The strategy selection‐construction controversy II: Comparing pre‐and experienced teachers' compliance‐gaining message constructions

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Arguing in favor of the constructionist method of assessment, Burleson, Wilson, Waltman, Goering, Ely and Whaley (1988) indicted the selectionist method commonly employed in compliance‐gaining research. This study examines the functional equivalence of these two techniques for compliance‐gaining research in the classroom. Specifically, we begin by asking teachers to construct compliance‐gaining messages. Next, we analyze those messages to assess the relative sensitivity of this approach to those results previously obtained with selections from the Behavior Alteration Technique (BAT) checklist. Our results do not reflect the allegations leveled against the selectionist method. Alternatively, these data suggest that when compared to findings obtained with the selectionist procedure, the construction approach is less sensitive to real world differences that should exist; provides similar results for other known predictors; and is just as likely to elicit socially desirable prosocial messages. These results are similar to conclusions drawn from analyses of construction methods in other contexts (e.g., Beatty, 1987). Rather than argue for the superiority of either procedure, we contend that both qualitative and quantitative approaches are potentially useful.