ANOTHER VIEW OF GROUP POLARIZING - THE REASONS FOR ONE-SIDED ORAL ARGUMENTATION

A synthesis based on persuasive arguments theory but including a revis ed social comparison component is proposed to account for group polari zation. According to the proposal, group members choose between risky and cautious alternatives based on the proportion of known arguments s upportive of each but argue exclusively for their chosen alternative d uring group discussion. This implies that the proportion of risky vers us cautious arguments in discussion will be more extreme than the prop ortion in participants' lists of arguments on both sides of the issue, but no more extreme than the proportion in participants' lists of the ''reasons for'' their chosen alternative. Research results generally supported this implication.