Content area
Abstract
This study examined Levy's (1963) hypotheses that arousal reducing interpretations may be more influential than arousal producing ones. The study included one independent variable, counselor intervention, with two levels: confrontation and reflection. Counselor intervention established the arousal context prior to interpretations, with confrontations creating high-arousal and reflections creating a low-arousal context. A no-treatment control condition was included in some analyses. The study hypothesized that interpretations presented within the high-arousal context would be more acceptable than those in the low-arousal context, because interpretations in the former context would be associated with arousal reduction.
Sixty subjects were selected for the study who tended to attribute procrastination to factors beyond their control. Experimental subjects participated in one 30 minute interview in which two interpretations were presented at designated times, within the differing arousal contexts. Interpretations were designed to influence subjects to attribute procrastination to controllable causes.
No-treatment control subjects did not participate in interviews, but were asked to complete posttest and follow-up measures assessing attitude change and interpretation acceptance. Galvanic skin response data and verbal affective response to interpretations were assessed during interviews. Immediately following interviews, attitude change and perceptions of counselors were assessed. At follow-up, attitude change, memory of interpretations, and interpretation acceptance were measured.
The results supported Levy's (1963) hypotheses. Subjects in the confrontation condition experienced significant arousal reduction following the first interpretation during interviews, but not the second interpretation. Confrontation subjects showed more accepting verbal affective responses during interviews toward the first interpretation than the second. Subjects experiencing the confrontation condition were more accepting of interpretations than those in the no-treatment control condition.
