Abstract
Subjects adjusted the sound pressure level of a 1,000-Hz tone or the luminance of a 10° target on a translucent screen to match their anticipated subjective tension in performing before audiences represented by 1–16 color slides of old or young males or females. Consistent with a new theory of social impact, “tension” was a multiplicative power function of the number texponent ≅ .6) of people in the audience and their ages, with older t37-year-old) audiences generating 2–3 times the tension of younger Iteen-age) audiences. Male audiences elicited 50%-40% more tension than females.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Reference Notes
Knowles, E. S.The gravity of crowding: The application of social physics to the effects of others. Unoublished manuscript, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, 1975.
Latané, B.A theory of social impact. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, 1973.
Brenner, M.Stagefright and Stevens’ law. Paper presented to the Eastern Psychological Association, 1974.
References
Anderson, N. Cross-task validation of functional measurement.Perception & Psychophysics, 1972,12, 389–395.
Brennan, E. M., Ryan, E. B., &Dawson, W. E. Scaling of apparent accentedness by magnitude estimation and sensory modality matching.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1975,4, 27–36.
Brown, B. R. Face-saving following experimentally induced embarrassment.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1970,6, 255–271.
Brown, B. R., &Garland, H. The effects of incompetency, audience acquaintanceship and anticipated evaluative feedback ort face-saving behavior.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1971,7, 490–502.
Brown, B. R., Garland, H., &Mena, M. Effects of another’s dependency and expectations of meeting with him on the reduction of face-saving behavior.Proceedings of the 79th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Associatton, 1971,6, 299–300. (Summary)
Cottrell, N. B. Social facilitation. In C. S. McClintock (Ed.),Ecperimental social psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1972. Pp. 185–236.
Curtis, D. W., Attneave, F., &Harrington, T. L. A test of a two-stage model of magnitude judgment.Perception & Psychophysics, 1968,3, 25–31.
Dawson, W. E. An assessment of ratio scales of opinion produced by sensory-modality matching. In H. R. Moskowitz, B. Scharf, & J. C. Stevens (Eds.),Sensations and measurement. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel, 1975.
Dawson, W. E., &Brinker, R. P. Validation of ratio scales of opinion by multimodality matching.Perception & Psychophysics, 1971,9, 413–417.
Dawson, W. E., &Mirando, M. A. Sensory-modality opinion scales for individual subjects.Perceptton & Psychophysics, 1975,17, 596–600.
Dawson, W. E., &Mirando, M. A. Inverse scales of opinion obtained by sensory-modality matching.Perception and Motor Skills, 1976,42, 415–425.
Dodd, S. C. The interactance hypothesis: A gravity model fitting physical masses and human groups.American Sociological Review, 1950,15, 245–256.
Freeman, S., Walker, M., Borden, R., &Latané, B. Diffusion of responsibility and restaurant tipping: Cheaper by the bunch.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1975,1, 584–587.
Garland, H., &Brown, B. R. Face-saving as affected by subjects’ sex, audiences’ sex and audience expertise.Sociometry, 1972,35, 280–289.
Goffman, E.The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday, 1959.
Greenhouse, M., &Geisser, T. On methods in the analysis of profile data.Psychometrika, 1959,24, 95–112.
Hamblin, R. L. Mathematical experimentation and sociological theory: A critical analysis.Sociometry, 1971,34, 423–452.
Künnapas, T., &Wikström, I. Measurement of occupational preferences: A comparison of scaling methods.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1963,17, 611–614.
Latané, B., &Darley, J. M.The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help? New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970.
Latané, B., &Dabbs, J. Sex, group size and helping in three cities.Sociometry, 1975,38, 180–194.
Levos, K.A dynamic theory of personah’ty: Selected papers of Kurt Lewin. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1935.
Marks, L. E. On scales of sensation: Prolegomena to any future psychophysics that will be able to come forth as science.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974,16, 358–376.
Martens, R. Effect of an audience on learning of a complex motor skill.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1969,12, 252–260.
Modigliani, A. Embarrassment and embarrassability.Sociometry, 1968,31, 313–326.
Porter, H. Studies in the psychology of stuttering. XIV. Stuttering phenomena in relation to size and personnel of audience.Journal of Speech Disorders, 1939,4, 323–333.
Shinn, A. An application of psychophysical scaling techniques to the measurement of national power.Journal of Politics, 1969,31, 932–951.
Stevens, S. S. On the psychophysical law.Psychological Review, 1957,64, 153–181.
Stevess, S. S. To honor Fechner and repeal his law.Science, 1961,133, 80–86.
Stevens, S. S. A metric for the social consensus.Science, 1966,151, 530–541.
Stevess, S. S. Perceived level of noise by Mark VII and decibels.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1972,51, 575–601.
Szevens, S. S.Psychophysics: Introduction to its perceptual, neural and social prospects. New York: Wiley, 1975.
Sxevess, S. S., &Greenbaum, H. B. Regression effect in psychophysical judgment.Perception & Psychophysics, 1966,1, 439–446.
Stewart, J. Q. A basis for social physics.Impact of Science on Society, 1952,3, 110–133.
Tesser, A., &Conlee, M. C. Some effects of time and thought on attitude polarization.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975,31, 262–270.
Walker, R. Group size and psychosocial judgment. Unpublished masters’ thesis, The Ohio State University, 1974.
Ward, L. M. Category judgments of loudness in the absence of an experimenter-induced identification function: Sequential effects and power function fit.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,94, 179–184.
Welch, R. The use of magnitude estimation in attitude scaling: Constructing a measure of political dissatisfaction.Social Science Quarterly, 1971,52, 76–87.
Woolbert, C. H. The audience.Psychological Monographs, 1916,21, 37–54.
Zajonc, R. B. Social facilitation.Science, 1965,149, 269–274.
Zipf, G. K.Human behavior and the principle of least effort. Cambridge, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1949.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported oy National Science Foundation Grant GS40194 and by a fellowship from the John Simon Guggenheim Foundation to Bibb Latané. Lewis Hinkle built the apparatus, Stanley W. Smith calibrated it, James M. Lynn provided the audiometer for loudness matching, and Marcus R. Walker made and provided the sets of slides.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Latané, B., Harkins, S. Cross-modality matches suggest anticipated stage fright a multiplicative power function of audience size and status. Perception & Psychophysics 20, 482–488 (1976). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208286
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208286