1

The Social Judgement Theory:

An Application for Persuasion

Sydney B. Bridges

Emmanuel College

CM302-11: Persuasion

Dr. Terilyn Goins

March 29, 2020

 2

The Social Judgement Theory: An Application for Persuasion

When examining methods or ways to persuade an individual’s line of thinking

concerning an idea or subject, several theories have been developed and evolved. The Social

Judgment Theory (SJT) is one such theory that counselors and psychologists have relied on and

used over the past 50 years. The Social Judgment Theory, founded by Muzafer and Carolyn

Sherif, in the early 1960s, relies heavily on a person’s already established attitude towards a

subject as a springboard to solidify or change that attitude in real life situations.

Interestingly, the social and historical background of the lives of these individuals have

played as much a part in developing the Social Judgment Theory as much as their formal

education. Muzafer Sherif grew up in a prosperous family and received the best possible

education as a young man in Turkey, ultimately receiving his doctorate degree from Columbia

University in the United States (Gur, McLarty, and Muldoon, 2017). After receiving his PhD,

Sherif moved back to Turkey to establish research operations and teach in the field of

psychology. He also oversaw projects and conducted research in remote villages of Turkey. It

was this experience with people groups and political troubles in Turkey, which greatly

influenced his desire to develop techniques in conflict resolution in group settings (Gur,

McLarty, and Muldoon, 2017). Following political differences with his country, Sherif moved

back to the United States and began work at Princeton University where he would eventually

meet his future wife, Carolyn Wood, who also happened to be a colleague of his in the field of

psychology (Gur, McLarty, and Muldoon, 2017). Carolyn was well educated in her own right,

eventually receiving a PhD in psychology from the University of Texas at Austin before

accepting a position at Princeton University. It was Muzafer’s background work and experiences

in Turkey which led to his increased efforts in the area of social psychology, with an emphasis
 3

on management and group interaction. The husband and wife team’s subsequent work and

research in the field of social psychology has been widely used in many years in management

and group settings. Working as a team, they have been credited with providing research on issues

such as group aggression, identity, norms, responsiveness, abuse, gender issues in groups and

social identity (Gur, McLarty, and Muldoon, 2017). They are considered pioneers in the area of

social psychology and their later study and emphasis in the area of attitudes would ultimately

lead to the formulation of their Social Judgment Theory.

The Social Judgment Theory has one primary aspect that serves as the starting point of

how the theory works. The theory holds that the way a person feels about a certain issue or

subject will be the primary factor that determines how that person evaluates that subject. Upon

examination of the example of LeBron James in The Dynamics of Persuasion: Communication

and Attitudes in the 21st Century, one can see how the Social Judgment Theory can be applied.

James’ decision to leave Cleveland for Miami set off a whirlwind of angry emotions by many

Cleveland fans. All this was mainly due to the Cleveland fans’ attitude towards wanting to win a

championship in Cleveland. It was their strong desire for a championship that led to their

evaluation of arguably the best player in the NBA at the time and his decision to go to Miami.

However, Miami fans most certainly felt the opposite due to their own strong desire for a

championship as well. Cleveland fans would find many reasons why he should stay in Cleveland

and very few reasons why he should go to Miami. Their latitude of acceptance would be broad. It

would be vice-versa for the Miami fans, and their latitude of acceptance would be narrow. This

example of individuals’ strong feelings about a topic demonstrates the social judgment method to

evaluating attitudes (Perloff, 2017, p. 116)

 4

In a practical sense, the management team from both organizations would use this

information formulated by the Social Judgment Theory to calm or encourage their respective

fans through public announcements, advertising, and/or actions. The Social Judgment Theory

focuses on a person’s judgments about a subject regardless of the stated facts or arguments from

both sides about that subject. Decisions and evaluations will be made based on these feelings or

attitudes (Perloff, 2017, p.117).

How a person thinks about a subject, or their attitude, can be broken down further into

several parts to better clarify the degree of the attitude. The Social Judgment Theory describes

one concept of study as latitudes of acceptance, latitudes of rejection, and latitudes of

noncommitment. Acceptance is how favorable a subject is to the person. Rejection is how

undesirable that subject is to a person. Noncommitment is the middle ground area that describes

how a person does and does not feel strongly about a subject at the same time; they are like

lukewarm water. All three of these latitudes will come into play in relation to how a person

thinks about a subject. However, the percentages of each will vary greatly. For example, if a

person thinks very favorably towards a subject, then their latitude of acceptance on things

relating to that subject will be high (perhaps 50-70% or more on a 100% scale). Their latitude of

rejection would be low (perhaps 20-40% or lower). Their latitude of noncommitment would fall

somewhere in between. Obviously, a persuader will want to approach a person in attempts to

broaden their latitude of acceptance, thereby increasing their favorable attitudes to the subject or

product they are pitching. Granberg says, “The size of the latitude of acceptance is useful in

predicting a person’s susceptibility to attitude change” (Granberg, 1974). In other words, the

greater the latitude of acceptance, the greater the chance for persuasion.
 5

The benefits of using latitude of acceptance in advertising can be seen in the following

example. When determining the price of a product, the goal would be to persuade the consumer

to gravitate toward widening their latitude of acceptance. In other words, make the price

appealing enough so the consumer will want to buy it. If a price is rounded to a base amount

such as $25.00 or $50.00, then the consumer will be more apt to pay prices very close to those

amounts. Conversely, if the price is vague, such as $24.95 or $48.99, then the consumers latitude

of acceptance should widen, thereby causing the consumer to be willing to pay for the item in a

wider price range (Crompton, 2015). Other aspects such as “target markets, prices charged by

other suppliers, frequency of purchase, degrees of loyalty… all contribute to the latitude of price

acceptance varying among individuals” (Crompton, 2015).

Conversely, if a person thinks negatively towards a subject then their latitude of rejection

would be high, their latitude of acceptance would be low, and again, their latitude of

noncommitment would fall in between. A person’s ideas that are dogmatic are “directly

associated with the size of latitude of rejection across issues.” (Granberg, 1974). The precise

point where that person’s view is located on their overall latitude spectrum (encompassing all

three latitudes) is called their anchor. That anchor could very well be at the extreme of high

acceptance or rejection, or it could fall right in the middle of noncommitment. It all will go back

to that person’s base attitude on how they feel about that subject.

Another concept that expounds on the Social Judgment Theory is assimilation and

contrast. These are two ways in which a person overexaggerates an idea about a subject based on

their anchor mentioned previously. An example in The Dynamics of Persuasion speaks of a pro-

gun journalist hinting at restricting gun laws. This created a wave of contrast effects which

produced negative effects upon the journalist, even causing him to lose his job (Perloff, 2017, p.
 6

120). In contrast, another example explained how a group of people who were expecting the

temperature to be very cold outside, but the temperature was not as cold as expected. This group

ignored the fact that it was a little warmer, thereby assimilating the temperature more towards

what they were expecting (Perloff, 2017, p. 119). Some people contrast and some people

assimilate. Both actions tend to be exaggerations, thereby distorting reality.

The last concept which plays a role in the application of the Social Judgment Theory is

ego-involvement. More than just having a strong opinion about a subject, ego-involvement

means that the subject or topic in question has become more personal for the person. They have

become very passionate toward the subject and are very hard to persuade when it comes to

changing their mind. As Granberg states, “The size of the latitude of rejection is an indicator of

ego involvement in the issue” (Granberg, 1974). This passion will ultimately result in greatly

influencing that person’s latitude positioning, anchor, and assimilation/contrast. Religion is one

such area where strong ego-involvement can be seen. Many people are so committed to and have

faith in their religion, that very little, if any, amount of persuasion can convince them to stray

from that commitment. This strong ego-involvement will have a huge impact on the way that

person perceives many aspects of life and social issues. Not all experts agree that ego-

involvement should be used to measure involvement in persuasion. Even Sherif felt that it may

confuse “individual difference within various factors” (Teng, Khong, & Goh, 2015).

The Social Judgment Theory and its core element of attitude, coupled with its influencing

concepts of latitude, assimilation/contrast, and ego-involvement, make it a very useful tool in the

area of persuasion and attitude change. “Attitude change is considered as a two-step process:

First, people evaluate the position that the advocated message anchored; second, the attitude

changes with the judgment” (Teng, Khong, & Goh, 2015). Individuals, teachers, coaches,
 7

management personnel, and others can all benefit from the understanding of people by applying

this theory. Whether it be a company seeking to influence consumers to purchase their product or

service, a coach attempting to create unity on the team by getting the players on the same page,

or an organization president or politician trying to convince their constituents to follow his or her

lead, the Social Judgment Theory can be used as one tool to achieve those desires. The Social

Judgment Theory does have its negative connotations as well. Too much passion, attitude, or

ego-involvement in an area may cause a person to be unwilling to compromise, thereby creating

conflict or dissention within a group.

Through the initial work in developing the Social Judgment Theory by the Sherifs, many

psychologists and teachers have used it to counsel and instruct management leaders to better

their organizations. Unfortunately, there are still many people that are so set in their ways and

attitudes about different subjects that no amount of persuasion can convince them otherwise.

There is still much work and research to be done in the realm of persuasion and understanding

key theories such as the Social Judgment Theory will be key to creating more harmony among

people of different attitudes and perceptions.

 8

References

Cooksey, R. W. (1996). The Methodology of Social Judgement Theory. Thinking & Reasoning,

2(2/3), 141174. https://doiorg.proxygsuemm1.galileo.usg.edu/10.1080/135467896394483

Crompton, J. L. (2015). Reference price-based strategies: a key to raising revenues without

alienating users. Managing Sport & Leisure, 20(4–6), 275. https://doi-org.proxygsu-

emm1.galileo.usg.edu/10.1080/23750472.2015.1090886

Granberg, D., & Steele, L. (1974). Procedural Considerations in Measuring Latitudes of

Acceptance, Rejection, and Noncommitment. Social Forces, 52(4), 538–542. https://doi-

org.proxygsu-emm1.galileo.usg.edu/10.2307/2576997

Gur, A. F., McLarty, B. D., & Muldoon, J. (2017). The Sherifs’ contributions to management

research. Journal of Management History, 23(2), 191-216. doi:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108 /JMH-12-2016-0065

Perloff, R. M. (2017). The Dynamics of Persuasion: Communication and Attitudes in the 21st

Century. New York (NY): Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Teng, S., Khong, K. W., & Goh, W. W. (2015). Persuasive Communication: A Study of Major

Attitude-Behavior Theories in a Social Media Context. Journal of Internet Commerce,

14(1), 42-64. https://doiorg.proxygsuemm1.galileo.usg.edu/10.1080/15332861.2015.

1006515