Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Green, M. C.
Right arrow Articles by Tetlock, P. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Green, M. C.
Right arrow Articles by Tetlock, P. E.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 26, No. 11, 1380-1391 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167200263006

Coping with Accountability Cross-Pressures: Low-Effort Evasive Tactics and High-Effort Quests for Complex Compromises

Melanie C. Green

The Ohio State University, mcgreen{at}psych.upenn.edu

Penny S. Visser

Princeton University

Philip E. Tetlock

The Ohio State University

The current study explores two classes of strategies of coping with accountability: low-cognitive-effort decision-evasion tactics (buckpassing, procrastination, and exiting the situation) and high-cognitive-effort attempts to craft integratively complex compromises among conflicting perspectives. Some participants read weak arguments on one side of the free trade issue and strong arguments on the other side, and some participants read strong arguments for both the pro-and anti-free trade positions. They then expected their own views to be anonymous or expected to justify those views to a pro-free trade audience or to both a pro-and an anti-free trade audience. Participants were most integratively complex when they read strong arguments from each side and were accountable to conflicting constituencies (maximum intrapsychic and interpersonal conflict). Participants also relied on low-effort decision-evasion tactics to escape accountability and were willing to use escape strategies demanding relatively more time and energy to avoid accountability to contradictory constituencies.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Conflict ResolutionHome page
U. Bar-Joseph and R. McDermott
Personal Functioning Under Stress: Accountability and Social Support of Israeli Leaders in the Yom Kippur War
Journal of Conflict Resolution, February 1, 2008; 52(1): 144 - 170.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Cross-Cultural PsychologyHome page
C. T. Tadmor and P. E. Tetlock
Biculturalism: A Model of the Effects of Second-Culture Exposure on Acculturation and Integrative Complexity
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, March 1, 2006; 37(2): 173 - 190.
[Abstract] [PDF]