Read the following nine statements carefully and notice the letters next to them. The one statement that most closely matches the participant's stand on smoking is indicated with a YY. All other statements with which the participant agrees are marked with a Y. The statement found to be most objectionable is denoted with an NN. All other disagreeable statements are distinguished with an N. Statements left blank represent the latitude of noncommitment.
NN 1. Since smoking is not only hazardous to the smoker, but also to those around the smoker, all tobacco smoking must be outlawed.
N 2. Cigarette advertising influences children to smoke and must therefore be outlawed.
N 3. Since tobacco is addictive, its use should be discouraged.
4. Cigarette advertising should be allowed, but anti-smoking advertising should also be used for educational purposes.
N 5. Both the arguments for and against tobacco usage are similar.
N 6. Since second hand smoke is dangerous, restrictions should be enforced that allow for smoking only in designated areas.
Y 7. Cigarette advertising must be protected by freedom of speech.
Y 8. Smoking should be allowed in all public places.
YY 9. Smoking is a personal choice and must not be influenced by any regulations.
Observe the pattern of this participant's responses. The latitudes of acceptance and noncommitment are narrow. The only views this person agrees with are that tobacco usage and tobacco advertising should be completely unrestricted. The only statement the respondent had no reaction to discussed the issue of educational advertising that would publicize the harm that tobacco causes. The latitude of rejection is noticeably larger. Where only three statements fell into the latitude of acceptance and one into the latitude of noncommitment, there are five statements in the latitude of rejection. This indicates the possibility of a high level of ego-involvement with this product. It appears that this person takes smoking very seriously and has a high level of personal involvement with the issue. Recall that the extreme stand taken may be empirically related to the ego-involvement level, but is actually an independent concept, according to Carolyn W. Sherif's research. The respondent used in this example would have a very small likelihood of an attitude change. The distinguishing characteristic that reflects an attitude change is a large latitude of noncommitment, which this person clearly does not have.
When a person with this level of involvement with a product observes advertising such as the Benson & Hedges ad, the reaction may vary greatly from that of nonsmokers. A nonsmoker may not even notice the ad since it represents a product that person doesn't buy. Although this campaign is different from many tobacco campaigns today, the nonsmoker may not be aware of the differences, nor care. A smoker with the above mentioned latitudes will more likely take notice of this and other cigarette advertising and will therefore notice the playfulness found in the Benson & Hedges ad as opposed to another brand's advertising.
There is a good chance that an assimilation effect will occur when the earlier mentioned respondent views the ad. That is to say that a smoker would be more likely to mold this ad into his or her latitude of acceptance than a nonsmoker with different latitudes would. For example, a smoker may be loyal to another brand of cigarettes and enjoy that brand's advertising, but when exposed to the new advertising by another brand, that person would find it easy to incorporate the new ad into his or her perception of acceptable tobacco advertising.
On the other hand, a nonsmoker would probably contrast the ad. A nonsmoker would likely have very different latitudes of acceptance, rejection, and noncommitment if asked to complete the same ordered alternatives questionnaire. As a result, that person's view of cigarette advertising would be on a different level than that of smokers. This person would probably immediately consider the ad to be outside his or her latitude of acceptance just because it is a cigarette ad, even though it may be closer to their latitude than that person thinks. In summary, it would be easier for the nonsmoker to reject the ad as being outside his or her latitude of acceptance, just as it would be easier for the smoker to accept the ad.
Click here to return to the 