Theory Application Paper
Social Judgement Theory Muzafer Sherif’s theory of social judgement explains and predicts how and why persuasive messages in communication are successful or ineffective. Sherif describes that, with every new idea presented, everyone has their own beliefs and attitudes beforehand. In the case of a past relationship between a man and myself, Sherif’s theory will be able to explain why our arguments didn’t work, what we could have done differently, and what I may be able to expect in the future.
Review of Theory Everyone has their own beliefs, attitudes, and opinions about every subject. Whether they be weak or strong, personal or impersonal, these views are always with us. Muzafer Sherif describes how these opinions …show more content…
We were arguing from two very different ideas that fell into the opposite of each other’s latitude of acceptance. My latitude of acceptance – that there is a God, Jesus died for our sins, and that there is more than just this life – was Alan’s latitude of rejection. Whereas Alan’s latitude of acceptance – that science is all that there is and there’s nothing more after this life – was, and still is, my latitude of rejection. The biggest problem with our arguments was that neither one of us attempted to persuade each other using idea’s closest to the other’s latitudes of acceptance. In other words, I only argued from my point of view (or acceptance), and Alan continuously argued from his. This would cause the boomerang effect that social judgement theory describes, because our argument was from each other’s latitude of rejection, causing us to move farther away from each other’s stances and deeper into our …show more content…
Going on with the topic of religion, my current boyfriend, we’ll call him Michael, is a Christian, while I am continuing to be Catholic. This situation is obviously nothing like my relationship with Alan in high school, because Michael and I have much more in common. Much more overlap in our latitudes of acceptance. Instead of being against each other, and arguing about it, like Alan and I did; Michael and I are able to support each other. Of course, we don’t have everything in common when it comes to our religious practice; like Catholics practice Eucharistic prayers in mass, and pray to Saints and the Virgin Mary, and Christians do not. We do have core religious values in common though; like the belief in the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), the resurrection and purpose of Jesus, and eternal life. I’ve always told myself that, as long as I marry a man that follows God, regardless of his religious practice, then I’ll be
Social Judgement Theory Muzafer Sherif’s theory of social judgement explains and predicts how and why persuasive messages in communication are successful or ineffective. Sherif describes that, with every new idea presented, everyone has their own beliefs and attitudes beforehand. In the case of a past relationship between a man and myself, Sherif’s theory will be able to explain why our arguments didn’t work, what we could have done differently, and what I may be able to expect in the future.
Review of Theory Everyone has their own beliefs, attitudes, and opinions about every subject. Whether they be weak or strong, personal or impersonal, these views are always with us. Muzafer Sherif describes how these opinions …show more content…
We were arguing from two very different ideas that fell into the opposite of each other’s latitude of acceptance. My latitude of acceptance – that there is a God, Jesus died for our sins, and that there is more than just this life – was Alan’s latitude of rejection. Whereas Alan’s latitude of acceptance – that science is all that there is and there’s nothing more after this life – was, and still is, my latitude of rejection. The biggest problem with our arguments was that neither one of us attempted to persuade each other using idea’s closest to the other’s latitudes of acceptance. In other words, I only argued from my point of view (or acceptance), and Alan continuously argued from his. This would cause the boomerang effect that social judgement theory describes, because our argument was from each other’s latitude of rejection, causing us to move farther away from each other’s stances and deeper into our …show more content…
Going on with the topic of religion, my current boyfriend, we’ll call him Michael, is a Christian, while I am continuing to be Catholic. This situation is obviously nothing like my relationship with Alan in high school, because Michael and I have much more in common. Much more overlap in our latitudes of acceptance. Instead of being against each other, and arguing about it, like Alan and I did; Michael and I are able to support each other. Of course, we don’t have everything in common when it comes to our religious practice; like Catholics practice Eucharistic prayers in mass, and pray to Saints and the Virgin Mary, and Christians do not. We do have core religious values in common though; like the belief in the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), the resurrection and purpose of Jesus, and eternal life. I’ve always told myself that, as long as I marry a man that follows God, regardless of his religious practice, then I’ll be