nt theory is the name given to analysis of structures of persuasive communication that explains how judgments or perceptions of others' statements and attitudes are shaped, whether favorably or unfavorably (Sherif & Hovland, 1961). The basis for these judgments is a so-called internal anchor or reference point (Text, p. 152). According to Sherif and Sherif (1969), there is ego involvement in the process of making a judgment about what others think or believe, and 'the more important the issue is to one's ego, the stronger the anchor will influence what is understood" (Text, p. 152). In addition to ego involvement, factors of analysis in social judgment theory include latitude of acceptance, or statements agreed with; latitude of rejection, or statements not accepted; and latitude of noncommitment, or statements about which one might be neutral (Text, 152). Ego involvement is also relevant to the issue of distortion, whether by contrast effect, or the view that a message or statement is further away from one's own than it actually is; or assimilation effect, or the view that a message or statement is closer to one's own than it actually is (Text, p. 153).
In this study, attitude judgments made by two opposing political lobbying groups are examined using a hypothetical scenario involving one Senator Smith's public position on two Supreme Court nominees who were being challenged on the basis of their views on abortion. The scenario appears to have been constructed based on prevailing law governing abortion decisions, the highly politicized issue environment, and the familiar issue positions of pro-choice and anti-choice advocacy groups, in the scenario identified as We Are Pro-Choicers (WAPC) and No More Abortions (NMA), respectively. Both WAPC and NMA can be seen to have strong ego involvement and narrow latitudes of acceptance on the issue. The narrowness of latitude of acceptance of WAPC vis-a-vis NMA is indicated by the fact that pr...