The present thesis investigates two theoretically novel processes of change in groups relevant to agents for change. Specifically, it examines the effects of group opinion change and reintegration on group members’ evaluation of ingroup change-agents. Group opinion change is operationalized as the group adopting the position advocated by a change-agent, and reintegration is operationalized as the group responding more positively towards a change-agent. These formulations of change processes within groups extend past theorizing in opinion deviance research (e.g., Festinger, 1950; Schachter, 1951; Marques & Paez, 1994) by a) examining how contextual differences that result from changes in the group may affect group members’ reactions to opinion deviates, and b) considering contingencies that result in acceptance or rejection of change-agents and their messages. In addition, this thesis investigates the psychological processes that may mediate and moderate the effects of group opinion change and reintegration on appraisals of change-agents. Specifically, it considers attributed motives of change-agents (i.e., perceived constructiveness; Hornsey, 2005), and target prototypicality (e.g., Hogg, 1993; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) as two possible mediators of these novel effects. Finally, group members’ identification with the group is examined as a moderator of these processes. Chapter 3 presents the first two experiments that tested the effects of group opinion change on the evaluation of change-agents. Experiment 1 (N=100) was a scenario-based study that had a change-agent express a non-conformist view of giving water to an outgroup state at a time when the ingroup state was experiencing a water crisis. Experiment 2 (N=103) was a scenario-based study that looked at a change-agent who expressed pro-immigration views to the ingroup country at an earlier time when popular attitudes toward immigration were poor. In both experiments the deviants were marginalized initially because they endorsed non-conformist opinions. Depending on the condition, group opinions either shifted toward the positions advocated by the deviants or remained unchanged. Results showed group members’ target evaluations shifted as a function of group opinion change. Target evaluations became less favourable in Experiment 1, and more favourable in Experiment 2. There also was evidence that increased perceived constructiveness mediated more favourable target evaluations in Experiment 2. Chapter 4 presents the first two experiments that tested the effects of reintegration and group members’ identification on the evaluation of change-agents. Both Experiments 3 (N=103) and 4 (N=94) involved a scenario where there was a severe drought in the ingroup state. In Experiment 3, a deviant politician argued for more investment on water infrastructure 10 years earlier when water shortage was not a critical problem. Thus, the politician expressed a minority opinion. In Experiment 4, a deviant water commissioner expressed a controversial opinion to give water to an outgroup state at the height of the drought. Both deviants were marginalized/excluded initially by the group. Reintegration was manipulated by showing that popular support for the deviant had increased (Experiment 3) or the deviant was reinstated (Experiment 4), or the group did not increase support for the deviant at all (not reintegrated). Results showed that high identifiers evaluated the deviant less positively, and perceived the deviant as more destructive after he or she was reintegrated than when marginalization continued. Further, perceived destructiveness mediated the effects of reintegration and identification on trait evaluations. Experiment 4 also showed that high identifiers were less willing to support change after the deviant was reintegrated, than when marginalization continued. Finally, Chapter 5 tested the interactive effects of group opinion change and reintegration on evaluation of change-agents. I also assessed group members’ responses to change-agents in light of the group’s resistance to change even though the change-agents were right and the groups were wrong. Experiment 5 was a scenario-based study in a minimal-groups situation that had a deviant arguing for a more equitable research funding than the existing distribution. Experiment 6 was a scenario-based study on the disagreement between Galileo Galilei and the Catholic Church on planetary motion. Again, the deviants initially were marginalized by the groups. For opinion change, the groups either adopted or rejected the deviants’ opinions. For reintegration, the groups either treated the deviants more favourably or continued to reject them. Results showed that either opinion change or reintegration was sufficient to defuse negativity towards the deviants. More importantly, group members continued mistreating the deviants when the groups rejected opinion change and reintegration. That is, negativity towards the deviants was highest when opinion was unchanged, and marginalization continued. Overall, this thesis shows that group members’ evaluations of deviant agents for change can shift as a function of group opinion change and reintegration. Group opinion change and/or reintegration defuse negativity toward change-agents in the absence of psychological threat (i.e., perceived destructiveness). However, if threat is present, opinion change or reintegration may ironically elicit more group members’ negativity towards these targets. This thesis also contributes to the literature by showing how change promotes or inhibits group members’ endorsement of change-agents.

Abstract This research investigated the extent to which taking notes influenced the quality of mock jurors’ decisions. High quality decisions were defined in this research as those which did not reflect the influence of the offender stereotype. The impact of note taking on the quality of jurors’ decisions is central to the judicial community’s concerns about note taking as a jury aid and their willingness to offer it in trial contexts. Previous research has argued that note takers make better quality decisions than non-note takers because note takers recall more trial content and make judgements that better reflect the evidence presented. However, according to dual process models of persuasion, high quality decisions should show evidence of both effortful processing of information and no influence of peripheral cues, such as stereotypes. To date, the existing literature has neglected to consider the extent to which note takers, as compared to non-note takers, are influenced by peripheral cues. The current research sought to address this by investigating the extent to which note taking and non-note taking mock jurors were influenced by stereotypes when making decisions in a mock criminal trial. In particular, note taking and non-note taking mock jurors were presented with a criminal trial in which either a male or female defendant had been charged with a stereotypically masculine crime (e.g., aggravated robbery or murder). The extent to which mock jurors were more likely to convict the male defendant and acquit the female defendant was used as a marker of the extent that stereotypes about offenders influenced participants in these studies. Across studies, note takers’ perceptions of guilt, evaluation of the defendant, and, in some instances, recall of trial content, reflected stereotype-based processing while the corresponding measures for non-note takers did not. This research then went on to investigate why note takers were more vulnerable to the influence of stereotypes than non-note takers. It was proposed that one reason might be the requirement that note takers simultaneously record and evaluate trial content. Previous research has shown that persons engaged in dual tasks rely on stereotypes to increase information processing efficiency and are therefore able to re-direct cognitive resources to the additional task. Consistent with previous studies, the current research found that both note takers and mock jurors engaged in an additional task during the trial were more vulnerable to the influence of stereotypes than non-note takers. Furthermore, whilst investigating interventions designed to reduce the influence of stereotypes on note takers’ decisions, results revealed that such interventions were less successful in improving decision quality than interventions that removed the requirement to engage in dual tasks. In particular, the influence of stereotypes was reduced when note takers were encouraged to elaborate on the content of their notes during designated review periods. Whilst methodological features of this research program--namely a reliance on student samples and the relative brevity of mock trials used--may have led to an underestimation of the reliance on stereotypes for note takers, the research has implications for the instructions given to jurors about note taking in judicial contexts. Specifically, the central conclusion of the thesis is that it would seem prudent to amend instructions to direct note takers to engage in the effortful review of their notes prior to coming together to reach a verdict.

Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) is an autoimmune syndrome characterized by a severe and rapid onset of paralysis that ascends without warning. It has an unknown aetiology and is generally unknown by most people, including medical professionals. When a person who has had GBS is asked to speak about their experience, they are likely to talk about aspects of it that are personally meaningful. Their account can be likened to a story in that it collates seemingly unconnected facts, episodes of activity and emotional attributions into a sequence that provides knowledge and understanding. A story is a powerful form for expressing suffering and experiences and so is particularly suitable for the study of trauma and illness. The actual process of creating the story, plus its presentational and organisational forms, provides sources for uncovering the identities authors choose to create and present of themselves. Six people who have had GBS were interviewed about their experience, and their stories were analysed using a narrative inquiry to discern the meanings attributed to GBS from the participants’ own understandings and perspectives. The intended focus of the research was holistic and content based. The result of the narrative inquiry was a plot common to all six narratives. Namely, GBS is an inexplicable condition, during which horrendous things happen, but people do recover with time and it is likely their life view will be changed in the process. Four fundamental issues, identity, meaning, making sense and meaningfulness were drawn from the stories and configured into a narrative of the researcher’s making. What the participants chose to speak about became the meanings, or themes, major and minor, of their stories. No event has meaning in itself, however traumatic events can precipitate crises of meaning. When these crises are viewed within the context of other events, and are perceived to add value to life, then they have meaningfulness. In the telling of meanings and meaningfulness, the purpose for storying and the audience to whom the story is directed are the criteria for which the storylines are chosen. Both the story and the storying provide opportunities for the authors to create and offer images of themselves, that are then open to interpretation by an audience. As a traumatic experience, GBS enabled six people to tell their stories. In doing so they were able to make sense of important issues for themselves, and re-examine the way they saw themselves and the world.

Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) is an autoimmune syndrome characterized by a severe and rapid onset of paralysis that ascends without warning. It has an unknown aetiology and is generally unknown by most people, including medical professionals. When a person who has had GBS is asked to speak about their experience, they are likely to talk about aspects of it that are personally meaningful. Their account can be likened to a story in that it collates seemingly unconnected facts, episodes of activity and emotional attributions into a sequence that provides knowledge and understanding. A story is a powerful form for expressing suffering and experiences and so is particularly suitable for the study of trauma and illness. The actual process of creating the story, plus its presentational and organisational forms, provides sources for uncovering the identities authors choose to create and present of themselves. Six people who have had GBS were interviewed about their experience, and their stories were analysed using a narrative inquiry to discern the meanings attributed to GBS from the participants’ own understandings and perspectives. The intended focus of the research was holistic and content based. The result of the narrative inquiry was a plot common to all six narratives. Namely, GBS is an inexplicable condition, during which horrendous things happen, but people do recover with time and it is likely their life view will be changed in the process. Four fundamental issues, identity, meaning, making sense and meaningfulness were drawn from the stories and configured into a narrative of the researcher’s making. What the participants chose to speak about became the meanings, or themes, major and minor, of their stories. No event has meaning in itself, however traumatic events can precipitate crises of meaning. When these crises are viewed within the context of other events, and are perceived to add value to life, then they have meaningfulness. In the telling of meanings and meaningfulness, the purpose for storying and the audience to whom the story is directed are the criteria for which the storylines are chosen. Both the story and the storying provide opportunities for the authors to create and offer images of themselves, that are then open to interpretation by an audience. As a traumatic experience, GBS enabled six people to tell their stories. In doing so they were able to make sense of important issues for themselves, and re-examine the way they saw themselves and the world.

This research involved an examination of Beck's congruency hypothesis (1983). There were three studies, each examining an assumption that underpins the congruency hypothesis. There were two groups of participants: 61 remitted depressives and 61 university student controls, who were followed for a 1-year period. The first study stemmed from Blatt's theory that interpersonal and achievement-oriented personality styles are independent and enduring, arising from different early childhood experiences. It investigated individuals' perceptions of the parenting style they had experienced in the first 16 years of their life and how these related to their current personality style. Overall, an achievement-oriented personality style (self-criticism) was predicted by maternal protectiveness in the university student sample and by a lack of maternal warmth in the clinical sample. No relationship between perceptions of early parenting and an interpersonal personality (dependency) was found. The second study comprised two parts. The first examined the stability of personality over the 1-year examination period. This was seen as an important test. For personality to be a vulnerability factor or diathesis in terms of the congruency hypothesis, it must be stable over time. The second part of this study investigated whether any significant changes in personality over time were predicted by recent negative life events that had been experienced. The results showed that all of the personality constructs investigated (sociotropy, autonomy (solitude, independence), dependency, self-criticism) were stable over the 6-month period. However, during the 12-month period, there was a significant decrease in mean scores on sociotropy for the university students group and a significant decrease in mean scores on sociotropy and dependency for the remitted depressives group. For the remitted depressives group, change in dependency was predicted by stress resulting from negative life events as rated by an independent research team (objective stress) but not by participants' own ratings of the stressfulness of these events (subjective stress). In research testing the congruency hypothesis, life events are routinely classified as being either sociotropic or autonomous. The third study investigated the validity of this practice. The results of this study demonstrated only partial support for the a priori procedure for classifying events in this way. Across samples (university students and remitted depressives) and measures (self-reported and interview measures of life events), participants did not consistently rate events as sociotropic or autonomous in line with their own personality styles. Throughout the research, many of the methodological shortfalls that were identified as being present in prior research on the congruency hypothesis were addressed. Notably, comparisons were made between the different samples (student versus clinical) and measures (self-report versus interview) used. The results of the current research differed depending on the choice of sample and the type of measures used. For example, in some instances, significant results were found only when the stressfulness of an event was rated by the research team (objective stress) rather than by the participants themselves (subjective stress). However, it is subjective stress that is most commonly used in previous research on the congruency hypothesis. This choice could well contribute to the many non-significant results found in this area of study. These and other methodological issues are taken into account, examined, discussed, and recommendations for future research are made.

The present thesis investigates two theoretically novel processes of change in groups relevant to agents for change. Specifically, it examines the effects of group opinion change and reintegration on group members’ evaluation of ingroup change-agents. Group opinion change is operationalized as the group adopting the position advocated by a change-agent, and reintegration is operationalized as the group responding more positively towards a change-agent. These formulations of change processes within groups extend past theorizing in opinion deviance research (e.g., Festinger, 1950; Schachter, 1951; Marques & Paez, 1994) by a) examining how contextual differences that result from changes in the group may affect group members’ reactions to opinion deviates, and b) considering contingencies that result in acceptance or rejection of change-agents and their messages. In addition, this thesis investigates the psychological processes that may mediate and moderate the effects of group opinion change and reintegration on appraisals of change-agents. Specifically, it considers attributed motives of change-agents (i.e., perceived constructiveness; Hornsey, 2005), and target prototypicality (e.g., Hogg, 1993; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) as two possible mediators of these novel effects. Finally, group members’ identification with the group is examined as a moderator of these processes. Chapter 3 presents the first two experiments that tested the effects of group opinion change on the evaluation of change-agents. Experiment 1 (N=100) was a scenario-based study that had a change-agent express a non-conformist view of giving water to an outgroup state at a time when the ingroup state was experiencing a water crisis. Experiment 2 (N=103) was a scenario-based study that looked at a change-agent who expressed pro-immigration views to the ingroup country at an earlier time when popular attitudes toward immigration were poor. In both experiments the deviants were marginalized initially because they endorsed non-conformist opinions. Depending on the condition, group opinions either shifted toward the positions advocated by the deviants or remained unchanged. Results showed group members’ target evaluations shifted as a function of group opinion change. Target evaluations became less favourable in Experiment 1, and more favourable in Experiment 2. There also was evidence that increased perceived constructiveness mediated more favourable target evaluations in Experiment 2. Chapter 4 presents the first two experiments that tested the effects of reintegration and group members’ identification on the evaluation of change-agents. Both Experiments 3 (N=103) and 4 (N=94) involved a scenario where there was a severe drought in the ingroup state. In Experiment 3, a deviant politician argued for more investment on water infrastructure 10 years earlier when water shortage was not a critical problem. Thus, the politician expressed a minority opinion. In Experiment 4, a deviant water commissioner expressed a controversial opinion to give water to an outgroup state at the height of the drought. Both deviants were marginalized/excluded initially by the group. Reintegration was manipulated by showing that popular support for the deviant had increased (Experiment 3) or the deviant was reinstated (Experiment 4), or the group did not increase support for the deviant at all (not reintegrated). Results showed that high identifiers evaluated the deviant less positively, and perceived the deviant as more destructive after he or she was reintegrated than when marginalization continued. Further, perceived destructiveness mediated the effects of reintegration and identification on trait evaluations. Experiment 4 also showed that high identifiers were less willing to support change after the deviant was reintegrated, than when marginalization continued. Finally, Chapter 5 tested the interactive effects of group opinion change and reintegration on evaluation of change-agents. I also assessed group members’ responses to change-agents in light of the group’s resistance to change even though the change-agents were right and the groups were wrong. Experiment 5 was a scenario-based study in a minimal-groups situation that had a deviant arguing for a more equitable research funding than the existing distribution. Experiment 6 was a scenario-based study on the disagreement between Galileo Galilei and the Catholic Church on planetary motion. Again, the deviants initially were marginalized by the groups. For opinion change, the groups either adopted or rejected the deviants’ opinions. For reintegration, the groups either treated the deviants more favourably or continued to reject them. Results showed that either opinion change or reintegration was sufficient to defuse negativity towards the deviants. More importantly, group members continued mistreating the deviants when the groups rejected opinion change and reintegration. That is, negativity towards the deviants was highest when opinion was unchanged, and marginalization continued. Overall, this thesis shows that group members’ evaluations of deviant agents for change can shift as a function of group opinion change and reintegration. Group opinion change and/or reintegration defuse negativity toward change-agents in the absence of psychological threat (i.e., perceived destructiveness). However, if threat is present, opinion change or reintegration may ironically elicit more group members’ negativity towards these targets. This thesis also contributes to the literature by showing how change promotes or inhibits group members’ endorsement of change-agents.

No description available.

Traditionally, it has been the cognitive-developmental approach that has dominated moral judgment research. Specifically, it has been Kohlberg’s theory of moral development (1969, 1986) that has provided the theoretical framework for much of the research in the field. According to the Kohlbergian perspective, individuals are rational agents who engage in conscious deliberation in order to reach a moral judgment or decision. In contrast to this, the social intuitionist model of moral judgment (Haidt, 2001; Haidt & Bjorklund, 2007) proposes that it is the individual’s immediate affective reactions to events are the overriding cause of moral judgment. In addition to this, the model proposes that the social context is an equally important determinant of moral judgment. Emergent group norms are said to directly shape the moral judgments of the individual, with the moral judgments of friends, allies and acquaintances having a direct bearing on the moral judgments one makes, even those made and held privately. In the current thesis, the impact of social persuasion - group norms, audience, and social identity - on moral judgment was investigated, using the methods and meta-theoretical framework of the social identity approach. In Studies 1 (N = 98) and 2 (N = 60) the influence of group norms and level of identification with the reference group on participants’ moral evaluations was assessed. The results of these studies revealed that participants’ evaluation of the target issue (the sex selection of children) was not influenced by the group norms to which they were exposed. In both studies, the interaction between norm and identification was also found to be non-significant. Under investigation in Studies 3, 4, and 5 was the impact of normative influence on participants’ moral evaluations. In Study 3 (N = 186) the impact of group norms, level of identification, and audience expectation on participants’ moral evaluations of morally-tinged scenarios and issues were assessed. Those exposed to a norm portraying the reference group as judgmental tended to be harsher in their evaluations than those exposed to a non-judgmental norm, but the effect was weak and inconsistent. Contrary to expectation, identification and audience were not found to interact with the norm manipulation. Study 4 (N = 93) focused exclusively on the impact of audience expectation on participants’ moral evaluation. Participants evaluated a number of morally-tinged scenarios either alone, under the expectation that their responses would be visible to an audience (with either the opportunity to justify their evaluations, or not), or under the pretext of being connected to a lie-detector. Contrary to expectation, no significant difference in participants’ moral evaluations was found across the four audience conditions. To discount the possibility that the lack of normative influence on moral evaluation obtained in Study 4 was due to methodological limitation (i.e., the audience category was too broad), the selection of participants and the choice of audience were modified for Study 5 (N = 54). In Study 5, Christian students were required to make their moral evaluations under the expectation that their responses would be made visible to either a Christian or student audience. Contrary to expectation, only a subtle effect of audience was found in relation to both the morally tinged issues and the morally tinged scenarios. Participants in the Christian audience condition were found to evaluate only a small number of the issues (3 of 10), and only one of the four scenarios more negatively than those in the student audience condition. In Studies 6 and 7 the impact of social identity factors on participants’ moral evaluations was investigated. In Study 6 (N = 45), the extent to which participants’ moral evaluation were influenced by their social identity was assessed. In this study, participants had either their Christian identity or their student identity made salient when making their evaluations. No difference in participants’ moral evaluations was found between the Christian identity and student identity salience conditions. In Study 7 (N = 68), the extent to which participants’ political identity influenced their moral evaluation of government policy was assessed. Participants (who were either Australian Labor Party supporters or Australian Liberal Party supporters) were led to believe that the policies had been proposed by either the Australian Labor Party or the Australian Liberal Party. It was found that participants’ political affiliation contributed to their moral evaluation of the presented policies. Overall, the current program of studies provides a first step toward understanding the impact that group norms, audience, and social identity factors have on the evaluation component of moral judgment. It suggests that morality is complex, and that moral judgments may be amenable to social influence, albeit weakly. Theoretical and practical implications for this research are discussed with reference to social identity theory and the broader literature on moral psychology.

ABSTRACT Exploitation of older people can result in devastating emotional and financial consequences. Researchers and policy makers have widely recognised the deleterious effects of exploitation on older adults, particularly cognitively impaired older people. Studies to date have provided basic information about the demographic and health characteristics that contribute to exploitation in later life, namely extreme dependence, frailty, social isolation, severe physical illness, and cognitive impairment. However, an overarching explanatory framework of vulnerability, and clinical instruments to aid with identifying those individuals at elevated risk of exploitation a priori have been lacking. Furthermore, the specific cognitive and social factors at the level of the individual which promote vulnerability to exploitation remain largely unexplored. The present research was directed towards addressing these issues. For definitional purposes, the term social vulnerability is used throughout in reference to an individual’s degree of susceptibility to exploitation. Exploitation of older people can take many forms including social and sexual exploitation, mistreatment, and deprivation of rights. Financial exploitation in particular is a relatively widespread phenomenon among older people, and may be a salient marker of social vulnerability in later life. In Chapter 1 of this dissertation, literature relevant to financial exploitation and social vulnerability more generally among older people is reviewed, and a conceptual framework for describing and explaining heightened vulnerability is presented. Central to this framework are various factors of personal competence at the level of the individual (i.e., intelligence, cognitive functioning, social intelligence, social skill, personality traits) which, in theoretical terms, contribute to, or protect against, exploitation. Chapter 2 details the development and psychometric evaluation of a standardised scale for assessing social vulnerability among older adults (termed the SVS15). Given that financial exploitation may be a pertinent marker of social vulnerability in older people, item content for the scale includes items of a financial nature. The results of two studies provided support for the reliability (internal consistency) and validity (known-groups) of the SVS15. Results of a factor analysis revealed a two-factor solution, with the emerging factors labelled gullibility and credulity. Stability in factor structure of the SVS15 was established in an independent sample using structural equation modelling. Chapters 3 and 4 of the dissertation detail the methodology employed in, and results of, a series of three studies systematically investigating the relationships between personal competence factors and social vulnerability in older people. Using multiple regression analyses, non-significant associations between basic demographic characteristics and social vulnerability were found in a nonclinical older sample, indicating that heightened vulnerability to exploitation is not readily explained by age, gender, or education. Rather, general cognitive functioning emerged as the most significant correlate of SVS15 scores in a combined clinical and nonclinical sample of older adults such that poorer cognitive functioning was associated with greater vulnerability to exploitation. Executive functioning in particular showed significant overlap with SVS15 scores after controlling for differences in memory and age. These results support the inclusion of standardised neuropsychological tests of memory and executive functioning (tests which are routinely used) when issues of social vulnerability arise. After general cognitive functioning, social measures of self-awareness and social skill were also important correlates of social vulnerability scores, indicating that social measures could also contribute useful information when assessing social vulnerability in older people. From an applied perspective, Chapter 5 of the thesis presents normative data for the SVS15, and an examination of the Tclinical utility of the scale using individual case studies of older adults diagnosed with a dementia syndrome. In Chapter 6, an amalgamation of the results from the project is presented, and the theoretical and clinical contributions of the findings are highlighted. TThe findings contribute to the extant literature in two ways: (1) through the development of aT potentially useful and psychometrically sound instrument which targets symptoms of social Tvulnerability more directly than existing neuropsychological measures and (2) by enhancing the current understanding of the cognitive and social personal competence factors associated with heightened vulnerability in later life.

The present thesis investigates two theoretically novel processes of change in groups relevant to agents for change. Specifically, it examines the effects of group opinion change and reintegration on group members’ evaluation of ingroup change-agents. Group opinion change is operationalized as the group adopting the position advocated by a change-agent, and reintegration is operationalized as the group responding more positively towards a change-agent. These formulations of change processes within groups extend past theorizing in opinion deviance research (e.g., Festinger, 1950; Schachter, 1951; Marques & Paez, 1994) by a) examining how contextual differences that result from changes in the group may affect group members’ reactions to opinion deviates, and b) considering contingencies that result in acceptance or rejection of change-agents and their messages. In addition, this thesis investigates the psychological processes that may mediate and moderate the effects of group opinion change and reintegration on appraisals of change-agents. Specifically, it considers attributed motives of change-agents (i.e., perceived constructiveness; Hornsey, 2005), and target prototypicality (e.g., Hogg, 1993; Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Reicher, & Wetherell, 1987) as two possible mediators of these novel effects. Finally, group members’ identification with the group is examined as a moderator of these processes. Chapter 3 presents the first two experiments that tested the effects of group opinion change on the evaluation of change-agents. Experiment 1 (N=100) was a scenario-based study that had a change-agent express a non-conformist view of giving water to an outgroup state at a time when the ingroup state was experiencing a water crisis. Experiment 2 (N=103) was a scenario-based study that looked at a change-agent who expressed pro-immigration views to the ingroup country at an earlier time when popular attitudes toward immigration were poor. In both experiments the deviants were marginalized initially because they endorsed non-conformist opinions. Depending on the condition, group opinions either shifted toward the positions advocated by the deviants or remained unchanged. Results showed group members’ target evaluations shifted as a function of group opinion change. Target evaluations became less favourable in Experiment 1, and more favourable in Experiment 2. There also was evidence that increased perceived constructiveness mediated more favourable target evaluations in Experiment 2. Chapter 4 presents the first two experiments that tested the effects of reintegration and group members’ identification on the evaluation of change-agents. Both Experiments 3 (N=103) and 4 (N=94) involved a scenario where there was a severe drought in the ingroup state. In Experiment 3, a deviant politician argued for more investment on water infrastructure 10 years earlier when water shortage was not a critical problem. Thus, the politician expressed a minority opinion. In Experiment 4, a deviant water commissioner expressed a controversial opinion to give water to an outgroup state at the height of the drought. Both deviants were marginalized/excluded initially by the group. Reintegration was manipulated by showing that popular support for the deviant had increased (Experiment 3) or the deviant was reinstated (Experiment 4), or the group did not increase support for the deviant at all (not reintegrated). Results showed that high identifiers evaluated the deviant less positively, and perceived the deviant as more destructive after he or she was reintegrated than when marginalization continued. Further, perceived destructiveness mediated the effects of reintegration and identification on trait evaluations. Experiment 4 also showed that high identifiers were less willing to support change after the deviant was reintegrated, than when marginalization continued. Finally, Chapter 5 tested the interactive effects of group opinion change and reintegration on evaluation of change-agents. I also assessed group members’ responses to change-agents in light of the group’s resistance to change even though the change-agents were right and the groups were wrong. Experiment 5 was a scenario-based study in a minimal-groups situation that had a deviant arguing for a more equitable research funding than the existing distribution. Experiment 6 was a scenario-based study on the disagreement between Galileo Galilei and the Catholic Church on planetary motion. Again, the deviants initially were marginalized by the groups. For opinion change, the groups either adopted or rejected the deviants’ opinions. For reintegration, the groups either treated the deviants more favourably or continued to reject them. Results showed that either opinion change or reintegration was sufficient to defuse negativity towards the deviants. More importantly, group members continued mistreating the deviants when the groups rejected opinion change and reintegration. That is, negativity towards the deviants was highest when opinion was unchanged, and marginalization continued. Overall, this thesis shows that group members’ evaluations of deviant agents for change can shift as a function of group opinion change and reintegration. Group opinion change and/or reintegration defuse negativity toward change-agents in the absence of psychological threat (i.e., perceived destructiveness). However, if threat is present, opinion change or reintegration may ironically elicit more group members’ negativity towards these targets. This thesis also contributes to the literature by showing how change promotes or inhibits group members’ endorsement of change-agents.