
investigate the perseverance 1989;
of such judgments against
Wooten 1995). Mostly focused on gender
corrective andproceduresethnic
that areidenti-
intended to counter the initial
ties, this research demonstrates that the judgment.
identity-based salience and
In this section, we briefly describe
strength of a person's identity lead theto different
conceptual consumer
underpinnings of each corrective procedure.
responses to marketing stimuli. (We reserve full discussions and development of specific
Taking this research a step further, we for
hypotheses argue that
the studies thatjudg-
follow.)
ments based on a salient and strong identity may be espe-
Feature-Based Analysis
cially resistant to change. Social cognition research sug-
gests that the self and its multiple identities
Some models of represent
judgment are baseda on attribute-driven
complex and highly elaborate knowledge structure
processing in mem-
that is characterized as a data-driven, bottom-up
ory (Kihlstrom and Klein 1994). The
process (seepremise of
Park and Smith our
1989). The prompting of
research is that a salient and strong identity
people to engage activates
in feature-based ananalysis is likely to
elaborate and integrated schema that is relevant
encourage to the driven
bottom-up processing self,by attributes of the
frames the target of judgment, and drives
object rather thinking
than top-down,that schema-driven processing
incorporates aspects of the self that(e.g.,
are by linked
an identity to theInsocial
schema). Study 1, we test the effec-
category. As a result, identity-based judgment
tiveness of feature-basedhas three
analysis at neutralizing identity
important characteristics. First, it effects
reflects on judgment (compared
relatively one- with an inoculation
sided, top-down thinking that is driven
approach) by a perspective
to provide preliminary evidence for an identity-
linked to a single identity (in contrast
basedto analytic
sticky prior. judgment,
which applies reasoning in a relatively evenhanded man-
ner). Second, judgment that is based on a salient and strong
identity is embedded in an elaborate1Nonanalytic/analytic
self-relevant thinking schema
is useful, nonpejorative nomenclature for
that may be difficult to undo because this of
distinction
its (Alba and Hutchinson 1987; Sloman
entrenchment in 1996).
the self (in contrast to analytic judgment, which does not
activate aspects of the self-concept). Third, identity-based Figure 1
judgments that are shared by others (i.e., OVERVIEW social OF referents
EMPIRICAL STUDIES
who share the identity) are perceived as having greater sub-
jective validity and therefore are held more confidently (in
contrast to analytic judgments, which lack social referenc-
ing) (Markus, Smith, and Moreland 1985). Identity These character-
istics suggest that identity-driven thinking leads to biased
Corrective Procedures
Analytic
judgment that resists change, that is, a procedural bias or informational
"sticky prior" in favor of an initial identity-based judgment.
To our knowledge, prior research has not Study 1- Feature-based analysis
investigated thebottom-up
perseverance of judgment based on identity. Concomitantly,
A--Study 2- Counterfactual reasoning
such an investigation will test the effectiveness of various
corrective procedures that are intended toA--Studies 2 & 3- Counteridentification
neutralize identity
effects on judgment.
A-Study 4- Social influence Nonanalytic
CORRECTIVE PROCEDURES social
top-down
Prior research has identified corrective procedures that
are believed to improve judgment (for reviews, see Arkes Judgment
Perseverance
1991; Wilson and Brekke 1994). A traditional approach has
been to encourage analytic thinking. Analytic judgments
reflect efforts to apply reasoning and logic in a relatively
Identity-Based Judgments 399
Counterfactual thinking. A traditional approach to encourage analytic

Reasoning
thinking in new product judgment is to draw people's atten-
A traditional form of analytic thinking i
soning, such as tion to product features. Feature-based analysis prompt
the generation of pros
source of bias is thepeople to engage in attribute-driven
increased processing, a data-
availability
driven, bottom-up
dence (e.g., due to a salient and strong id
process (Park and Smith 1989).
Attribute-based
nique that increases the availability (or expectancy-value) models typically
of ev
depict a person's attitude toward an object as his or her sub-
the other side should improve judgment.
jective probability that the
the-opposite" techniques object has a certain attribute
might collec
multiplied by his or her evaluation of the attribute; overall
counterfactual reasoning (Lord, Lepper, a
judgment is based on aggregation across salient attributes
In Study 2, we examine the effectiveness
reasoning at
neutralizing initial identity-d
(e.g., Fishbein and Ajzen 1975). Such an approach also
reflects the spirit of decomposition, a "divide-and-conquer"
also examine whether identity-driven
approach that can improve problem solving (e.g., MacGre-
stickier prior than analytic reasoning.
gor, Lichtenstein, and Slovic 1988). Therefore, the prompt-
Counteridentification
ing of people to engage in feature-based analysis is likely to
If identity-driven encourage
judgment them to engage in bottom-up processing that is be
is sticky
driven by attributes
an elaborate self-schema and induces soci of the product.
potential corrective In technique
contrast, identity-based judgmentis reflects
to top-down
encou
to consider an objectprocessing
or driven issueby identity.fromWhen judgment an is madeopp
with the perspective
spective (i.e., counteridentification). Therof an identity in mind, an elaborate
speculation about theand self-relevant schema may drive thinking in
interaction a relatively
among
one-sided manner. Consistent with its moderator role, the
flict (Shih, Pittinsky, and Ambady 1999),
strength of investigated
edge, research has not identification will enhance the one-sidedness
the i
and self-relevance
salient conflicting identities of identity-driven
on thinking and thereby
judgmen
enhance identity effects on
3, we propose and examine judgment. effective
the Moreover, such ini-
tial one-sidedness
identification as a corrective procedure.may be difficult to undo with a relatively
the diagnosticity of evenhanded
the feature-based
identities analysis task. Prior
for researchthe
in t
other domains suggests that top-down thinking dominates
Social Influence bottom-up thinking (e.g., Alba et al. 1994; Bolton 2003;
The importance Hoch andsocial
of Deighton 1989); people who have initially
influence h
interest engaged in top-down
psychological in thinking may find it difficult
literature. Consito
psychology suggests engage in bottom-up,
that feature-based
influenceanalysis. Similarly, it fr
may be difficult for
affects personal opinion; people to engage in relatively
however, even-
results
handed analysis after
on identity and social engaging in one-sided thinking.
influence are As a m
result, feature-based
understood (Flemming and Petty 1999). T analysis may be susceptible to iden-
tity effects
tests the effectiveness of and therefore
social be less effective
influencewhen it follows, fr
rather than precedes, identity-driven
ers at neutralizing identity effects thinking. Thus,
on initialjudg
identity-driven thinking may create a sticky prior that is
OVERVIEW AND RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION relatively resistant to change regardless of subsequent
feature-based analysis. Accordingly, we hypothesize the
The objective of our research is to examine the persever-
following:
ance of identity-based judgments by exploring the effective-
ness of various corrective procedures that are intended H1:to
Feature-based analysis is less effective when it follows
neutralize identity effects on judgment. Identity research rather than precedes identity-based judgment.
has previously argued for pervasive effects of the self,
through identity, on thoughts and behaviors, whereas As support
ana- for this hypothesis, we expect that identity
lytic thinking is often held up as the normative ideal strength
for has a greater effect on judgment when identity-
driven thinking precedes rather than follows feature-based
judgment and decision making. Our work can be character-
analysis. Such evidence would argue against the effective-
ized as a first attempt to link these two streams of research.
ness of feature-based analysis as a corrective tool to neutral-
To our knowledge, a systematic investigation pitting
identity-driven judgment against analytic thinking has ize prior
not identity effects on judgment.
been conducted. Doing so will shed light on the persever-
Method
ance of identity effects on judgment, including whether
identity-driven judgment is stickier than analytic judgment,
Participants and design. Participants were undergraduate
and the efficacy of various analytic corrective procedures.
students who received extra credit in an introductory mar-
In addition, we go beyond traditional corrective procedures
keting class. Each participant was randomly assigned to one
and propose and test several nonanalytic corrective
of two cells in a 2 (order of reasoning) between-subjects
procedures. design. A total of 39 participants completed the task.
Materials and procedure. The experimental materials
STUDY 1: IDENTITY-BASED JUDGMENT AND
were contained in a booklet distributed to participants. Par-
FEATURE-BASED ANALYSIS
ticipants were asked to read over some background infor-
Study 1 investigates the effectiveness of feature-basedmation about a new product concept: the electronic book (e-
analysis at neutralizing the effects of initial identity-driven
book). Participants then were instructed as follows:
The E-Book can be assessed in a variety

[s.d.] = 1)of
and ways
includedand
it as a covariate that represented
from a variety of perspectives. On the next
strength of few pages,We conducted analyses of covari-
identification.
you will be asked to consider one or ance
more of these
(ANCOVAs) per-
on dependent variables using a full
spectives in detail. (Due to time constraints, we cannot
model that included the identity strength covariate, order of
ask you to consider them all.) Then you will be asked
reasoning, and their interaction. Hi predicts that identity
to give us your opinion of the E-Book and its future.
strength has a greater effect on judgment in the identity-
analysis than inwere
In the identity-analysis order, participants the analysis-identity
asked toorder.2 Therefore, the
engage in identity-driven reasoningappropriate
as follows:test of Hi is a relative test of the magnitude of
the coefficients of the identity strength covariate within
The Environmental Viewpoint: Imagine that you are an
each order condition (i.e., the significance of the two-way
active environmentalist. In this role, please write down
interaction term in
what you believe is important in considering the full
the E- model).3
We present
Book's future. For example, what appeals to you as anthe results for the various judgment measures
environmentalist about the E-Book? (confidence
Why? in e-book success,
Provide a personal opinions, and pre-
short essay describing your position dictions of others' opinions) in Table 1. As we expected,
as an environmen-
talist regarding the appeal of the E-Book
ANCOVAs in the space
of confidence in e-book success reveal a signif-
below.
icant interaction of order of reasoning and strength of iden-
tification (F(1, 35) = 5.67, p < .05). Similarly, multivariate
The participants then engaged in analytic reasoning as
follows: analyses of covariance (MANCOVAs) of personal opinion
ratings and predictions of others' opinions are significant
Feature Analysis: Please write down each feature of the functions of the interaction of order of reasoning and iden-
E-Book that you believe is important in considering its tity strength (F(1, 35) = 4.59, p < .05; F(1, 34) = 7.29, p <
future. Then evaluate each feature. For example, will
.01, respectively). As we expected, identity strength drives
the feature be attractive or unattractive to the average
more favorable judgments when identity-driven thinking
U.S. consumer? Why? Provide an analysis of the appeal
precedes rather than follows analytic thinking, as is evi-
of the E-Book, feature-by-feature, in the space below.
denced by more positive coefficients for identity strength in
Participants in the analysis-identity order completed both the identity-analysis versus the analysis-identity order in
tasks in the opposite order (for control group purposes). Table 1.4
Thus, the order manipulation reflects the type of thinking Overall, these findings are consistent with Hi and pro-
that leads to initial judgment formation: In the identity- vide preliminary evidence against the effectiveness of
analysis (analysis-identity) order, identity-driven thinking feature-based analysis as a corrective tool to neutralize prior
precedes (follows) analytic thought; that is, there is an identity effects on judgment. In Figure 2, we illustrate this
identity-based (analytic-based) judgment prior. pattern of results using a median split of the identity
Participants were asked to predict success for this new strength covariate. When identification is strong (versus
product in the marketplace by indicating their confidence weak), initial identity-driven thinking leads to more favor-
on a percentage scale. Participants then rated their opinion able judgments, which indicates that initial identity-driven
of the e-book on four seven-point scales: "really dislike/ thinking leads to a sticky prior that resists change through
really like," "would not buy or recommend/would definitely
buy or recommend," "a very bad idea/a very good idea,"
2In a pretest using similar stimuli, subjects who were prompted to con-
and "unlikely to succeed/likely to succeed." Participants sider the e-book only from an environmentalist perspective provided more
also predicted the opinions of various groups (e.g., college favorable judgments than did subjects who engaged only in feature-based
students, children, adults) toward e-books on seven-point analysis (F(1, 36) = 7.91, p < .01). Therefore, we expect judgment favora-
scales. bility toward e-books in Study 1 to increase with strength of identification;
that is, greater environmental identity effects are evidenced by more posi-
Participants also responded to various background and tive covariate coefficients.
diagnostic questions. Environmental identity was measured 3Note that the critical test of Hi is a relative, not absolute, test of the
by three seven-point scales: "I don't really think of myself magnitudes of the covariate coefficients across conditions. The use of a
as an environmentalist" (reverse-coded), "Being an environ- baseline or control group (here, the analysis-identity condition) for com-
parison enables us to control for various other factors (e.g., amount of elab-
mentally conscious person is an important part of who I oration, fatigue) that may contribute to the strength of primacy and recency
am," and "I see myself first and foremost as an effects and thus affect the absolute magnitudes of the covariate coefficient.
environmentalist." Therefore, we do not report on such simple effects tests of the covariate
coefficients (i.e., nonzero t-tests). We use a similar approach for all analy-
Results and Discussion ses in this article.
4The amount of analytic thought, as coded by a judge, was unaffected by
In subsequent analyses, we standardized the average of order or identity strength, which rules out simple fatigue or output interfer-
the environmental identity scale (M 0, standard deviation ence as alternative explanations. We omit the results for brevity's sake.
Table 1
E-BOOK JUDGMENTS AS A FUNCTION OF IDENTITY STRENGTH (STUDY 1)
Order of Reasoning N Confidence in Success Personal Opinion (Average) Prediction of Others' Opinions (Average)
Identity-analysis 19 10.0 (6.8)a .49 (.32) .51 (.22)b

Analysis-identity 20 -10.3 (5.1) -.37 (.24) -.22 (.16)
aTabular data report the coefficient (and standard error) of the identity strength covariate nested in order of reasoning.
bData missing from one respondent.
Figure 2 Counterfactual reasoning is based on a traditional

AVERAGE PERSONAL OPINION AS A FUNCTION OF IDENTITY approach to encourage analytic thinking by prompting
STRENGTH AND ORDER OF REASONING (STUDY 1) people to consider the opposite (Lord, Lepper, and Preston
1984). By prompting people to generate one-sided argu-
ments that counter their initial judgment, counterfactual
7 reasoning provides a potentially more powerful corrective
procedure than relatively evenhanded feature-based analy-
6 sis. Prior research has investigated counterfactual reasoning
in an analytic judgment task. For example, Hoch (1984)
5
investigates order effects in analytic reasoning. Participants
generated pro and con arguments for various target events
4
(e.g., OPEC embargo, buying a VCR). Net reasons and
3 judgments were biased toward the initial reasons generated
(a primacy effect); with a delay between explanation tasks,
2 people generated reasons evenhandedly, and judgments
showed a recency effect. Counterfactual reasoning can be
1 effective as a debiasing strategy (Arkes 1991), at least in the
Strong Identity Weak Identity domain of analytic reasoning, such that belief perseverance
is not a foregone conclusion. Primacy and recency effects
have been attributed to several factors, including strength of
-o- Identity-analysis priors and evidence of updating (Anderson and Sechler
-4-- Analysis-identity
1986), judgment delays and memory (Hoch 1984), amount
of elaboration (Haugtvedt and Wegener 1994), and type of
elaboration (Bolton 2003).
Notes: For illustrative purposes only, strong and weak identity are based
We have previously argued that a strong identity activates
on a median split of the identity strength covariate.
an elaborate and integrated schema that is relevant to the
self, frames the target of judgment, and drives thinking in a
subsequent feature-based analysis. Why? In our view, a one-sided manner. Consistent with its moderator role,
strong environmentalist identity leads to one-sided, top- stronger identification will enhance the one-sidedness and
down thinking and the generation of an elaborate self- self-relevance of identity-driven thinking and thereby
relevant schema in favor of e-books that is difficult to undo enhance identity effects on judgment. Moreover, when an
with subsequent bottom-up, feature-based analysis, particu- elaborate and integrated schema has driven an initial
larly if the feature-based analysis is rendered less effective identity-based judgment, it may be difficult for the subject
because of its susceptibility to identity effects. Regardless to undo the schema completely and consider an alternative.
of whether identification is strong or weak, judgments Thus, initial identity-driven thinking may create a sticky
based on initial feature-based analysis did not differ, which prior that is relatively resistant to change (as in Study 1).
indicates that feature-based analysis confers some resist- Initial reasoning is not integrated in an identity schema that
ance to subsequent identity-driven thought. Why? The rela- is linked to the self-concept and therefore should be less
tive evenhandedness of initial analytic thinking may facili- resistant to change. As a result, identity-based judgments
may be more difficult to neutralize with counterfactual rea-
tate the refutation (Crowley and Hoyer 1994) of subsequent
one-sided, identity-driven thinking, consistent with inocula- soning than analytic judgments are. Accordingly, we
tion theory (McGuire 1961). As a result, identity-driven hypothesize the following:
thinking may be less one-sided when preceded by analytic H2: Counterfactual reasoning is less effective when it follows
thinking, which reduces the identity's ability to polarize identity-driven thinking rather than analytic reasoning.
judgment (see Millar and Tesser 1986).5 Thus, analytic
thinking appears to be less effective at neutralizing identity
As support for this hypothesis, we expect that identity
effects on judgment when it attempts to correct judgment strength has a greater effect on judgment when identity-
afterward rather than inoculating beforehand. driven thinking, rather than analytic reasoning, precedes
counterfactual reasoning. Such evidence would argue
STUDY 2: IDENTITY-BASED JUDGMENT AND against the effectiveness of counterfactual reasoning as a
COUNTERFACTUAL REASONING corrective tool to neutralize prior identity effects on judg-
ment. Concomitantly, such a finding also would indicate
The first study demonstrates that identity effects perse-
that initial identity-driven thinking perseveres more than
vere despite a relatively evenhanded feature-based analysis
analytic thinking (i.e., priors based on identity are stickier).
task. Study 2 has two main objectives: to investigate
Another objective of this study is to explore the effective-
whether identity effects persevere despite counterfactual
ness of counteridentification in neutralizing an initial
reasoning and to explore the relative perseverance of initial
identity-based judgment. By counteridentification, we mean
judgment based on identity versus reasoning.
the use of an alternative identity to counter an initial iden-
tity's effect on judgment. An alternative identity may break
the frame established by the initial identity (Koehler 1994)
51n a similar vein, prompting people to analyze an identity bias may
and
reduce its effects (Cheryan and Bodenhausen 2000). However, research onreframe and highlight different aspects of the target,
thereby inducing more evenhanded
mental contamination suggests that people cannot always correct for bias judgment. Hirt and
successfully when forewarned (Wilson and Brekke 1994). Markman (1995) provide evidence that mere consideration
of alternatives may be sufficient to In thedebias judgment.

identity-counter In
reasons conditions, participants
addition, an alternative identity that
first brings
were asked toto mind
adopt social of either a busi-
the perspective
referents with conflicting judgmentsnessperson
may (pro-con
reduce order) or an environmentalist (con-pro
confidence
in and thereby facilitate change from the initial
order) identity. identity-
The participants then considered opposing
based judgment. In contrast, evenhanded consideration
reasons, either con or pro (shown inof brackets), as follows:
multiple identities may be more difficult if a prior
Please take identity-
few moments to think about reasons
driven thinking serves to reinforce the initial identity or
against (in favor of) pollution credits. Why are pollu-
makes it difficult to consider alternative identities even-
tion credits a bad (good) idea? Write down as many
handedly. Research on multiple scenario generation and reasons as you can in the space below.
analogical reasoning supports this view (Bolton 2003).
However, identity may be less susceptible to interference We again manipulated the order. Thus, participants gener-
effects if identities are an important part of the self-conceptated either pro reasons with a businessperson identity fol
and come to mind readily and easily (Niedenthal, Cantor, lowed by con reasons or con reasons with an environmen-
and Kihlstrom 1985). Accordingly, we offer no prediction talist identity followed by pro reasons.
but provide an exploratory test of the effectiveness of coun- In the reasons-counter reasons conditions, participants
teridentification at neutralizing an initial identity-based generated pro and con reasons. We again manipulated order
judgment. Reason generation serves as a control group that represents
initial analytic judgment, against which we contrast initia
Method
identity-based judgment.6
Participants and design. Participants were undergraduate In all conditions, the reasoning tasks were timed and
students who participated for extra credit in an introductory lasted three minutes each.? Following the reasoning tasks,
marketing class. Each participant was randomly assigned to participants reported their personal opinion of pollutio
one of six cells in a 3 (type of reasoning) x 2 (order of rea- credits on three seven-point Likert scales: "really dislike/
soning) between-subjects design. A total of 210 participants really like," "a very bad idea/a very good idea," and "defi-
completed the experiment; cell sizes ranging from 34 to 37. nitely do support/definitely do not support." Participants
Materials and procedure. The task directed participants also judged the opinion held by their classmates on a seven-
to a Web site and asked them to complete a self-perception point scale and estimated the percentage who voted in favo
questionnaire. Within the online questionnaire was a scale of pollution credits. Participants also were asked to judge
that measured their degree of identification with two identi- the opinions held by businesspeople and environmentalists
ties: businessperson and environmentalist. Each scale con- on seven-point scales. Finally, participants responded t
sisted of 12 seven-point Likert agree/disagree items (e.g., various background and diagnostic questions.
"Being a businessperson is an important part of who I am"). Results and Discussion
After completing the computer questionnaire, partici-
pants received an ostensibly unrelated exercise in booklet Counterfactual reasoning. In the first analysis, we exam-
form. Participants were asked to read some background ined the identity-counter reasons and reasons-counter rea-
information about emissions trading or pollution credits as sons conditions to test the effectiveness of counterfactual
a new concept for reducing air pollution levels. Participants reasoning at neutralizing an initial identity-based judgment.
were then asked "to consider various sides of this issue as H2 predicts that counterfactual reasoning is less effective
you develop your own opinion about pollution credits." when it follows identity-driven thinking rather than analytic
In the identity-counter identity conditions, participants reasoning. Specifically, we expect that identity strength has
were asked to adopt the perspective of a business identity a greater effect on judgment when identity-driven thinking,
and generate reasons in favor of pollution credits. The pur- rather than analytic reasoning, precedes counterfactual rea-
pose of the instructions was to make identity salient in a soning. To test this prediction, we standardized the average
manner that would drive subsequent thinking. In the pro- of the first 11 items of the businessperson (environmental-
con order, participants first read the following: ist) identity scales (M = 0, s.d. = 1) and used it as a covari-
ate that represented initial identification strength in the pro-
Imagine that you are a business executive in favor of
con (con-pro) order.8 We conducted MANCOVAs on
pollution credits. Please take a few moments to think
dependent variables using a full model that includes the
about reasons in favor of pollution credits. In your role
as a business executive, why are pollution credits a identity strength covariate, type and order of reasoning, and
good idea? Write down as many reasons as you can in
6See Note 3.
the space below.
7Doing so permits us to control for the amount and valence of thought
The participants then adopted the perspective of an environ-and, in turn, simple order effects arising from fatigue, delay, and output
mentalist identity and generated reasons against pollution interference. In addition, identity-driven thinking may be lengthier and
more elaborate than analytic thinking for motivational reasons (because of
credits, prompted as follows: the identity's self-relevance). If so, controlling for the amount and valence
Imagine that you are an environmentalist against pollu- of thought can provide a more conservative test of the cognitive differences
tion credits. Please take a few moments to think about (e.g., one-sidedness, schematicity) between identity-driven and analytic
thinking.
reasons against pollution credits. In your role as an envi-
8We dropped the twelfth item for the businessperson and environmental-
ronmentalist, why are pollution credits a bad idea? Write ist identity scales (respectively, coefficient a = .93 and .96) because it
down as many reasons as you can in the space below. loaded on a separate factor in a factor analysis. Businessperson and envi-
ronmentalist identity strengths are positively correlated (r = +.30) in the
We manipulated order; in the con-pro order, participants sample. In accordance with the perspective-taking instructions, busi-
adopted the perspective of the environmentalist identity nessperson (environmentalist) identification is positively (negatively) asso-
first, followed by the business identity. ciated with judgments of pollution credits.
all higher-order sonal opinions, MANCOVAs reveal a significant

interactions. The interaction
approp
of order of reasoning and identity strength
relative test of the magnitude of (F(1, the64) = coeff
tity strength covariate within
13.04, p < .01); that the
is, identity strength is related more pos- type a
ing (i.e., the significance of
itively to personal opinions the
in the pro-con three-wa
order than in the
in the full model). con-pro order, indicating that counteridentification does not
We present the results for
neutralize the effect the
of initial identification. various ju
For predictions
(personal opinions,
of others'others'
opinions, MANCOVAs revealopinions)
no significant
expected, MANCOVAs of
effects of order or identity the
strength (Fs < 1); that items
is, coun- m
opinions reveal a significant teridentification neutralizes the interaction
effect of initial identifica- o
reasoning with identity strength
tion, regardless of identity strength.9 These results (F(1,
suggest 1
For example, identity strength
that the effects drives
of a salient and strong initial identity on per- m
ments in the pro-con sonal judgment
order are particularly
than difficult to inovercome thebut c
identity-counter that reasons
counteridentification may conditions
neutralize identity effects (
.06). In contrast, identity effectively when judging strength
others.10 and o
in the reasons-counter Overall, the patternreasons condit
of results in Study 2 provides support
larly, MANCOVAs for of the
H2 regarding items
identity-based judgment measuri
and counterfac-
(classmates' opinions and the environmentalist- tual reasoning. Initial identity-driven thinking creates stick-
businessperson opinion gap) reveal a significant interaction
ier priors than initial reasoning, and counterfactual reason-
of the type and order of reasoning (F(l , 133) = 4.05, p ing
< does not neutralize identity effects. Moreover,
.05), qualified by a marginal interaction with identitycounteridentification fails to eliminate identity effects on
strength (F(1, 133) = 3.03, p = .08). As evidenced by thepersonal opinions. Counteridentification shows some prom-
pattern of coefficients in Table 2, counterfactual reasoningise, however, at neutralizing identity effects when judging
fails to neutralize the effects of initial identity-driven think-others. In terms of identity's unique characteristics (one-
ing and, consistent with H2, is less effective following ini-sidedness, self-relevance, and social referencing), we specu-
tial identity-driven thinking than after initial analytic rea-late that social referencing matters more than self-relevance
soning. As a result, initial identity-driven thinking when judging others, which improves the effectiveness of
perseveres more than initial reasoning (i.e., priors based on counteridentification as a corrective procedure.
identity are stickier).
STUDY 3: DUELING IDENTITIES
Counteridentification. In the second analysis, we exam-
ined the identity-counter identity conditions to test the Study 2 provides evidence that counterfactual reasoning
effectiveness of counteridentification at neutralizing an ini-may be insufficient to neutralize the effects of initia
tial identity-based judgment. (Recall that competing predic-identity-driven thinking on judgment. It also provides som
tions are possible.) As before, we conducted MANCOVAs evidence that counteridentification may be ineffective as
on dependent variables using a full model that includes the corrective procedure, particularly for personal judgments
identity strength covariate, order of reasoning, and theirAlthough Shih, Pittinsky, and Ambady (1999) speculat
interaction. Again, the appropriate test of the hypothesis is a
relative test of the magnitude of the coefficients of the iden- 9A similar pattern of results occurs when both identity strength covari
tity strength covariate within order of reasoning (i.e., the ates are included in the analyses.
significance of the two-way interaction term in the full loThis pattern of results for personal versus other judgments is consis-
tent with that of prior literature, which suggests that indirect judgments
model).
others are more sensitive measures than are personal opinions (Duck
We present the results for the various judgment measures Hogg, and Terry 1999; Fisher 1993) and therefore that they can be changed
(personal opinions, others' opinions) in Table 2. For per- more easily through corrective procedures such as counteridentification.
Table 2
POLLUTION CREDIT JUDGMENTS AS A FUNCTION OF IDENTITY STRENGTH (STUDY 2)
Prediction of Others' Opinions

Personal Opinion Items Environmentalist-
Type of Order of Good Classmates' Businessperson
Reasoning Reasoning N Like Idea Support Opinion Items Opinion Gap
Identity-counter reasons Pro-con 37 .76a .39 .48 -.03 4.43 .16
(.26) (.27) (.27) (.23) (3.72) (.52)
Identity-counter reasons Con-pro 34 -.03 -.15 -.06 -.03 .19 -.25
(.22) (.23) (.23) (.19) (3.15) (.44)
Reasons-counter reasons Pro-con 35 -.22 -.27 -.16 -.25 -5.37 .01
(.22) (.23) (.23) (.20) (3.17) (.44)
Reasons-counter reasons Con-pro 35 .15b -.06b .07b .24 2.29 .31
(.22) (.23) (.22) (.19) (3.09) (.43)
Identity-counter identity Pro-con 35 .94b .62b .77b -.09 .36 -.44
(.24) (.27) (.27) (.25) (3.79) (.44)
Identity-counter identity Con-pro 34 -.44 -.32 -.60 -.11 -.75 -.54
(.24) (.23) (.23) (.22) (3.32) (.38)
aTabular data report the coefficient (and standard error) of the identity strength covariate nested in type and order of reasoning.
bData missing from one respondent.
about the interaction among identities yourin conflict,

teenage to our
children to understand. In other words, we
would like you to adopt
knowledge, prior research has not empirically the perspective of a parent and
investigated
tell us identities
the impact of multiple salient conflicting about your values on
and views
judg-as a parent today.
What comes to mind when you are asked to consider
ment. Identities duel only when they lead to conflicting
your thoughts and feelings and play the role of a
judgments (Wilson, Lindsey, and Schooler 2000). In Study
parent?
3, we use multiple target judgments to examine the role of
diagnosticity; that is, we expect The
that identification
teen perspective and
was manipulated as follows:
counteridentification affect personal judgment when identi-
Please take a moment to consider yourself as a
ties are associated with differentially valenced judgments
teenager. Imagine that you are a teenager today sitting
about the target. In previous studies, around
we the selected identity-
dining room table with your parents. You
diagnostic targets only; here, diagnosticity
are having varies
a conversationacross
about varioustar-
issues of the
get judgments on a within-subjects basis.
day-things that matter to you as a teenager and that
We pursue this investigation in a field study
you want your parentsof parents
to understand. In other words,
we would like attitudes
and teenagers. Conflict in intergenerational you to adopt the perspective
is a of a
teenager and tell usattempts
staple of the popular media, and our research about your values andtoviews as a
shed light on how identification and counteridentificationyou are
teenager today. What comes to mind when
asked to consider your thoughts and feelings and play
exacerbate or reduce this conflict. Study 3 also enables us to
the role of a teenager?
test support for the findings of Study 2 in a field study that
varies the population sample, identities, For both sets and targetparticipants
of instructions, judg- were asked to
ments used. In addition, Study 3 loosens experimental
write down their thoughts or feelings incon-
a series of text
trol over the amount and valence of boxesthought
as they considered and eachthereby
perspective for approxi-
provides a less conservative but potentially mately three minutes. more ecologi-
cally valid test of counteridentification as a corrective
After the thought-listing task, participants expressed their
procedure. personal opinion toward the ten issues on seven-point scales
anchored by "strongly against/strongly in favor." Participants
Method
also responded to six items that measured their strength of
Participants and design. We used two participant samples identification with parent and teen identities: "I identify
for Study 3. The first sample consisted of high school stu- strongly with being a parent/teen," "Being a parent/teen is an
dents who participated in the exercise as part of a class important part of who I am," and "I found it difficult to play
requirement. The second sample was a group of adult com- the role of a parent/teen" (reverse-coded). For the ten opinion
munity residents who participated in the exercise in return items, participants were asked to indicate the opinions of a
for a donation to a local community organization. Partici- typical parent and teenager toward the issues. Finally, partic-
pants from each sample were randomly assigned to one of ipants responded to some background information queries.
two cells in a 2 (order of reasoning) between-subjects Results and Discussion
design. A total of 211 participants provided usable data on
all variables (74 parents, 110 teenagers, and 27 For the analyses, we standardized the averages of the
unclassified). three-item parent (coefficient a = .71) and teen (coefficient
Materials and procedure. The experimental materials a = .73) identity scales (M = 0, s.d. = 1) and used them as
were contained in a booklet distributed to participants. The continuous covariates. In addition, we analyzed sample esti-
cover story instructed participants as follows: mates of parent and teen opinions toward the various opin-
ion items to identify items for which parent-teen differ-
We are interested in learning more about your attitudes ences were large (i.e., the identities are diagnostic and lead
and opinions toward a number of issues of the day,
to differential judgments) and small (i.e., the identities are
including Internet censorship, wildlife conservation,
not diagnostic and/or do not lead to differential judgments).
legalization of marijuana, campaign finance reform,
mandatory school uniforms, legislation to reduce Table 3 contains a description of the items and the parent-
global warming, raising the drinking age, safe sex edu-
Table 3
cation in the classroom, universal health care, and gun
control. On the next few pages, you will be asked to DIFFERENCE SCORES (PARENT MINUS TEEN RATINGS)
share your views on these and other issues. First you (STUDY 3)
will be asked to consider some different viewpoints or
perspectives in society. (Doing so helps us compare Mean
your opinions to the views that others hold, and also Opinion Item (Standard Deviation)
allows us to understand how people consider other per-
Internet censorship 2.94 (2.61)a
spectives on issues.) Afterwards, we will ask you for Wildlife conservation .36 (1.85)b
your opinions on several issues. Legalization of marijuana (reverse-coded) 2.67 (2.71)a
Campaign finance reform 1.27 (2.03)
Participants then were asked to adopt parent and teen per- 2.98 (2.42)a
Mandatory school uniforms
spectives. We manipulated order. The parent perspective Legislation to reduce global warming .43 (1.79)b
was manipulated as follows: Raising the drinking age 2.44 (3.37)a
Safe sex education in the classroom .24 (2.15)b
Please take a moment to consider yourself as a parent. Universal health care .92 (1.78)
Imagine that you are a parent today sitting around the Gun control .83 (1.93)
dining room table with your teenage children. You are
aIdentity-diagnostic items; difference scores are large.
having a conversation about various issues of the day-
bBaseline items; difference scores are small.
things that matter to you as a parent and that you want
teen differences.11thatForadopting each

an alternative participant,
identity appears to be relatively
ineffective in both
average personal opinion a relatively controlled
score for laboratoryidenti experi-
ion items (Internet ment and a more ecologically validmandator
censorship, field study of personal
judgments.
raising the drinking age, Counteridentification
legalization is not always availableof as
we coded such that a nonanalytic
higher corrective opinion
technique, such as when alternative
score
views. Similarly, weidentities created an averag
that counter an identity-based judgment do not
exist, are not important
score for baseline items (wildlifeto the self-concept, are nondiagnos-
conser
tic, or are suppressed and
to reduce global warming, do not come
safe sexto mind educ
in the judg-
ment task.
identity-driven judgment effects for the
latter, which serve In as Studycontrols to rule
4, we examine the effectiveness ou
of an alternative
ple order effects onnonanalytic
judgment.corrective procedure that is traditionally used t
We conducted ANCOVAs of social
facilitate persuasion, namely, the avera
influence. If identity
represents
ion difference scores an internalized
(i.e., source of social influence, how
identity-diagn
does it of
items) as a function interact with external sources of influence?
parent andPrior teen
and order of reasoning, as
psychological research well
suggests that socialas all
influence affectshig
tions, for each personal opinion both
sample. In when the majority
the serves as the
parent
reveal a marginal effect source of influence of pressure and when the (F(1,
order person is 6
qualified by an interaction exposed to minority influences
with (Moscovici 1980).
parent However,
(F(1, 66) = 3.89, presults < of.05); teen
prior research on identit
identity and social influence are
effect (F < 1). Parent mixed identity
and not well understood (Flemming
strength and Petty 1999). le
opinions in the parent-teen People may be particularly susceptibleversus
to social influence t
(respective coefficients: from others who share 1.56 [.48]
group membership and
(Wilder 1990);
suggests that counteridentification however, out-group members also might be more is mo
influential
precedes rather than (Whitefollows
and Harkins 1994). primary ide
ing. In the teen sample, the
In Study 4, we focus on the interaction
case of shared group mem-
identity strength is bershipdirectional
and investigate whether strength of (F(1, 102
identity moder-
parent identity strength ates susceptibility tohas
social influence.
noForeffect example, would a (F
strength leads to directionally more
student's university identification affect nega
his or her accept-
teen-parent versus parent-teen order (respective ance of social influence from other college students who
coefficients: -.48 [.35] and .51 [.32]), which again suggests express positive/negative opinions toward a university-
that counteridentification is more effective when it precedes endorsed product? We propose that, ceteris paribus, partici-
rather than follows primary identity-driven thinking. pants who identify strongly with a particular social category
Overall, this pattern of results suggests that initial are less susceptible to subsequent social influence from oth-
identity-driven thinking is difficult to neutralize with subse- ers who share group membership. This prediction is consis-
quent counteridentification. In terms of dueling identities, tent with the results from our previous studies that demon-
the preponderance of evidence from Studies 2 and 3 sug- strate the perseverance of identity-driven judgment. We
gests that "fighting fire with fire" does not work. However, have argued that identity-based judgments are held with
initially adopting an alternative identity provides some pro- greater confidence because social referents who share the
tection against subsequent identity-driven thinking. Thus, identity agree with the judgment. However, what if partici-
counteridentification may be a useful inoculation technique, pants are confronted with social referents who hold con-
consistent with the results of Study 1. In summary, the flicting judgments? We propose that such social influence is
results of the present field study, which varies the popula- less effective when identity is strong because participants
tion sample, identities, and target judgments, provide sup- reject or discount inputs that are inconsistent with their
port for the perseverance of identity-based judgments identity schema as a threat to the coherence of their self-
against subsequent counteridentification as a corrective concept (Conover 1988; Markus 1977). Prior research also
tool. suggests that attitudes that serve an ego-defensive function
resist change (Eagly and Chaiken 1993). Identity may be
STUDY 4: IDENTITY AND SOCIAL INFLUENCE
reinforced by evidence of attitudinal consensus from in-
In Studies 1 and 2, we primarily examine the effective-
group members, whereas a lack of consensus may threaten
ness of analytic thinking, including feature-based analysis
identity (Markus and Kunda 1986). For participants who do
and counterfactual reasoning, at neutralizing identity effects
not have a strong identity, social influence is neither consis-
on judgment. The findings suggest that identity-basedtent nor inconsistent with the identity schema and is
judg-
accepted
ments persevere; that is, identity-driven priors are sticky. In more or less at face value. Accordingly, we
Studies 2 and 3, we also examine dueling identities that
hypothesize the following:
conflict with respect to a judgment. In this case, we find
H3: Identity strength moderates the effect of social influence on
judgment.
1 As we expected, parents are perceived as being much more favorable
than teens toward Internet censorship, mandatory school uniforms, As
andsupport
the for this hypothesis, we expect that strong identi-
raising of the drinking age and much less favorable than teens fication
toward reduces a person's susceptibility to social influence
legalization of marijuana. In contrast, parents and teens are viewed as hold-
that is inconsistent with his or her identity. Such evidence
ing relatively similar opinions about wildlife conservation, legislation to
reduce global warming, and safe sex education in the classroom. would argue against the effectiveness of social influence as
Parents
and teens differ moderately on the remaining items, which we omitted a corrective tool to neutralize prior identity effects on
from further analyses. judgment.
Method The moderator then announced that the discussion time
Participants and design. Participants were undergraduate

was up and thanked participants. Participants then com-
pleted an online private questionnaire about their experi-
students who participated for extra credit in an introductory
ence in the discussion group (i.e., participants' ratings were
marketing class. Each participant was randomly assigned to
one of two cells in a 2 (social influence: positive versus not visible to the other focus group members). After
responding to questions about the group interaction, partici-
negative) between-subjects design. A total of 119 partici-
pants reported their personal opinions of the product on
pants completed the tasks.
seven-point disagree/agree scales ("I really like the photo
Materials and procedure. The first experimental task
frame" and "I would definitely buy the photo frame"). Par-
directed participants to a Web site and asked them to com-
ticipants also were asked to predict others' opinions of the
plete a self-perception questionnaire. This questionnaire
product ("I think the photo frame could be a very successful
contained a scale that measured degree of identification
product").
with X university, followed by two other filler scales.12 The
In a subsequent analytic reasoning task in the experimen-
identity scale consisted of 12 seven-point agree/disagree
tal session, participants again were shown the description of
items (e.g., "Being an X student is an important part of who
I am"). the photo frame and asked to complete a pencil-and-paper
feature analysis as follows:
In the second ostensibly unrelated experimental task, par-
ticipants engaged in an online focus group discussion about You've already shared your views regarding this prod-
a target product. Participants first completed a prescreening uct, but some people find it helpful to consider the
questionnaire that requested basic demographic information product feature by feature. Please write down each of
(e.g., age, gender) and then were assigned to a group for the features of the photo frame that you believe are
online discussion purposes. Unbeknownst to the partici- important. Then evaluate each feature. For example,
will the feature be attractive or unattractive? Why? Pro-
pants, the group discussion involved an automated modera-
vide an analysis of the photo frame, feature-by-feature,
tor and three automated confederates. Discussion appeared
in the space below.
in windows on-screen in real time (i.e., as it was ostensibly
typed by each participant in turn), with the participant Participants then predicted the success of the product and
assigned to the last speaker order. A picture and description provided their overall opinion on four seven-point scales
of the target product, an electronic photo frame with an X anchored as follows: "really dislike/really like," "would not
university seal, also appeared in a window on-screen buy or recommend/would definitely buy or recommend," "a
throughout the discussion. very bad idea/a very good idea," and "unlikely to succeed/
After a round of introductions, the moderator asked for likely to succeed." Finally, participants responded to several
participants' initial ratings of the product on a scale of 1 background and diagnostic questions.
("really dislike") to 10 ("really like"). When social influ-
Results and Discussion
ence was positive, confederates rated the product as 9, 8,
and 10; when social influence was negative, confederates Manipulation check. As we expected and consistent with
rated the product as 2, 3, and 1. Participants then responded compliance induced by normative pressure, online public
with their own online public rating of the target product judgment is higher under positive versus negative social
(i.e., participants' ratings were visible to the other focus influence (5.12 [2.37] and 2.98 [1.84], respectively,
group members). F(1, 113) = 27.34, p < .01).13 Thus, the manipulation of the
The moderator then asked group members why they gave valence of social influence is effective.
the rating they did. Confederates provided identity-driven H3 predicts that identity strength will moderate the effect
reasoning to support their positive versus negative initial of social influence on judgment. Specifically, we expect
rating. Participants' responses followed. The moderator that strong identification reduces susceptibility to social
then asked group members why they would buy the product influence that is inconsistent with the identity. To test this
or not. Again, each confederate responded positively or neg- prediction, we standardized the average of the 12-item iden-
atively and provided an identity-based explanation to sup- tity scale (coefficient a = .91) (M = 0, s.d. = 1) and used it
port his or her position. The explanation was similar for as a continuous covariate that represented the strength of
positive versus negative social influence; only the valence identification with X university. We conducted MANCO-
differed. For example, the first confederate's comments for VAs on dependent variables using a full model that included
positive (negative) social influence ran as follows: the identity strength covariate, social influence valence, and
their interaction. The appropriate test of the hypothesis is a
Here's why I (don't) like it. When I first saw the prod-
relative test of the magnitude of the coefficients of the iden-
uct, I thought about my friends. Most of my friends are
into the university, sports, and other stuff. I'm like tity strength covariate within social influence valence (i.e.,
them, and I think they would love to have a picture the significance of the two-way interaction term in the
frame with the X seal on it. (But this isn't it.) model).
Initial private judgment after social influence. For the
For brevity, we omit further details of the group discussion
private online measures, MANCOVAs reveal a significant
program and confederates' comments (they may be effect of social influence valence (F(1, 113) = 11.66, p <
obtained from the authors).
.01), qualified by an interaction with strength of identity
13Participants were susceptible to social influence and reported public

12We omit the name of the university ("X") to preserve anonymity in the judgments that did not reflect their private opinions, which casts doubt on
review process. the usefulness of virtual focus group research.
(F(1, 113) = 3.47, p pressures

= .07). As the
to comply. Privately, pattern
however, strong identifiers
4 and Figure 3 indicates, identity
attempt to resist social influence that arises from groupstre
favorable judgments when
interaction. We social
argue that this result inf
arises because judg-
(rather than positive),
ment basedsuch that
on a strong identity strong
is embedded within an elab- i
orate schema
what less susceptible to and leads to a sticky
social prior that resists
influence
change.14
group interaction, in However, evidence forof
support identity-driven
H3.resistance
Private judgment after
is not apparent after a feature-based
subsequent feature-based analysis
experimental procedure, we
task, which indicates that identity subseque
effects will not persevere
feature-based analysis
in the face ofas an
multiple additional
corrective procedures. Ultimately, the c
to neutralize initialeffects
identity and
of social influence are evident social
regardless of identity in
judgment. A MANCOVA of
strength, which points private
to the judg
potential power of social influ-
feature-based analysis reveals
ence as a nonanalytic a main ef
corrective procedure.
ence (F(1, 110) = 17.21, p < .01); the inte
tity strength is GENERAL DISCUSSION but
directional no l
(F(1, 110) = 1.72, p Identity-Based = .19). Thus, social in
Judgment
to exert an influence on judgment, rega
strength. The purpose of this research was to examine the perse
In summary, people respond similarly in a public setting verance of identity-based judgments by exploring the eff
to valenced social influence, consistent with normative tiveness of corrective procedures intended to neutra
identity effects on judgment. Study 1 demonstrates tha
identity effects on judgment persevere despite subseque
Table 4
feature-based analysis. Study 2 provides preliminary ev
PHOTO FRAME JUDGMENTS AS A FUNCTION OF IDENTITY
dence that initial identity-based judgment may persever
STRENGTH (STUDY 4) despite subsequent counterfactual reasoning and lead to
stronger primacy effect than initial analytic reasoning (
Initial Private Judgment
Private Judgment
a stickier prior). Studies 2 and 3 also provide evidence th
Social (After Social Influence)
(After Analysis) initial identity-driven thinking perseveres despite counte
Influence N Like Buy Succeed (Average) identification; in other words, fighting fire with fire fai
Negative 54 .54a .40 .41 .14b Finally, Study 4 demonstrates some resistance of identi
(.22) (.22) (.16) driven judgment to social influence from others. Thus,
Positive 63 -.06 .11 -.25 -.16 find overall support for the proposition that judgment driv
(.23) (.22) (.16)
by a salient and strong identity will tend to perseve
namely,
aTabular data report the coefficient (and standard error) a procedural bias or sticky prior in favor of an
of the identity
strength covariate nested in social influence valence. tial identity-based judgment.
bData missing from three respondents. Our set of studies examines various identities (environ
mentalist, businessperson, parent, teen, university) and c
Figure 3 rective procedures (feature-based analysis, counterfactu
AVERAGE INITIAL PRIVATE JUDGMENT AS A FUNCTION OF reasoning, counteridentification, social influence), whic
IDENTITY STRENGTH AND SOCIAL INFLUENCE VALENCE we test across multiple target judgments (new produ
(STUDY 4)
social issues) and dependent variables (personal judgment
predictions for others), with some variation in the part
pant population (college students, teenagers, parent
7 Although the findings attest to the robust effects of ident
on judgment, the usual caveats to laboratory-based expe
6 mental work apply when the results are generalized to
real world. In addition, our quest for robustness necessita
5 a sacrifice in understanding the process, which represen
an area ripe for further research. Identity effects are lik
4
due to multiple processes, and we suggest three importa
characteristics of identity-schema-driven one-sidedn
3
2
14Consistent with the notion of identity-driven resistance, an explorat
analysis reveals that "pressure to agree with other people's opinion
1
driven by identity strength under negative rather than positive social in
Strong Identity Weak Identity ence (respective coefficients: .57 [.19] and .06 [.20]; F(1, 113) = 3.51,
.06). However, strong identifiers appear able to resist this pressure,
evidenced by their private judgments following social influence. We
Negative social influence pect that felt pressure leads strong identifiers to counterargue social in
ence from others. Identity strength undermines ratings for self-gener
Positive social influence
con reasons following negative rather than positive social influ
(respective coefficients: -.27 [.18] and .17 [.18]; F(1, 106) = 3.12, p =
This evidence from the feature-based analysis task suggests that anal
Notes: For illustrative purposes only, strong and weak identity are basedthought is susceptible to identity-driven effects, though not enough in
on a median split of the identity strength covariate. case to render the corrective procedure completely ineffective.
self-relevance, and social referencing-that likely con- may be insufficient t

reasoning, and counteridentification
overcome
tribute to the perseverance of identity identity effects on judgment. However, inocula
effects.
Corrective Procedures tion and social influence may offer some protection agains
competing brands that make identity appeals.
We speculate that successful procedures to neutralize
identity effects must counter one-sidedness, self-relevance, Consumer Welfare and Social Marketing
and social referencing. Across the corrective procedures we
examined in these studies, we find considerable evidence Just as identity-driven thinking may be a powerful sourc
of branding and loyalty, social marketing may be enhanced
that argues against the effectiveness of analytic techniques.
through identification, which may benefit consumer wel
In Studies 1 and 2, we find that feature-based analysis and
fare. For example, healthful eating may be driven by an ath
counterfactual reasoning are relatively ineffective at neu-
lete identity, civic behavior such as voting can be linked to
tralizing prior identity effects on judgment. However, Stud-
national identity, and so forth. Moreover, counteridentifica
ies 1 and 3 imply that such techniques may be useful to
tion and social influence may be useful in combating the
inoculate beforehand against identity-driven thinking. In
dark side of consumer behavior, such as addictive behavior
our view, the evidence for nonanalytic corrective proce-
dures indicates that counteridentification and social influ- linked to identity. For example, inoculation of younger ado
lescents against smoking may be a useful technique i
ence may be more promising avenues for further investiga-
antitobacco advertising can be constructed and delivered t
tion. Although counteridentification failed to neutralize
recipients before their considering smoking from the per
identity effects on personal judgments in Studies 2 and 3,
spective of a smoker identity (e.g., "As a smoker, I will b
some evidence in Study 2 implies that it may be effective on
popular and cool"). Provision of a counteridentity before-
judgments of others' opinions. Similarly, although strong
hand for thinking about smoking (e.g., a savvy teen con-
identifiers attempted to resist social influence inconsistent
sumer who distrusts tobacco companies, as in recent adver-
with their identity in Study 4, social influence (coupled with
tising by the Legacy Foundation) may be more effective a
feature-based analysis) ultimately proved more powerful.
neutralizing smoking behaviors than traditional campaign
Whereas analytic corrective procedures tend to focus only
that employ analytic reasoning (e.g., health risk messages
on countering the one-sidedness of identity-driven thinking,
used in antitobacco advertising).
nonanalytic corrective procedures that address one-
sidedness, self-relevance, and social referencing may prove
Managerial Decision Making
more effective at neutralizing identity effects on judgment.
Building on prior reviews of the debiasing literature (e.g., The role of identity in managerial judgment also merits
Arkes 1991; Wilson and Brekke 1994), we suggest that forattention. Managers who consider a business or public pol
the corrective procedure to be effective, it must match the icy issue from the perspective of a salient and strong iden
tity (e.g., businessperson, Republican) may find it difficult
source of the bias-in our case, the unique characteristics of
identity-driven thinking. Thus, more research is needed to to consider, anticipate, and respond to alternative perspec
better understand identity-driven judgment processes, their tives. Similarly, advocates of new technologies or social ini
tiatives, who may identify, for example, as engineers or
tendency to persevere, and the efficacy of various corrective
procedures. environmentalists, also may find it difficult to broaden the
MARKETING IMPLICATIONS AND FURTHER
perspectives. Such identity-driven thinking may lead t
biased perceptions and expectations of customers and com
RESEARCH
petitors, leading to overconfident predictions of market-
Branding and Identity-Based Marketing place success. Thus, the perseverance of identity-based
Although much product development and research judgment
is and the (in)efficacy of corrective procedures may
have
attribute based, consumers often are attracted to productsconsequences for managers as well as consumers.
and brands that are linked to their identity (Forehand and REFERENCES
Deshpande 2001; Stayman and Deshpande 1989). This link-
Aaker, Jennifer (1997), "Dimensions of Brand Personality," Jo
age may come about because the brand or product symbol-
nal of Marketing Research, 34 (August), 347-57.
izes the consumer's own personality traits (Aaker 1997) or
Alba, Joseph W., Susan M. Broniarczyk, Terence A. Shimp,
embodies the type of person that the consumer aspires to E. Urbany (1994), "The Influence of Prior Beliefs, F
Joel
become (Belk, Bahn, and Mayer 1982; Levy 1959). For
quency Cues and Magnitude Cues on Consumers' Percept
example, Harley-Davidson motorcycles are linked to
of an
Comparative Price Data," Journal of Consumer Research
outlaw or rebel identity, which is an aspirational identity for
(September), 219-35.
many of its customers. Our research suggests that brand and J. Wesley Hutchinson (1987), "Dimensions of Con-
preferences based on an important identity are especially sumer Expertise," Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (March),
411-54.
sticky. Successfully appealing to consumer identity as part
of product positioning becomes an important source Anderson,
of Craig A. and Elizabeth S. Sechler (1986), "Effects of
Explanation and Counterexplanation on the Development and
brand loyalty. If a brand can be connected to central aspects
Use of Social Theories," Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
of the self-concept (Oliver 1999), the consumer will view
chology, 50 (January), 24-34.
the brand as part of him- or herself (see Kleine, Kleine, andHal R. (1991), "Costs and Benefits of Judgment Errors:
Arkes,
Allen 1995), that is, an extension of the self (Belk 1988).
Implications for Debiasing," Psychological Bulletin, 110 (3),
Moreover, an identity basis for brand loyalty may be resist-
486-98.
Belk, Russell W. (1988), "Possessions and the Extended Self,"
ant to change. As our research attests, counterpersuasion
techniques based on feature-based analysis, counterfactualJournal of Consumer Research, 15 (3), 139-68.
, Kenneth D. Bahn, and Robert N. Mayer (1982), "Devel- Kihlstrom, John F. and Stanley B. Klein (1994), "The Self as a
opmental Recognition of Consumption Symbolism," Journal of Knowledge Structure," in Handbook of Social Cognition,
Consumer Research, 9 (1), 4-17. Robert S. Wyer Jr. and Thomas K. Srull, eds. Hillsdale, NJ:
Bem, Sandra L. (1981), "Gender Schema Theory: A Cognitive Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 153-208.
Account of Sex Typing," Psychological Review, 88 (4), 354-64. Kleine, Susan Schultz, Robert E. Kleine III, and Chris T. Allen
Bolton, Lisa E. (2003), "Stickier Priors: The Effects of (1995), "How Is a Possession 'Me' or Not Me'? Characterizing
Nonanalytic Versus Analytic Thinking in New Product Forecast- Types and an Antecedent of Material Possession Attachment,"
ing," Journal of Marketing Research, 40 (February), 65-79. Journal of Consumer Research, 3 (December), 327-43.
BusinessWeek (2002), "Hybrid Cars: Less Fuel But More Costs," Koehler, Derek J. (1994), "Hypothesis Generation and Confidence
(April 15), 107. in Judgment," Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Cheryan, Sapna and Galen V. Bodenhausen (2000), "When Posi- Memory, and Cognition, 20 (March), 461-69.
tive Stereotypes Threaten Intellectual Performance: The Psy- LeBoeuf, Robyn A. and Eldar Sharif (2003), "Alternating Selves
chological Hazards of 'Model Minority' Status," Psychologicaland Conflicting Choices: Identity Salience and Preference
Science, 11 (September), 399-402. Inconsistency," working paper, University of Florida.
Cohen, Joel B. and Americus Reed II (2001), "Dual Attitudes: Levy, Sidney J. (1959), "Symbols for Sales," Harvard Business
Object-Centered vs. Person-Centered Bases for Evaluation in Review,
a 37 (4), 117-24.
Model of Attitude Generation and Recruitment," working paper, Lord, Charles G., Mark R. Lepper, and Elizabeth Preston (1984),
The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. "Considering the Opposite: A Corrective Strategy for Social
Conover, Pamela (1988), "Feminists and the Gender Gap," Jour- Judgment," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47
nal of Politics, 50 (4), 985-1010. (6), 1231-43.
Crowley, Ayn E. and Wayne D., Hoyer (1994), "An Integrative MacGregor, Donald G., Sarah Lichtenstein, and Paul Slovic
Framework for Understanding Two-Sided Persuasion," Journal (1988), "Structuring Knowledge Retrieval: An Analysis of
of Consumer Research, 20 (March), 561-74. Decomposed Quantitative Judgments," Organizational Behav-
Deaux, Kay, Anne Reid, Kim Mizrahi, and Kathleen Ethierior and Human Decision Processes, 42 (3), 303-23.
(1995), "Parameters of Social Identity," Journal of Personality
Markus Hazel, (1977), "Self-Schemata and Processing Informa-
and Social Psychology, 68 (2), 280-91. tion About the Self," Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
Deshpande, Rohit and Douglas M. Stayman (1994), "A Tale of ogy, 35 (2), 63-78.
Two Cities: Distinctiveness Theory and Advertising Effective- and and Ziva Kunda (1986), "Stability and Malleability in the
ness," Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (February), 57-64. Self-Concept in the Perception of Others," Journal of Personal-
Duck, Julie M., Michael A. Hogg, and Deborah J. Terry (1999), ity and Social Psychology, 51 (4), 858-66.
"Social Identity and Perceptions of Media Persuasion: Are We , Jeanne Smith, and Richard L. Moreland (1985), "Role
Always Less Influenced than Others?" Journal of Appliedof the Self-Concept in the Perception of Others," Journal of
Social Psychology, 29 (9), 1879-99. Personality and Social Psychology, 49 (December),
Eagly, Alice H. and Shelly Chaiken (1993), "Resistance and Per- 1494-1512.
sistence Processes in Attitude Change," in The PsychologyMcGuire, of William J. (1961), "A Multi-Process Model for Paired-
Attitudes. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Pub- Associate Learning," Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62
lishers, 559-625. (4), 335-47.
Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen (1975), Belief Attitude, Intention, Meyers-Levy,
and Joan (1988), "The Influence of Sex Roles on Judg-
Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading,ment," Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (4), 522-30.
MA: Addison-Wesley. and Brian Sternthal (1991), "Gender Differences in the
Fisher, Robert J. (1993), "Social Desirability Bias and the Validity Use of Message Cues and Judgments," Journal of Marketing
of Indirect Questioning," Journal of Consumer Research, 20Research, 28 (February), 84-96.
(September), 303-315. Millar, Murray G. and Abraham Tesser (1986), "Thought-Induced
Flemming, Monique A. and Richard E. Petty (1999), "Identity and Attitude Change: The Effects of Schema Structure and Commit-
Persuasion: An Elaboration Likelihood Approach," in Attitudes, ment," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51
Behavior and Social Context: The Role of Norms and Group (August), 259-69.
Membership, D.J. Terry and M.A. Hogg, eds. Mahwah, NJ: Moscovici, Serge (1980), "Toward a Theory of Conversion
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 171-99. Behavior," in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
Forehand, Mark R. and Rohit Deshpande (2001), "What We See Vol. 13, L. Berkowitz, ed. New York: Academic Press,
Makes Us Who We Are: Priming Ethnic Self-Awareness and 209-239.
Advertising Response," Journal of Marketing Research, 38 The New York Times (2003), "Both Sides Confident as Senate
(August), 336-48. Nears Vote on Alaska Drilling," (March 14), A18.
Grier, Sonya A. and Rohit Deshpande (2001), "Social Dimensions Newman, Leonard S., Kimberly Duff, Nicole Schnopp-Wyatt,
of Consumer Distinctiveness: The Influence of Group Social Bradley Brock, and Yonit Hoffman (1997), "Reactions to the
Status and Identity on Advertising Persuasion," Journal of Mar- O.J. Simpson Verdict: 'Mindless Tribalism' or Motivated Infer-
keting Research, 38 (May), 216-24. ence Processes?" Journal of Social Issues, 53 (3), 547-62.
Haugtvedt, Curtis P. and Duane T. Wegener (1994), "Message Niedenthal, Paula M., Nancy Cantor, and John F. Kihlstrom
Order Effects in Persuasion: An Attitude Strength Perspective," (1985), "Prototype Matching: A Strategy for Social Decision
Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (June), 205-218. Making," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48
Hirt, Edward R. and Keith D. Markman (1995), "Multiple Expla- (March), 575-84.
nation: A Consider-an-Alternative Strategy for Debiasing Judg- Oliver, Richard L. (1999), "Whence Consumer Loyalty?" Journal
ments," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69 of Marketing, 63 (Special Issue), 33-44.
(December), 1069-86. Park, C. Whan and Daniel C. Smith (1989), "Product Level
Hoch, Stephen J. (1984), "Availability and Interference in Predic- Choice: A Top-Down or Bottom-Up Process?" Journal of Con-
tive Judgment," Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, sumer Research, 16 (3), 289-99.
Memory, and Cognition, 10 (October), 649-62. Reed, Americus, II (2004), "Activating the Self-Importance of
and John Deighton (1989), "Managing What Consumers Consumer Selves: Exploring Identity Salience Effects on Judg-
Learn from Experience," Journal of Marketing, 53 (April), 1-20. ments," Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (6), forthcoming.
Shih, Margaret, Todd L. Pittinsky, and White,Nalini Ambady

Paul H. and Stephen G. (1999),
Harkins (1994), "Race of Source
"Stereotype Susceptibility: Identity Effects Salience and Shifts
in the Elaboration in Model," Journal of Per-
Likelihood
Quantitative Performance," Psychological sonality and Science, 10 67
Social Psychology, (1),
(November), 790-807.
80-83. Wilder, David A. (1990), "Some Determinants of the Persuasive
Sloman, Steven A. (1996), "The Empirical Case for Two Systems Power of In-Groups and Out-Groups: Organization of Informa-
of Reasoning," Psychological Bulletin, 119 (1), 3-22. tion and Attribution of Independence," Journal of Personality
Stayman, Douglas M. and Rohit Deshpand6 (1989), "Situationaland Social Psychology, 59 (December), 1202-13.
Ethnicity and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Consumer Wilson, Timothy D. and Nancy Brekke (1994), "Mental Contamina-
Research, 16 (December), 361-71. tion and Mental Correction: Unwanted Influences on Judgments
Stryker, Sheldon (1980), Symbolic Interactionism. Menlo Park, and Evaluations," Psychological Bulletin, 116 (July), 117-42.
CA: Benjamin/ Cummings. , Samuel Lindsey, and Tonya Y. Schooler (2000), "A Model
of Dual Attitudes," Psychological Review, 107 (1), 101-126.
Tajfel, Henri and John C. Turner (1979), "An Integrative Theory of
Intergroup Conflict," in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Wooten, David B. (1995), "One-of-a-Kind in a Full House: Some
Relations, W.G. Austin and S. Worchel, eds. Monterey, CA: Consequences of Ethnic and Gender Distinctiveness," Journal
Brooks-Cole, 33-47. of Consumer Psychology, 4 (3), 205-24.

Sticky Priors - The Perseverance of Identity Effects On Judgment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sticky Priors - The Perseverance of Identity Effects On Judgment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sticky Priors: The Perseverance of Identity Effects on Judgment

Author(s): Lisa E. Bolton and Americus Reed II

This research examines the perseverance of identity-based judgments

Sticky Priors: The Perseverance of Identity

Journal of Marketing Research

concept) also affects judgment. Prior research

Counterfactual thinking. A traditional approach to encourage analytic

The E-Book can be assessed in a variety

Identity-analysis 19 10.0 (6.8)a .49 (.32) .51 (.22)b

Figure 2 Counterfactual reasoning is based on a traditional

of alternatives may be sufficient to In thedebias judgment.

all higher-order sonal opinions, MANCOVAs reveal a significant

Prediction of Others' Opinions

about the interaction among identities yourin conflict,

teen differences.11thatForadopting each

Method The moderator then announced that the discussion time

Participants and design. Participants were undergraduate

13Participants were susceptible to social influence and reported public

(F(1, 113) = 3.47, p pressures

self-relevance, and social referencing-that likely con- may be insufficient t

Shih, Margaret, Todd L. Pittinsky, and White,Nalini Ambady

You might also like