Thesis (PH. D)--University of Minnesota, 1936. / Vita on leaf mounted on p. [3] of cover. Published also without thesis note. Bibliography: p. 89.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1962. / Typescript. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [28]-[29]).

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1963. / Typescript. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaf 41).

Issued also as thesis (PH. D.) Columbia university. / Bibliography: p. 42.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1936. / Typescript. Includes abstract and vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 124-134).

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1960. / Typescript. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 42-43).

The research reported here used Coombs' (1964) theory of data and evidence drawn from attitude change research to construct two models which, if correct, would describe the attitudinal choice and judgmental processes of, for the first model, an uninvolved S and, for the second model, a highly involved S. Both models were dependent on two of Coombs' (1964) eight classes of data, Petrusic's (1966) findings using single stimulus response latencies and the evidence from Sherif and Hovland (1961) and Ager and Dawes (1965) that a judge's attitude will affect his judgment of favourabiIity of alternative positions on a social issue. The test of the models occurred when single stimulus response latencies were collected from Ss who were required to accept or reject a position and then indicate if the position was more-pro or less-pro than his ideal position on issues of high, medium, and low involvement. The accept-reject task was, according to Coombs' (1964) formulation, Qllb data and the more-pro, less-pro task was QIIa(c.) (categorization relative to an ideal point). The data did not follow the predictions of the models for any of the four Ss used. Thus, our major hypothesis that an individual who is not involved in a social issue will judge alternative positions according to our first model (J-scale model) and that an individual who is highly involved in a social issue will judge alternative positions according to our second model (I-scale model) was rejected. Additional classes of data collected did, however, replicate and confirm the findings of Petrusic (1966). We were able to show that the latency data collected, whatever the attitudinal choice process involved, was reliable and orderly for each S over each issue. (Except for one S on one issue where a speed orientation was clearly shown). The order Iiness of the data was shown by the ability of QIIa(c.) and QIlb inferred orderings to predict the ordering of QIa (preference ordering) data. / Arts, Faculty of / Psychology, Department of / Graduate

[No abstract submitted] / Arts, Faculty of / Psychology, Department of / Graduate

What difficulties will a person encounter, and what defenses will he use, if placed in a position where he must verbally attack a group with which he has strongly identified himself? In an attempt to gain some insight into this problem, two groups of people were selected. One group was made up of fifteen male university students who had strongly ego-involved attitudes toward the Christian Church. The second group, the controls, consisted of fifteen male students who scored in the neutral zone of the Thurstone-Chave scale of Attitudes Toward the Church. Both groups found it more difficult to attack the church than to support it. Also, when attacking the church, both groups tended more to weaken their arguments by qualifications and by making concessions to the opposing view-point. In terms of group differences, the religious group were much more effective (convincing) in their arguments in favor of the church than were the neutrals. There was no significant difference, however, in their relative abilities to attack the church in a convincing manner. The religious group showed the greatest disparity in terms of ratings gained when supporting the church, minus ratings gained when attacking it. This difference in disparity scores was not statistically significant. Therefore, our principal hypothesis was not supported. Continuous G.S.R. records were made while the subjects were engaged in the two tasks. From the data obtained, we are unable to say that either of the two activities is more tension-producing for either group. / Arts, Faculty of / Psychology, Department of / Graduate

Thesis (Ed.D.)--Teachers College, Columbia University, 1966. / Typescript; issued also on microfilm. Includes tables. Sponsor: Albert S. Thompson, . Dissertation Committee: Roger A. Myers, Morton Deutsch, . Includes bibliographical references.