Investigated J. L. Freedman and S. C. Fraser's (see 40:10) suggestion that self-percept may affect the likelihood that individuals will act on an attitude. The probability of 60 male undergraduates' complying with E 2's request to distribute anti-air-pollution leaflets was assessed following E 1's manipulation of high or low payment (
10) and feedback to Ss indicating they (1) had a
... [Show full abstract] "doer" personality which entitled them to this payment (doer self-percept-inequity); (2) had a "doer" personality, but were entitled to this payment because of their performance on an experimental task (doer self-percept-no inequity); or (3) 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 Ss (p < .05), and greater for Ss 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 Ss acting on an attitude, the results are consistent with Freedman and Fraser's suggestion. They also tend to support some inequity theory assumptions employed in the experimental manipulations. (19 ref.)