Abstract
A hypothesis was tested that increased “fate control” will lead to increased compliance. Fate control was manipulated by inducing S to tell a lie about information he had received and then make use of the information. Other Ss were induced to lie but could not make use of the information. Control Ss who told no lie were included in the design. Significant compliance was observed in the “fate control” group only.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
BERSCHEID, E., & WALSTER, E. When does a harmdoer compensate a victim? Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 1967, 6, 435–441.
BROCK, T. C. On interpreting the effects of transgression upon compliance. Psychological Bulletin, 1969, 72, 138–145.
BROCK, T. C., & BECKER, L. A. “Debriefing” and susceptibility to subsequent experimental manipulations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1966, 2, 314–323.
CARLSMITH, J. M., & GROSS, A. E. Some effects of guilt on compliance. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 1969, 11, 240–244.
FREEDMAN, J. L., WALLINGTON, S. A., & BLESS, E. Compliance without pressure: The effect of guilt. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 1967, 7, 117–124.
WALLACE, J., & SADALLA, E. Behavioral consequences of transgression: I. The effects of social recognition. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1966, 1, 187–194.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McMillen, D.L. Transgression, fate control, and compliant behavior. Psychon Sci 21, 103–104 (1970). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335787
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03335787