Oral Presentations: UC 326

Presentation Type

Presentation - Campus Access Only

Faculty Mentor’s Full Name

Betsy Bach

Faculty Mentor’s Department

Communication Studies

Abstract / Artist's Statement

This experiment examined how accountability to an audience with unknown views influenced the integrative, dialectical, and elaborative complexity of people’s statements. The experiment tested 185 undergraduate students randomly assigned to one of two conditions: No Accountability and Accountability. Participants in the No Accountability condition were assured their responses would be completely anonymous. Participants in the Accountability condition were told they would have to explain their views to another individual, but not what that individual’s views were. Participants responded with their views on 4 controversial social issues: abortion, immigration, climate change, and gun ownership. Hypothesis One: Individuals who are accountable to an audience with unknown views will respond with greater integrative complexity than individuals who are not accountable to an audience. Hypothesis Two: Individuals who are accountable to an audience with unknown views will respond with a greater ratio of dialectical complexity to elaborative complexity than individuals who are not accountable to an audience. There was no evidence to support either Hypothesis One (p=.324) or Hypothesis Two (p=.7128). However, there was very strong evidence that the accountability manipulation caused a greater drop-out rate for participants in the Accountability condition than in the No Accountability condition (p=.007). These results suggest that although accountability to others may not influence complexity in all contexts, instead sometimes causing some people to be less willing to express controversial views.

Category

Social Sciences

Share

COinS
 
Apr 27th, 9:00 AM Apr 27th, 9:20 AM

The Effect of Accountability on Dialectical and Elaborative Complexity

UC 326

This experiment examined how accountability to an audience with unknown views influenced the integrative, dialectical, and elaborative complexity of people’s statements. The experiment tested 185 undergraduate students randomly assigned to one of two conditions: No Accountability and Accountability. Participants in the No Accountability condition were assured their responses would be completely anonymous. Participants in the Accountability condition were told they would have to explain their views to another individual, but not what that individual’s views were. Participants responded with their views on 4 controversial social issues: abortion, immigration, climate change, and gun ownership. Hypothesis One: Individuals who are accountable to an audience with unknown views will respond with greater integrative complexity than individuals who are not accountable to an audience. Hypothesis Two: Individuals who are accountable to an audience with unknown views will respond with a greater ratio of dialectical complexity to elaborative complexity than individuals who are not accountable to an audience. There was no evidence to support either Hypothesis One (p=.324) or Hypothesis Two (p=.7128). However, there was very strong evidence that the accountability manipulation caused a greater drop-out rate for participants in the Accountability condition than in the No Accountability condition (p=.007). These results suggest that although accountability to others may not influence complexity in all contexts, instead sometimes causing some people to be less willing to express controversial views.