Brief for Prof. Leslie C. Griffin as Amica Curiae in Support of Appellant, Kant v. Lexington Theological Seminary

Tested the hypothesis that majority (MAJ) influence induces convergent processing, which stimulates attitude change (AC) on focal issues (FISs), whereas minority (MIN) influence produces divergent processing, which might stimulate change on related attitudes. Ss were 86 high school students. Results of a numerical support (MAJ vs MIN) by outcome involvement (high vs low) experiment with AC and cognitive activity as dependent variables yielded partial support for these predictions. MAJ arguments caused more AC on the FIS than MIN arguments, especially under high outcome involvement. Results indicate: (1) that MAJ support is more effective than MIN support in eliciting AC on FISs, (2) that both MAJ and MIN support elicit cognitive activity, which predicts AC on FISs in MAJ support, but generalization in MIN support and (3) that these processes are especially strong when there is motivation to engage in systematic processing of persuasive arguments

Neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience:contributions to neurology

Background: 'Neuromarketing' is a term that has often been used in the media in recent years. These public discussions have generally centered around potential ethical aspects and the public fear of negative consequences for society in general, and consumers in particular. However, positive contributions to the scientific discourse from developing a biological model that tries to explain context-situated human behavior such as consumption have often been neglected. We argue for a differentiated terminology, naming commercial applications of neuroscientific methods 'neuromarketing' and scientific ones 'consumer neuroscience'. While marketing scholars have eagerly integrated neuroscientific evidence into their theoretical framework, neurology has only recently started to draw its attention to the results of consumer neuroscience.Discussion: In this paper we address key research topics of consumer neuroscience that we think are of interest for neurologists; namely the reward system, trust and ethical issues. We argue that there are overlapping research topics in neurology and consumer neuroscience where both sides can profit from collaboration. Further, neurologists joining the public discussion of ethical issues surrounding neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience could contribute standards and experience gained in clinical research.Summary: We identify the following areas where consumer neuroscience could contribute to the field of neurology:. First, studies using game paradigms could help to gain further insights into the underlying pathophysiology of pathological gambling in Parkinson's disease, frontotemporal dementia, epilepsy, and Huntington's disease.Second, we identify compulsive buying as a common interest in neurology and consumer neuroscience. Paradigms commonly used in consumer neuroscience could be applied to patients suffering from Parkinson's disease and frontotemporal dementia to advance knowledge of this important behavioral symptom.Third, trust research in the medical context lacks empirical behavioral and neuroscientific evidence. Neurologists entering this field of research could profit from the extensive knowledge of the biological foundation of trust that scientists in economically-orientated neurosciences have gained.Fourth, neurologists could contribute significantly to the ethical debate about invasive methods in neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience. Further, neurologists should investigate biological and behavioral reactions of neurological patients to marketing and advertising measures, as they could show special consumer vulnerability and be subject to target marketing

Dilution of stereotype-based cooperation in mixed-motive interdependence

This research expands the finding that nondiagnostic information about a target reduces the impact of stereotypes on person perception and social judgment. Specifically, we examined this dilution effect in settings of mixed-motive outcome-interdependence and studied stereotype-based cognition as well as cooperative behavior. Three experiments employing Prisoner's and Chicken Dilemma Games revealed that people cooperate less when category information suggests that the other is competitive and immoral rather than cooperative and honest, but not when nondiagnostic attribute information is added. Moreover, Experiment 3 shows that people are motivated to interpret attribute information as consistent with their stereotype-based beliefs; dilution occurs only when it is impossible to construe attribute information as consistent with the stereotype. Implications to both the person perception literature and interdependence and conflict resolution theories are discussed. (C) 1995 Academic Press, Inc