An experimental test of three choice shift hypotheses

The present experiment pitted three choice shift hypotheses against one another in an attempt to eliminate one or more of the hypotheses and find support for those remaining. Subjects responded three times to the twelve CDQ items, once as a pretest, and twice following presentation of homogenous sets of three arguments which advocated either a risky or a cautious position. The risk-as-value, relevant arguments, and conformity-attitude change hypotheses generated three separate predictions for the subjects' responses. Results mirrored the prediction of the relevant arguments hypothesis: New information, whether it is contained in cautious or risky arguments, caused a shift toward the type of argument presented. The risk-as-value and the conformity-attitude change hypotheses could not explain the present data.