Acting on an attitude as a function of self-percept and inequity.

Freedman and Eraser's (1966) suggestion that self-percept may affect the likelihood that individuals will act on an attitude was investigated. The probability of subjects' complying with Experimenter 2's request to distribute anti-air-pollution leaflets was assessed following Experimenter 1's manipulation of high or low payment ($1.50 or $10) and feedback to subjects indicating they (a) had a personality which entitled them to this payment (doer self-percept-inequity) ; (6) had a personality, but were entitled to this payment because of their performance on an experimental task (doer self-percept-no inequity); or (c) were entitled to this payment because of their task performance (no doer self-percept-no inequity). The probability of compliance was greater for high- than low-payment subjects (p < .05), and greater for subjects who were told that payment was contingent upon their personality than for those in other feedback conditions (p < .01). Although both inequity motivation and the self-percept manipulation were necessary to increase the likelihood of subjects' acting on an attitude, the present results are consistent with Freedman and Eraser's suggestion. They also tend to support some inequity theory assumptions employed in the experimental manipulations. Although a great deal of attention has been given to attitudes and attitude change, there has been surprisingly little analysis of the relationship between attitudes and behavior.3 Yet this is certainly an important area of study, not only theoretically but also practically, for there is a growing demand being placed on the discipline of psychology to contribute to the solution of social problems. In a time fraught with violence, we need to understand the causes of aggression so as to prevent it; in a nation marked by racism, we must understand the genesis of attitudes so as to change them. Equally important to the institution of social change is an under