Advertisement

Behavior and Social Issues

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 71–79 | Cite as

Consequence Analysis: An on-Line Replication

  • Sarah K. Moore
  • Mark A. Mattaini
Article

Abstract

Sanford and Fawcett (1980) developed an approach for increasing informed public opinion called consequence analysis, in which more thoughtful, better informed opinions appeared to result from a procedure in which respondents were asked to consider, elaborate, and evaluate the multiple consequences of a public policy decision. In this partial replication, 43 persons responded to an internet-based instrument that tested the effects of an online consequence analysis procedure. The results indicated that the procedure produced significant changes in stated opinions in the direction of opinions more consistent with the science of behavior, supporting the initial findings of Sanford and Fawcett, but also that many respondents did not complete the on-line instrument. Implications for further research, and the possible substantial importance of the consequence analysis procedure for expanding “self-reflective society” are explored.

Keywords

consequence analysis public opinion change 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akwesasne Notes (1978). Basic call to consciousness. Summertown, TN: Book Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, T., & Birnbaum, M. H. (1976). Test of an additive model of social inference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, pp. 655–662.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.33.6.655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Davidson, A. R., & Beach, L. R. (1981). Error patterns in the prediction of fertility. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11, pp. 455–488.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1981.tb00837.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davidson, A. R., & Jaccard, J. J. (1979). Variables that moderate the attitude-behavior relation: Results of a longitudinal survey. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, pp. 1364–1376.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.8.1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Elliott, D. S., & Tolan, P. H. (1999). Youth violence prevention, intervention, and social policy: An overview. In D. J. Flannery & C. R. Huff (Eds.), Youth violence: prevention, intervention, and social policy (pp. 3–46). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.Google Scholar
  6. Fawcett, S. B., Bernstein, G. S., Czyzewski, M. J., Greene, B. F., Hannah, G. T., Iwata, B. A., Jason, L. A., Mathews, R. M., Morris, E. K., Otis-Wilborn, A., Seekins, T., & Winett, R. A. (1988). Behavior analysis and public policy. The Behavior Analyst, 11, pp. 11–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Geller, E. S., Winett, R. A., & Everett, P. B. (1982). Preserving the environment: New strategies for behavior change. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  8. Jenson, J. M., Potter, C. C., & Howard, M. O. (2001). American juvenile justice: Recent trends and issues in youth offending. Social Policy and Administration, 35 (1), pp. 48–68.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9515.00219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mattaini, M. A. (2001). Peace power for adolescents: Strategies for a culture of nonviolence. Washington, DC: NASW Press.Google Scholar
  10. Rasinski, K. (1989). The effect of question wording on support for government spending. Public Opinion Quarterly, 53, pp. 388–94.  https://doi.org/10.1086/269158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rubin, E. L. (1999) (Ed.). Minimizing harm: A new crime policy for modern America. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  12. Sanford, F. L., & Fawcett, S. B. (1980). Consequence analysis: Its effects on verbal statements about an environmental project. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, pp. 57–64.  https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1980.13-57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Seekins, T., & Fawcett, S. B. (1986). Public policymaking and research information. The Behavior Analyst, 9 (1), pp. 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sidman, M. (2001). Coercion and its fallout (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Author’s Cooperative Inc., Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Sloan, L. R., & Ostrom, T. M. (1974). Amount of information and interpersonal judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, pp.23–29.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tourangeau, R., Rasinski, K., Bradburn, N., & D’Andrade, R. (1989). Carryover effects in attitude surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 53, pp. 495–524.  https://doi.org/10.1086/269169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Warr, M. (1995). Poll trends: Public opinion on crime and punishment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 59, pp. 296–310.  https://doi.org/10.1086/269474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zaller, J. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Behaviorists for Social Responsibility 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarah K. Moore
    • 1
  • Mark A. Mattaini
    • 1
  1. 1.Jane Addams College of Social WorkUniversity of IllinoisChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations