CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 255Social and Intergroup PsychologyCultural Differences and ValuesPersonality Traits and Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Extending the bases of subjective attitudinal ambivalence: Interpersonal and intrapersonal antecedents of evaluative tension

Priester, Joseph R., Petty, Richard E.·2001·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.80.1.19
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Researchers have conceptualized ambivalence as resulting from the conflicting positive and negative thoughts and feelings that a person holds toward an attitude object (intrapersonal discrepancy). The authors investigated the hypothesis that perceived interpersonal attitudinal discrepancies can also contribute to feelings of subjective ambivalence beyond that determined by intrapersonal discrepancy. Study 1 revealed that the perception of attitudinal discrepancy with one's parents was associated with greater feelings of ambivalence. Studies 2 and 3 found increased ambivalence as a function of manipulated interpersonal discrepancies. Study 4 replicated and reversed the effect, revealing that interpersonal attitudinal discrepancy with a disliked other was associated with less ambivalence. Together, these studies provide support for the proposition that, because of balance processes, interpersonal relationships influence feelings of subjective ambivalence.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.80.1.19

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 82 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Allport, 1935, Attitudes., 798
  2. 10.1037/0022-3514.62.6.893 · DOI
  3. Chein, 1951, Notes on a framework for the measurement of discrimination and prejudice., 381
  4. Cohen, 1983, Applied multiple regression analysis for the behavioral sciences.
  5. Eagly, 1993, The psychology of attitudes.
  6. Maio, 1996, The utility of open-ended measures to assess intergroup ambivalence., Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 28, 12, 10.1037/0008-400X.28.1.12 · DOI
  7. 10.1037/0022-3514.55.1.37 · DOI
  8. Zajonc, 1968, Cognitive theories in social psychology., Vol. 2, 320

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 255

Related

Metadata

Authors
Priester, J. R., & Petty, R. E.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
ORCID
Petty, Richard E.
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2001
Volume
80
Issue
1
Pages
19-34
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/0022-3514.80.1.19
OpenAlex
W2003567180
Cited by
255
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 9
FWCI
23.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
parent-adolescent relationships, attitude change
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude, Cognitive Dissonance, Female, Humans, Individuality, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Michigan, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self-Assessment, Set, Psychology, Social Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review