ABSTRACT
It is often claimed that social support from a professional counselor, an informal adviser, or a friend can help a person to carry out a stressful course of action, such as staying on a diet, cutting down on smoking, avoiding alcoholic drinks, giving up hard drugs, or undergoing painful medical treatment. Recently I have been engaged in field research on adherence to stressful decisions of this type. The recent research grows out of two major types of research interests I have pursued for many years: (I) studies bearing on tolerance for severe stress, such as that involved in acute illness, surgery, and community disasters (Janis, 1958, 1967, 1971; Janis & Leventhal, 1965), and (2) studies of changes in attitudes and decisions induced by authoritative communications (Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953; Janis, 1959; Janis & Hovland, 1959; Janis & Mann, 1968, 1975). My current research interests are now directed toward understanding how and why the communication interchanges that occur in dyadic relationships influence a person's adherence to a stressful decision. My approach to this research area is based partly on the following assumption, derived from a considerable body of prior social psychological research on affiliative needs: When people face a stressful dilemma-including decisional conflicts-they generally become motivated to affiliate with others in order to satisfy a number of important needs which may involve seeking for social comparison, obtaining reassurance, or bolstering self-esteem (Bennis et al., 1973; Festinger, 1954; Darley & Aronson, 1966; Helmreich & Collins, 1967; Janis, 1968; Schachter, 1959; Zimbardo & Formica, 1963).
