Cognitive Dissonance & Attitude Change
Moderators of Cognitive Dissonance
1. Alcohol 2. Misattribution of arousal (another explanation for discomfort) 3. Need for consistency 4. Cultural background (collectivist expect more inconsistency)
Implications for attitude change
1. Reinterpret: change cognitions about behaviour 2. Justify: add additional cognitions to change behaviour 3. Change attitude
How cognitive dissonance leads to attitude change
Counter-attitudinal behaviour + Awareness of inconsistency + Psychological discomfort (dissonance) + Motive to reduce dissonance + Cognitive effort to reduce inconsistency ***This results in: reinterpreting, justifying or changing attitude.
Post-decision dissonance
Difficult choice results in cognitive dissonance since you rejected a good option.
Self-Concept & dissonance
Inconsistency can threaten self-concept Implication: if people can feel good about themselves in another way, dissonance may disappear.
Action-orientation ??
Inconsistency provides mixed signals in how to act. Inconsistent cognitions are a bigger problem for people who are action-oriented.
Who developed cognitive dissonance theory?
Leon Festinger. He proposed: counter-attitudinal behaviour + awareness of the inconsistency results in feeling discomfort.
Dissonance implications for placebo effect (health)
Making a choice between placebos enhances the placebo effect because of post-decision dissonance (chosen = more positive) IV: choice vs. no choice DV: pain level Results: choice reduced pain the most, no choice = no placebo effect, just placebo = some placebo effect.
Effort Justification
Suffering for something results in a more positive attitude towards that. You want to think you suffered for a reason.
Implications for action-orientation
Dissonance is weaker when people are in a passive mindset (such as a passive posture) than an active mindset (active position).
Post-decision dissonance study
IV: difference in initial ratings of two items (different vs. similar) DV: ratings after choice Results: in the tougher choice condition, the attitudes changed much more. Saw chosen much more positively, not chosen much more negatively.
Insufficient justification study
IV: incentive to lie (low vs. high $) DV: attitude about experiment (after lying) Results: high $ incentive said it was boring- easy to justify why they said something counter to what they actually believe, low dissonance. low incentive- said it was interesting to reduce dissonance, justify they did it because it was interesting. *groundbreaking cognitive research in time of behaviourism
Research on self-affirmation
IV: science major (yes or no) lab coat (yes or no) DV: dissonance effect Results: self-affirmation (science + lab coat) didn't show dissonance, but all other conditions did.
Effort Justification Study
P's: women IV: suffering (not vs. very embarrassing) DV: how interesting was discussion? Results: suffering condition more likely to say it was interesting; no suffering said it was boring.