Students rated a poem and an editorial believing that they alone were responsible, that they were one of four persons responsible, or that they were one of sixteen persons responsible for evaluating the communications. As predicted, group mem bers reported putting less effort into the assessment than indi viduals, and this diffusion of effort followed an inverse power function. In addition, individuals evaluated the communications more favorably than persons who thought they shared the evalu ation responsibility.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brock. T.C.Implications of commodity theory for value change. In A. Greenwald, T. Brock, and T. Ostrom (Eds.) Psyhological foundations of attitudes. New York: Academic Press. 1968. pp. 243-273.
2.
Ingham, A.G., Levinger, G., Graves. J. & Pechham, V.The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance . Journal of Experimental Social Psyelrology, 1974, 10. 371-384.
3.
Latané. B.A theory of social impact. Psychonomics Society , St. Louis, 1973.
4.
Latané. B. & Dabbs, J.M.Sex, group size and helping in three cities. Sociometry , 1975, 38, 180-194.
5.
Latané. B., & Darley, J.M., Help in a crisis: Bystander response to an emergency. Morristown. New Jersey: General Learning Press, 1976.
6.
Latané. B.Williams. K. & Harkins, S.Some cheering experiments. Psychonomic Society . St. Louis, 1976.
7.
Levy, P.Lundgren. D., Ansel,M., Fell, D., Fink, B., & McGrath.J.E.Bystandereffect in a demand-without-threat situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1972, 24, 166-171.
8.
Linder. D. & Worchel, S.Opinion change as a result of effortfully drawing a counter attitudinal conclusion . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1970, 6, 432-448.
9.
Wicker. A.N.Size of church membership and members support of church behavior settings . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1969, 13, 278-288.
