Discordantly meaningful: examining cognitive mechanisms of culture and action

Affect Control Theorys (ACT) predictions are predicated on the mechanism of deflection reduction, with the presumption that social institutions impose cognitive constraints on this process. The newly-developed ACT of Institutions (ACT-I) has codified the mechanism of social institutions, making it now possible and imperative to reconcile the relative weight and operational order of the two mechanisms effects on event prediction and likelihood ratings. Evidence from a 3-condition experiment shows that in contrast to ACT equation predictions, but consistent with ACT-I predictions, respondents reported that high deflecting, institutionally concordant events were more plausible and more likely than low deflecting, institutionally discordant events. Meaning disruptions elicited by institutionally out-of-place behaviors or identities are as or more impactful than affective meaning disruptions captured by ACTs impression change equations. While both mechanisms significantly determine estimations of event likelihood, institutional concordance is essential to event processing and must be incorporated into ACTs formalized equations.