Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

1965, Vol. 1, No. 2, 173-177

OPINION CHANGE AS A FUNCTION OF THE COMMUNICATOR'S

ATTRACTIVENESS AND DESIRE TO INFLUENCE1
JUDSON MILLS AND ELLIOT ARONSON
Syracuse University University of Minnesota

A recent experiment (Walster & Festinger, 1962) supports Hovland, Janis, and
Kelley's (1953) suggestion that a "desire to influence" on the part of a com-
municator will decrease his effectiveness by making him appear relatively
untrustworthy. In the present paper we suggest that this result may be limited
to a covert rather than an overt expression of intent to influence. Our major
hypothesis was that an overt, frankly stated desire to influence would actually
enhance the effectiveness of an attractive communicator. The results confirmed
this hypothesis: When the communicator was attractive he was more effective
if he announced his intention to persuade; when the communicator was
unattractive his stated intention to persuade had no apparent influence on his
effectiveness.

If the members of an audience think that a contention that, under certain conditions, a
communicator wants to change their opinions, frankly stated desire to influence may actually
how will this affect their actual opinion change? enhance the effectiveness of a communicator.
Hovland, Janis, and Kelley (1953) have sug- Suppose the communicator were a very at-
gested that the influence of the communicator tractive person—a person whom the members
will be reduced because he will be regarded as of an audience would like very much to please.
untrustworthy. They state "when a person is It seems reasonable to suggest that such a person
perceived as having a definite intention to per- would be more effective if he expressed a desire
suade others, the likelihood is increased that he to influence. If people think that someone whom
will be perceived as having something to gain they like very much wants them to do something,
and hence, as less worthy of trust [p. 23]." they may be motivated to do it, even if the
This suggestion was verified in a recent experi- admired person might never know about it. Thus,
ment by Walster and Festinger (1962) who a very attractive source may be more effective
showed that a communication was more effective in changing opinions if he openly and honestly
if the members of the audience felt that the informs the audience that he wants to change
communicator was unaware of their presence. their opinions.
Walster and Festinger concluded that, in the What if the communicator is unattractive? If
aware condition, the speaker was less effective the audience does not like the communicator,
because he was seen as intending to exert influ- they will not be prone to please him by allowing
ence and therefore, may have aroused suspicions their opinions to be changed according to his
of possible ulterior motives. desire. Thus, a stated desire to influence will not
Although this interpretation is reasonable, one increase the effectiveness of such a communicator.
must exercise caution in generalizing from it. In fact, if anything, an unattractive communi-
Specifically, it should be pointed out that in cator may lead the audience toward active dis-
the Walster-Festinger experiment any perceived affiliation; hence, a stated desire to influence, in
desire to influence was indirect. The reduced this case, might actually decrease the effectiveness
effect on opinion change may not have been due of the communication.
to a "desire to influence" alone but, rather, due
to an inference drawn by the audience that the EXPERIMENT I
speaker, because of a covert desire to influence, Method
may have been overstating his position in a The essential features of the design were as fol-
biased and somewhat dishonest fashion. Thus, the lows: Opinions of male subjects were measured
audience may have resisted because of a reluc- before and after they received a communication from
tance to be "conned" or "taken in." It is our a female communicator. Identical communications
were presented by the same communicator under
1
This study was supported by Grant M4860(A) four different conditions: attractive persuade, at-
from the National Institute of Mental Health, United tractive nonpersuade, unattractive persuade, and
States Public Health Service. Abraham Ross deserves unattractive nonpersuade. In the attractive conditions
thanks for his assistance in conducting Experiment I. the female communicator was made up to look
173
174 BRIEF ARTICLES
physically attractive. In the unattractive conditions
she was made up to look physically unattractive.
In the persuade conditions the communicator volun-
teered to give the communication and stated before-
hand that she would very much like to influence
the views of others. In the nonpersuade conditions
she did not volunteer and stated that she was not
at all interested in influencing the views of others.
The subjects were male students in introductory
psychology. They were required to participate in
the experiment as part of their regular course work.
The subjects were randomly assigned to the four
experimental conditions. They were run in groups,
20-30 subjects in each group. A few women students
from the same class were also scheduled at each
session so that the female confederate would not
appear conspicuous. The experiment was run on 2
successive days, two groups on each day.
More than 2 months prior to the experimental
sessions the subjects answered a disguised preques-
tionnaire. This questionnaire was administered during
their regular class period and consisted of 42 Likert-
type items dealing with 10 different issues of rele-
vance to college students. There were 7 alternatives
for each item ranging from strongly agree to strongly
disagree. Five of the items were concerned with the
issue of general versus specialized education, for
example, "Every college student should receive a
broad general education." "Students should not be
forced to take courses to make them well rounded."
When the subjects arrived at the experimental
session, the experimenter explained that he was
conducting a study to find out how students feel
about the issue of general versus specialized educa-
tion. He said that he was going to have them answer
a questionnaire on this topic and went on to explain
that the results of the questionnaire were much more
valid if respondents were allowed to think about
the questions beforehand. He told them that in
order to familiarize everyone with the questions he
was going to have one person in the group give his
answers to the questionnaire aloud, in front of
everyone, before distributing it.
In the persuade conditions the experimenter asked
for a volunteer to answer the questionnaire aloud.
The female confederate volunteered and was chosen
by the experimenter. In the nonpersuade conditions
the experimenter said he had had great difficulty in
getting volunteers in the past, and so he was going
to pick someone himself. He then chose the confeder-
ate, who always sat near the front of the room.
She appeared very reluctant to participate but finally
agreed to do so.
In the attractive conditions the confederate was
made up to look extremely attractive. She wore
chic, tight-fitting clothing; her hair was modishly
coiffured; she wore becoming makeup. In the un-
attractive condition the same confederate was made
up to look repulsive. She wore loose, ugly, ill-fitting
clothing; her hair was messy; her makeup was con-
spicuously absent; the trace of a mustache was
etched on her upper lip; her complexion was oily
and unwholesome looking.
When the confederate responded to the question-
naire in front of the group, she gave previously
prepared answers. In all conditions she made identical
responses to the first four questions which dealt
with interest in the issue, amount of thought about
the issue, desire to get more information about it,
and desire to know the views of others. For the fifth
question, "How much would you like to influence
the views of others on this issue?" her responses
varied in accord with the different conditions. In
the persuade conditions she answered "very much,"
the most positive of the five alternatives. In the
nonpersuade conditions she answered "not at all,"
the least positive of the alternatives.
The remainder of the questionnaire consisted of
10 items concerning general education—the S items
that were given in the prequestionnaire and 5 new
items similar in content. In addition to indicating
her degree of agreement with each item on the
7-point scale, the confederate was also asked to state
her reasons in a few sentences. In all conditions she
gave extremely pro-general-education responses to
each item and made identical remarks about her
reasons.
After the confederate had given her answers, the
questionnaires were administered to the subjects.
When they were completed, the experimenter told the
subjects that since the questionnaire did not take
the full hour, the remaining time was to be devoted
to another study. He then introduced a second
experimenter and left the room.
The second experimenter explained that he was
interested in finding out how much people agree
in their ratings of someone after they had just
seen him briefly. He asked the subjects to rate the
experimenter who had left, and informed them that
their rating would be kept confidential. He dis-
tributed forms on which were listed 28 different
personality characteristics. The subjects indicated
how well each characteristic applied to the person
rated by circling a number on a scale from 0
(extremely inappropriate) to 20 (extremely appro-
priate). The purpose of having the subjects rate
the first experimenter was to provide a plausible
context in which they could be asked to rate the
female confederate. When they had finished rating
the first experimenter, the second experimenter went
over to the confederate and told her she could leave.
He then told the subjects that he would also like to
find out how much people agreed in their ratings
of a female and asked them to rate the confederate
on a similar rating form.
After the subjects had completed their ratings
of the female confederate, the experimenter asked
them to turn over their papers and describe their
reactions to the experiment in a few sentences.
Those subjects whose comments indicated suspicion
of the procedure were eliminated before the results
were analyzed. In all, 12 subjects were eliminated,
no more than 4 from any one experimental condition.
Finally, before dismissing the subjects, the experi-
menter cautioned them not to discuss the experiment
with other students. He explained that if they did,
future results would be biased.
Results
Before presenting the data on opinion change,
it is appropriate to consider the evidence con-
 BRIEF ARTICLES
TABLE 1
MEANS POR THE MEASURES or FAVOSABILITY TO GENERAL EDUCATION
Experiment I
Condition
N Prequestionnaire* Postquestlonnaireb
Attractive persuade 24 24.3
Attractive nonpersuade 18 23.8
Unattractive persuade 26 23.8
Unattractive nonpersuade 29 23.8
Note.—-The higher the score, the more favorable to general education.
» Based on 5 items, 7 alternatives per item.
•> Based on 10 times, 7 alternatives per item.
0
Based on 10 items, 9 alternatives per item.
cerning the success of the experimental manipu-
lation of the perception of the communicator.
The subjects' ratings of the confederate's charac-
teristics provide strong evidence that she was
perceived as more attractive in the attractive
conditions than in the unattractive conditions.
The mean rating for the characteristic attractive
was 18.2 for the two attractive conditions com-
bined; it was 13.2 for the two unattractive condi-
tions combined. The difference is sizable and is
significant beyond the .001 level.2 The ratings
for charming, fashionable, neat, and romantic
were also significantly greater (p < .001) in the
attractive conditions than in the unattractive
conditions. In the only other significant differ-
ences between attractive and unattractive condi-
tions, the confederate was rated more affectionate
(p < .01) and more superficial (p < .05) in the
attractive conditions.
The evidence concerning the effectiveness of
the manipulation of the perception of the source's
desire to influence is much less direct. The con-
federate was rated as significantly less timid
(p<.001), less modest (£<.01), less anxious
(p < .05), more conceited (p < .01) more affec-
tionate (p < .05), and more cynical (p < .05) in
the persuade conditions than in the nonpersuade
conditions. The differences for timid, modest,
anxious, and conceited can be considered evi-
dence that the subjects did notice whether the
confederate volunteered to give her answers in
front of the group, There were no differences
between the persuade and nonpersuade conditions
for any of the other characteristics.
There is one other bit of evidence concerning
differences between the persuade and nonpersuade
conditions. On the item in the general education
questionnaire about amount of interest in
influencing the views of others, subjects in the
persuade conditions indicated they were more
interested in influencing others than did sub-
2
Statistical significance was tested by analysis of
variance, unless otherwise specified.
175
Experiment II
Adjusted postb Postquestionnalre0 N
42.1 41.8 S9.S 38
36.9 37.0 SS.6 19
38.0 38.1 56.8 19
37.7 37.8 56.6 22
jects in the nonpersuade conditions (/><.OS).
Hearing someone say that she wanted to influ-
ence others seems to have made the subjects
in the persuade conditions feel more free to
admit their own desire to influence others.
In order to determine the effect of the experi-
mental conditions on opinions, measures of
favorability to general education were calculated
from the subjects' responses on the pre- and
postquestionnaires. Scores from 1 to 7 were
assigned to the 7 degrees of agreement or dis-
agreement with each item concerning general
education (the more pro general education the
response, the higher the score). These scores
were then summed for the 5 items in the pre-
questionnaire and the 10 items in the post-
questionnaire. Means of the four different experi-
mental conditions for the pre- and postquestion-
naires, along with the Ns on which they are
based, are presented in Table 1, under the head-
ing Experiment I. The means for the prequestion-
naire were not significantly different in the
various conditions. However, since the attractive
persuade condition was slightly higher than the
others on the prequestionnaire, the scores for
the postquestionnaire were adjusted in terms of
the scores for the prequestionnaire by means of
analysis of covariance. The adjusted post means
are also presented in Table 1.
Our hypothesis leads us to expect that the
adjusted post mean for the attractive persuade
condition would be greater than the adjusted
post mean for the attractive nonpersuade
condition. Inspection of Table 1 reveals that
this is the case. However, the difference between
the means does not reach the conventional level
of significance (£ = 1.45, £ = .12, two-tailed).
In addition, we predicted that a desire to influ-
ence would not be an asset (and might be a
liability) if the communicator were unattractive.
Comparing the adjusted post mean for the un-
attractive persuade condition with the adjusted
post mean for the unattractive nonpersuade
176 BRIEF ARTICLES
condition reveals no apparent difference; the
means are virtually identical when the com-
municator is unattractive.
None of the other possible comparisons ap-
proaches significance. If the data are viewed in
terms of the effect of the attractiveness of the
communicator, the adjusted post mean for the
attractive persuade condition is slightly greater
than that for the unattractive persuade condi-
tion; this difference does not approach signifi-
cance. Similarly, the adjusted post means for
the two nonpersuade conditions are virtually
identical.
Because the results of the experiment were
provocative but not conclusive, the same experi-
ment was repeated several months later at a
different university.
EXPERIMENT II
The procedure in Experiment II was identical to
that used in Experiment I with the following excep-
tions:
1. The prequestionnaire was eliminated.
2. Two groups of subjects were run under each
of the four experimental conditions, 10-20 subjects
in each group.
3. A different girl acted as the confederate in
Experiment II, and different persons played the
roles of the two experimenters.
4. In an attempt to strengthen the manipulation
of the perception of the source's desire to influence,
another question was inserted at the beginning of
the general education interview with the accomplice,
namely, "To what extent would you like to get other
students to agree with you on this issue?" In the
persuade conditions the confederate answered "very
much"; in the nonpersuade conditions she answered
"not at all."
5. In an attempt to increase the sensitivity of the
opinion questionnaire, two additional alternatives
were included for each of the items about general
education, making 9 possible degrees of agreement
or disagreement for each item.
6. In an attempt to increase the impact of the
confederate's opinion, the subjects were asked to
make their responses to each item immediately after
they heard the confederate's response to that item.
In other respects the procedure for Experiment II
was identical to that described for Experiment I.
On the basis of the comments written at the end
of the experiment, IS subjects were eliminated from
Experiment II because of suspicion about the pro-
cedure. No more than 6 subjects were eliminated
from any one condition.
The ratings of the confederate provide evidence
that the manipulation of attractiveness was even
more successful in Experiment II. The mean rating
for the characteristic attractive was 16.3 in the two
attractive conditions combined; it was 7.1 in the
two unattractive conditions combined (/><.001).
Again the ratings for charming, fashionable, neat,
romantic, and affectionate were significantly greater
(p < .001) in the attractive conditions than in
the unattractive conditions. In addition, the con-
federate was rated more likable (/><.001), less
unpleasant (p<.0\), less annoying (p<.0l), and
less emotional (p < .05) in the attractive conditions.
The difference for superficial was not significant in
Experiment II.
As in Experiment I, the confederate was rated
as significantly less modest (p < .05) and more con-
ceited (p < .01) in the persuade conditions than in
the nonpersuade conditions. The ratings were also
significantly higher in the persuade conditions for
superficial (p<.01), emotional (£<.01), candid
(p< .01), and frank (p < .05). There were no sig-
nificant differences in the ratings for timid, anxious,
affectionate, or cynical. As before, subjects in the
persuade conditions said they were more interested
in influencing the views of others (p < .001) and
also, on the new question, said they were more
interested in getting other students to agree with
them (p< .001).
A measure of favorability to general education
was calculated from responses to the questionnaire
about general education in the same way as in
Experiment I. The means of the two different groups
in the same condition were highly similar in all four
cases and so they were combined. The combined
means for the four different experimental conditions
are presented in Table 1, along with the corre-
sponding Ns.
It can be seen from Table 1 that the pattern of
the results in Experiment II is highly similar to that
of Experiment I. The mean for the attractive per-
suade condition is higher than the mean for the
attractive nonpersuade condition. The two unat-
tractive conditions have almost identical means,
the unattractive persuade condition being slightly
higher. As in Experiment I, the difference between
the attractive persuade and attractive nonpersuade
conditions does not reach significance (t = 1.20).
However, when the p value for the difference from
Experiment I is combined with the p value from
Experiment II by Stouffer's method (Hosteller &
Bush, 1954), the resulting (two-tailed) p is .06.
DISCUSSION
The results of the two experiments together
offer support for our hypothesis—namely, when
the communicator is very attractive, an openly
stated desire to influence the views of the audi-
ence will actually increase the effectiveness of his
communication. Although the predicted difference
between the attractive persuade and attractive
nonpersuade conditions did not reach significance
in either of the two experiments alone, the com-
bined p is just barely short of the conventional
.05 level. The great consistency of the data argues
strongly against the acceptance of the null hy-
pothesis. Contrary to inferences drawn from
previous results, these data indicate that a desire
to influence, if frankly stated, can be an asset
to persuasiveness rather than a detriment.
 BRIEF ARTICLES 177

A potential alternative explanation for these ject of communication—general education—was

results might involve the possibility that the
confederate was seen as more attractive in the
attractive persuade condition than in the attrac-
tive nonpersuade condition. Perhaps when the
confederate volunteered she was perceived as
more exuberant, vivacious, and lively. This might
have made her more attractive and therefore
could have increased her influence. However, the
data do not support this interpretation. If any-
thing, the confederate was actually rated slightly
less attractive in the attractive persuade condition
than in the attractive nonpersuade condition in
both experiments.
We also suggested that, when the communi-
cator is not attractive, the greater the desire to
influence, the less will be the opinion change.
The data lend no support to this hypothesis. In
both experiments the unattractive persuade and
unattractive nonpersuade conditions were remark-
ably similar. Thus, in this condition, a desire to
influence does not appear to be an asset; neither
does it appear to be a liability.
It should be noted that the manipulation of
the attractiveness of the communicator was de-
signed so that it would not also affect the per-
ceived expertness of the communicator. If, for
example, the communication had dealt with
women's cosmetics, then these two variables
might well have been confounded. The sub-
chosen so that it would be irrelevant to physical
attractiveness, the basis for the attractiveness
manipulation.
Taken as a whole, our findings dictate caution
in interpreting the results from recent experi-
mentation which indicate that a desire to influ-
ence decreases the effectiveness of a communi-
cator. Our results suggest that this decrease in
effectiveness is limited to a covert rather than
an overt desire to influence. Our data indicate
that an overt, frankly stated desire to influence
does not influence the effectiveness of the com-
municator, unless he is attractive. If he is at-
tractive it increases his effectiveness; if he is
unattractive it has no apparent effect.
REFERENCES
HOVLAND, C. I., JANIS, I. L., & KELLEY, H. H.
Communication and persuasion. New Haven: Yale
Univer. Press, 1953.
HOSTELLER, F., & BUSH, R. R. Selected quantitative
techniques. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of
social psychology. Vol. 1. Theory and method.
Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1954. Pp. 289-
334.
WALSTER, ELAINE, & FESTINGER, L. The effectiveness
of "overheard" persuasive communications. Journal
of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 65, 395-
402.
(Received June 19, 1963)

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

1965, Vol. 1, No. 2, 177-181

ATTITUDE CHANGE AS A FUNCTION OF AUTHORITARIANISM

AND PUNITIVENESS l
JACK M. WRIGHT O. J. HARVEY
University of Florida University of Colorado

To study reactions to abuse in the form of a nondirectional order from an

authority figure to change previously stated attitudes, 55 undergraduate psy-
chology students were administered the California F Scale, the Rosenzweig
P-F Study, and 5 opinion scales regarding self, peers, instructors, people in
general, and certain professions. Authoritarianism related significantly to
changes in opinion as a result of treatment while punitiveness scores did not.
No evidence of displacement among more authoritarian Ss was found. On
the contrary, the results suggest that because of previous histories more
authoritarian Ss may expect (and accept as proper) abuse from authority
figures; consequently they did not feel frustrated but confirmed by derogation
from the instructor.

It is a common assumption among investi- information which is incongruent with existing

gators of attitude change that the recipient of concepts reacts in ways that favor his more
1 central concepts (Festinger, 1957; Harvey,
This study, completed in 1958 when both authors
were at Vanderbilt University, was partially financed Vanderbilt University. Reproduction of this study
by the Group Psychology Branch, Office of Naval in whole or part is permitted for any purposes of
Research, under Contract Nonr 2149 (02) with the United States Government.