Social Judgement Theory

Term Paper

Kathmandu University of School of Management

Social Judgement Theory

Term Paper

Consumer Behavior

Submitted to,
Asst. Prof. Rupesh K. Shrestha

Submitted by,
Amit Pathak
14325 || MBA 5th

10th August, 2015

Social Judgement Theory

Term Paper

Introduction
Social judgment theory (SJT) is a persuasion theory proposed by Carolyn Sherif, Muzafer Sherif,
and Carl Hovland, defined by Sherif and Sherif as the perception and evaluation of an idea by
comparing it with current attitudes. The central belief of social judgment theory is that attitude
change is mediated by judgmental processes and effects; that is, messages produce attitude change
through judgmental processes and effects. More specifically, the claim is that the effect of a
persuasive communication depends upon the way in which the receiver evaluates the position it
advocates.
One of the important aspect of the theory is the notion that people differ in terms of the information
they find acceptable or unacceptable. They form attitude of acceptance and rejection around an
attitude standard. Ideas that fall within a certain latitude will be favorably received, but those
falling outside will not be received. The perspective that people assimilate new information about
attitude objects in light of what they already know or feel; the initial attitude acts as a frame of
reference, and new information is categorized in terms of this standard. For instance, if a consumer
addicted for games, he/she will have a favorable concept of new Sony PSP4 model. If he/she is
opposed to gaming, then the message would probably not considered.

Social Judgement and Communication

The Social Judgment Theory is basically a communication model that explains whether a
persuasive message has a likely chance of resulting in the change of attitude of the receiver by
studying human judgment. This theory considers the psychological as well as situational aspect of

Social Judgement Theory

Term Paper

the consumer to specify the conditions under which the change takes place and predicts the
direction and the extent of the attitudinal change.
This theory proposes that the probability of a persuasive message altering attitude depends on
certain constructs. Firstly, the receiver of the message already has a certain category of judgment
against which the message will be evaluated. When pressed upon by said persuasive message, the
receiver automatically assess the messages by locating it on the category of judgment. These
categories are acceptance, non-commitment and rejection. The size of latitudes of said
categories depends upon the level of ego-involvement of the receiver pertaining to the message.
With higher involvement, the rejection latitude broadens and the non-commitment latitude
significantly reduces.
The receiver of the message generally distorts the message so as to fit said message in a particular
category. If in case the message falls in the range of ideas that are acceptable by the receiver, then
there is every chance of accepting what is being persuaded. On the other hand, if it falls in the
range of ideas that is rejected (i.e. in the latitude of rejection), then the message will be rejected. It
should be noted that the acceptance and rejection of an idea depends on the level of egoinvolvement and the latitude of the categories. Within the latitude of acceptance lies the receivers
anchor position which is basically that persons most preferred position with regards to that
subject.
So, communicating a message that lies closer to the anchor position will ensure maximum
influence. Similarly, putting forward a message that lies in the latitude of rejection will have
minimal influence. Moreover, in case the message is such that it is categorized beyond the range
of rejection, a boomerang effect will take place making the message carry a negative impact.

Social Judgement Theory

Term Paper

Constructing a message that will end up in the receivers latitude of rejection will have no influence
over the receiver. On the other hand, communicating a message that lies in the latitude of
acceptance (and closer to the anchor position) will influence the receiver to do what the message
is asking. This is because small or moderate differences between the anchor positions and the
proposed position will cause change while the probability of change decreases with larger
discrepancies declining to no change and finally change opposed to the advocated position (Sherif,
Sherif, & Nebergall, Attitude and attitude change. The social judgment-involvement approach,
1965). Therefore, the key for a marketer is to formulate the message in such a way that when
categorized, the message falls at least in the latitude of non-commitment and in doing so (through
that message), the receiver is influenced to shift his/her anchor position and broaden the range of
acceptance. Thus, changing the attitude of the receiver. If the message falls in the recipients
latitude of acceptance, well and good.
The key point of the SJT is that attitude change is facilitated by judgmental process and effects. In
other words, persuasion occurs at the end of the process where a person understands a particular
message then compares the position the message encourages with respect to that person's preferred
position on that issue.

Thesis Statement:
How can the acceptability of the price by the consumer supported by the Social Judgement Theory?

Social Judgement Theory

Term Paper

Analysis and Interpretation:

The concept of price acceptability by the consumer is supported by Sherif and Hovlands social
Judgement Theory. This theory focus primarily on expression of the attitudes and psychological
processes underlying the development (Alford & Engelland, 2000). According to the theory, when
evaluating individuals or things say suppose advertising selling price, consumer develops
guidelines for their evaluation:

The latitudes of acceptance

Rejection

Noncommitment

For instance, the latitude of the acceptance indicates all possible behavior or perceptions that can
be considered to be acceptable by consumers. Based on the guidelines, pricing offers falling within
the latitude of acceptance can be judged to be acceptable, thus regarding them as credible
information. Price offers falling within the latitude of rejection can be considered to be
unacceptable and contrasted which is considered as unbelievable information. However the
stimulus falling in the latitude of noncommitment can be all possible behavior that are neither
positive nor negative, hence leading to consumer indecisiveness.
Much of the price related literature has supported the applicability of social judgement theory in
that consumer have a wide range of internal standard against which price offers may be judged
(alford & Engelland, 2000; Kalyanaram &

Little, 1994; Klein & Oglethorpe, 1987). The

continuum of internal price standard is composed of the latitude of acceptance, rejection and
noncommitment can be identified with the preferred prices that are considered as internal reference
price that are easily acceptable, rejectable, or very difficult to decide (Li & Lee, 2005)
4

Social Judgement Theory

Term Paper

Our level of ego-involvement affects the size of our latitudes. Ego-involvement refers to the
importance an issue is to our self-identity. It can be said that Customer X is more ego-involved on
the subject of what should be done with increase in laptop price than Customer Y is, since his
latitude of acceptance is smaller. Because of this, he would be harder to persuade than Customer
Y since the price increment is more important to him than it is to Customer Y. The smaller the
latitude of acceptance, the more ego-involved the person is.
We tend to distort incoming information to fit our categories of judgment. If Customer X were
being persuaded to accept the price of Rs.70K is what should be price of Dell Laptop, the price
that it is so close to his anchor position will make him think it is closer than it really is. In other
words, because Rs.70K lands inside his latitude of acceptance, he will distort the information by
assimilating it, or making it seem more acceptable than it really is.

Conclusion:
Social Judgment Theory, in some way, is a very simplified theory to persuasive effects. It considers
only the position the message advocates and the clarity with which it identifies the position. It does
not consider where the message contains compelling arguments or relevant evidences or even
whether the message contains implausible arguments and evidences. Nor does it consider other
factors like the communicator or how the message is organized. What it claims is that everything
depends on what position the message takes. Therefore, the SJT is more of an incomplete theory
that does not consider a lot of aspects.
The attitude change (persuasion) is outcome of the judgmental processes and effects. Persuasion
occurs at end of the process where individual understand a message, comparing with its current
5

Social Judgement Theory

Term Paper

position on that issue, depending upon position of anchor point, latitudes of acceptance, rejection
and non-commitment with level of ego-involvement.

Social Judgement Theory

Term Paper

Bibliography
Sherif, C. W., Sherif, M., & Nebergall, R. E. (1965). Attitude and attitude change. The social
judgment-involvement approach. In C. W. Sherif, M. Sherif, & R. E. Nebergall, Attitude
and attitude change. The social judgment-involvement approach (p. 264). Philadelphia:
W.B. Saunders.
(n.d.). Retrieved from http://healthyinfluence.com/wordpress/steves-primer-of-practicalpersuasion-3-0/feeling/social-judgment-theory/
Emery, F. (1970). Some Psychological Aspects of Price. Princeton: Brandon/Systems.
Griffin, E. (2012). A First Look at Communication Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Little, G. K. (1989). A Price Response Model Developed from Perceptual Theories.
O' Keefe, D. (1990). Social Judgment Theory. In persuasion Theory and Research (pp. 29-44).
CA Newbury Park: Sage.
Sherif, C., Sherif, M., & Nebergall, R. (1965). Attitude and attitude change: The Social
Judgment involvement approach. Philadelphia: Saunders.
social-judgmenttheory. (n.d.). Retrieved from healthyinfluence.com.
Solomon, M. (2011). Consumer Behavior. In Buying, Having, and Being 9th Edition (p. 262).
Wills, B. T. (1970). Pricing Strategy. Princeton: Brandon.