Self Persuasion

Insufficient Punishment and Parenting

"The forbidden toy study 2" (Freedman) Children were told by the experimenter to not play with an attractive toy (robot); there were two threat conditions: mild and severe. Several weeks later, the children were put into the same room for another experiment where all the toys were displayed. The mildly threatened group refused to play with the robot (even 9 weeks later); the severely threatened group played with the robot. Applying this principle to aggressive children. Some parents use severe punishment at home in an attempt to stop their children from being aggressive toward other children. How effective will this be given what you now know about dissonance theory?

Cognitive Dissonance (Festinger)

A state of tension that occurs whenever an individual simultaneously holds two cognitions (ideas, attitudes, beliefs, opinions) that are psychologically inconsistent. Created if a behavior is inconsistent with a preexisting attitude. Tension is unpleasant, and we are motivated to reduce it by: - Changing one or both cognitions so that they are consistent. - Adding additional cognitions to bridge the gap between original ones. - Changing the pre-existing attitude to be consistent with the behavior.

Decisions and Dissonance Choosing Between Outcomes

After we make a decision, we experience dissonance. This is because we had to make a tough decision where each thing has both positive and negatives that you had to choose between. Common way to reduce: focus on the positive aspects of our choice and the negative aspects of the ones we did not choose. Seek advertising information that is reassuring (Ehrlich). Appliance Study (Brehm): Participants rated appliances and then were given the choice of two (that they previously rated as equal). - Participants were later asked to rate the items once again. - Ratings increased for the selected appliance and decreased for the appliance not chosen. - Before we even make the final decision, we are rationalizing on a subconscious level (not aware).

Dissonance and the Self-Concept

Aronson reformulated the theory of cognitive dissonance to put more emphasis on the concept of the self. Dissonance would be most strong in situations where the self- concept is threatened (e.g., I have done [or said] something inconsistent with my self-concept.). Dissonance effects are greatest when: We feel personally responsible for our actions. - Our actions conflict with a central aspect of our self-concept. - Our actions have serious consequences. - Our actions are irrevocable; we can't take it back.

"The Forbidden Toy" Study

Children were told by the experiment to not play with a toy they thought was attractive and given one of two threat conditions. - Threat was mild (I would be a little angry) to strong (very angry). - None of the children played with the toy. Children in the mild-threat group rated the toy less attractive and refrained from playing compared to the strong-threat group. The mild threat kids didn't have much of a consequence for not playing with toy - and since they didn't play with it, they must not like the toy that much after all. Strong threat group - the reason they didn't play with it is because they were threatened, so when the threat is gone, you are more likely to play with it (removed justification for not playing).

What happens when commitment to an attitude is high? Heaven's Gate Suicides

Cigarette company executives statements and behaviors Heaven's Gate suicides (1997): - Cults believed a spacecraft was going to be following a comet when it passed by Earth. - They saw the comet coming (as predicted), but the space craft wasn't behind it like it was supposed to be . - They didn't admit to their faulty beliefs, they returned the telescope and said there was something wrong with it. Donald Trump campaign - at a certain level of commitment people would disregard anything; he could stand on 5th avenue and shoot someone and not lose voters.

Decisions and Dissonance (Dating)

Computer dating study: - People were shown pictures and rated their attractiveness and how much they would enjoy a date with them. - The more committed the participants were to a current relationship, the less attractive they rated the women in the pictures. Another attractiveness rating study (Simpson): - Compared people in committed relationships to those not in committed relationships. - Those in committed relationships rated potential others as less physically and sexually attractive. - Effects held only for those alternative dating partners who were available. - If the person they were rating were in a relationship, the person rating would feel free to rate them as attractive, because it's not a threat to their own relationship. No threat - no dissonance - no derogation.

Early Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Convinced people that the cost of not believing in God is much higher if they don't believe in God. If it's the opposite, the consequences are far less. Belief in God -> infinite gain, greater than loss of a few sins. Disbelief in God -> infinite loss, greater than gain of a few sins. Have people act as though they do believe in God. Behave how you think and vice versa.

Is Dissonance Universal?

Dissonance operates in almost every part of the world, but it does not always take the same form. Collectivist cultures: - Dissonance-reducing behavior may take more communal form. - Japanese are more likely to feel dissonance when their behavior shames or disappoints others than when they need to justify personal misbehavior (as Individualists such as Americans do). fMRI studies: - Reasoning areas of the brain (prefrontal cortex) virtually shut down when a person is confronted with dissonant information. - Emotion circuits of the brain light up indicating that this process involves more emotion than reason. - Reward circuits then respond happily when consonance is restored. - Very rewarding in the brain to resolve these inconsistencies.

Justification of Effort

If a person works hard to attain a goal that goal will be more attractive to the individual than it will be to someone who achieves the same goal with little or no effort. "The Psychology of Sex" Study - An initiation was required for entry into a desirable discussion group. There were two levels of initiation (severe and mild) and one control group. - Severe initiation required orally reciting obscene words; mild required simply reading the list of words. All participants listened to the discussion, which was boring. - People who went through the severe initiation thought the discussion was more interesting and worthwhile than those in the mild or control groups.

Justification of Cruelty

If we think we are decent, reasonable people, how do we justify our behavior when our actions hurt others? Research evidence: - Students watched others being interviewed (Davis & Jones) Instructed to tell them they were shallow, untrustworthy, dull. - Found that students who were cruel to another thought the other student to be less attractive after having done so Another shocking tale (Glass) Students who shocked other students later derogated their victims. The results were more pronounced for those with high self-esteem. Applications to war and discrimination: - In war, soldiers hurt civilians even if they try to avoid it. - What can they tell themselves to reduce the dissonance this causes? - Would seeing others as subhuman help?

Insufficient Punishment

If we use strong punishment to get people to stop doing something they enjoy, they will comply only when the punisher is present (e.g., speeding) and then go right back to doing it again when they are no longer present. Insufficient punishment may be better at inhibiting a behavior.

Psychology of Inevitability

Making the best of things. When unpleasant situations are inevitable (Brehm): - Children volunteered to eat a vegetable they disliked. - After eating it, they were told they would eat more (or nothing in the control). - Children who expected to eat more rated the vegetable not as bad. More unpleasant and inevitable situations (Darley & Berscheid): - Women volunteered to discuss sex with a stranger (female). - Read two files describing two women (they were going to meet one). - The files were a mix of positive and negative characteristics. - Rated the women in the files before they met their partner. - Participants rated the one they thought they were going to meet higher than the woman described in the other file (did not matter which one).

Examples of Cognitive Dissonance: Smoking

Most smokers know that smoking is bad for you, but they keep smoking everyday. What are some of the ways one can reduce the dissonance of smoking cigarettes? What was the response to the initial Surgeon General's report in 1964 on the part of smokers and non smokers? - Only 10% of non smokers doubted it, 90% thought it was true. - For smokers, 40% doubted the evidence, 60% thought it was true - lots of rationalization taking place. Why do people explain the same behavior (smoking one to two packs a day) as either heavy or moderate smoking? - 40% consider themselves moderate, 60% consider themselves heavy - yet smoking the same amount. - The people who realize and believe the information, considered themselves moderate because they realized the threat. - People who didn't believe the evidence considered themselves heavy smokers because they didn't see the threat. When the motivation to be right and the motivation to believe that we are good people collide: How did people who tried but failed smoking cessation programs explain their smoking?

Dissonance and Irrevocability

Once a decision is final, we experience dissonance and are motivated to reduce it, but there is a catch. This relationship holds when the decision is final (irrevocable). With a final decision, you like your decision more. Gamblers were more confident that their horse would win after placing a $2 bet than before placing the bet (Knox & Inkster) Voters have greater confidence in chosen candidate after voting than before. What happens when the decision is not final? People who were given a choice between two photographs liked their selection more if it was final versus those who were able to exchange it. How does making a decision reversible affect self-justification? The decision to behave immorally Cheat on an exam (the difficult decision results in dissonance). If cheat, reduce dissonance by softening stance on cheating. If do not cheat, harden stance against to justify made right decision. Are you more ethical than a sixth grader? (Mills) - Sixth graders were put in situation where they could not win without cheating. - Ask them to indicate their views on cheating. - It was easy to cheat, so the children were tempted. - Some cheated, but some did not cheat. When asked later their views on cheating, those who cheated had softened their stance; those who did not hardened their stance.

Is Dissonance Reduction Conscious?

People are unaware of how successfully they will reduce dissonance. Because the process is unconscious, we do not realize that it will protect us from pain in the future. It's one of the reasons we say things like "I have no regrets" If we do have regrets, they're more likely to be about acts of omission (thinks we wish we'd done) rather than commission (thinks we've done). For things that we have already done, we find a silver lining (we have to rationalize). For things we haven't done, we can't find this rationalization.

What Constitutes External Justification

Punishment, reward, praise, a desire to please. What would produce the most dissonance? - Eating a grasshopper for a friend? - Eating a grasshopper that a stranger gave you?*** Like it more from stranger? Research evidence (Zimbardo et al.) Reservists liked the grasshoppers more when asked to eat them from a pleasant officer than an unpleasant officer. Why?

Self-Persuasion vs. Classic Persuasion

Self-Persuasion: when we persuade ourselves to change our own attitudes or behaviour. Classic Persuasion: when others attempt to change our attitudes or behaviours. Self-persuasion is more powerful and lasts longer than persuasion by others. We have a need to be in control of our own attitudes and behaviour. Indirect vs. direct persuasion: when others are trying to persuade us, we are usually aware of this, whereas with self-persuasion, we're convinced that motivation comes from within ourselves. People don't like hypocrisy - persuade people by getting them to think about their hypocrisy.

Living with the Rationalizer Within: Combating Rationalization

Suggestions: Understand my own defensiveness and dissonance-reducing tendencies. Realize that performing stupid or immoral actions does not necessarily mean I am an irrevocably stupid or immoral person. Developing enough ego strength to tolerate errors in myself. Increase my ability to recognize the benefits of admitting my errors in terms of my own growth and learning as well as my ability to form close, meaningful relationships with other people.

Research on Justification

The "$1-$20" study: Student performed a boring task for an hour. Asked to help the experimenter, who was running late, to lie to another student waiting to do the experiment (say it was interesting). They all lied and were offered $1 (low external) or $20 (high external). When asked later, the $20 said was boring, and the $1 said it was interesting. The "New Haven Police" study: Students were asked to write a letter in support of the police department after they had behaved brutally toward student rioters. They were paid $10, $5, $1, 50¢. Can you predict who felt most favorably toward the police after writing? The results followed a linear trend. Being paid less = more support. Zimbardo et al. Electric shocks: High-dissonance group (voluntary decision) reported less pain than low-dissonance (don't have a choice, they need to do the condition with the shocks) group. High-dissonance physiologically showed less pain, convinced themselves it wasn't that bad because, since why would someone choose to be a study that is painful.

Self-Justification

The desire we have to justify our actions, beliefs, and feelings. *Sam being hypnotized example (rationalization of his strange behaviour - wearing raincoat on sunny day, being bourbon when he doesn't drink, walking farther to a store when one is just around the corner). We are very motivated to justify our behaviour. We want to feel like we are doing the rational and logical things. Need for consistency and accuracy.

The Importance of Self-Esteem

The role of self-esteem: - We experience the most dissonance in situations that threaten our self- esteem. - Those with high self-esteem experience the most dissonance when they behave in ways that are inconsistent with their self concept. Self-esteem and cheating: - Students have their self-esteem temporarily raised or lowered based upon feedback from a bogus personality test. - Participants next played a card game that was rigged where they could win only by cheating. - Those with lowered self-esteem were more likely to cheat than either those with raised or those with unaltered (control) self-esteem. When it's directly affecting the self, you are going to experience more dissonance and be more motivated to rationalize your behavior and change your attitudes.

Self-justification and Rumours Example: Earthquakes in India

Towns in India that were not damaged by an earthquake but that felt the tremors experienced rumors forecasting impending doom (e.g., a flood is rushing toward them; Prasad). Towns that experienced damage did not experience rumors forecasting doom; their rumors were more positive and encouraging (e.g., water supply would be fixed soon; Sinha) Why did the rumors differ so dramatically between the towns? An external cause of their fear/hope was not visible. Lack of external justification for their fear - no way to justify it because the earthquake didn't affect them, this is when we engage in rationalization. People who had the earthquake experienced fear for a good reason.

Capital Punishment Study

We will distort information to fit our preconceived beliefs. Some participants favored capital punishment, some did not. Read one really good argument on each side of the issue (for vs. against). Rather than moderate their attitudes, people on both sides of the issue were more steadfast in arguing their original position after reading the papers. They believed that the opposing paper's position was flawed. If you were against it before, you were even more against it now (more polarized even after reading good arguments for both side of the issue). Discredit and find methodical flaws in the one that discredits their beliefs.

The Psychological of Insufficient Justification

What is the relationship between external justification and internal justification? If an individual states a belief (or behaves in a way) that is difficult to justify externally, that person will attempt to justify it internally by making his or her attitudes more consistent with the statement (or behavior). The "saying is believing paradigm" When there is not adequate external justification, we will start to believe our statements (e.g., lies) that run counter to our pre-existing attitudes. The smaller the external justification, the greater the internal attitude change. "Costly" behavior makes us like products better. - When people pay for goods with cash (vs. credit) they are more committed to the product and the company because this feels more costly. - Ikea effect: When people assemble a product, they end up enjoying it more.

Dissonance Reduction and Irrational Behaviour

When is it irrational? When is prevents us from learning important facts or finding real solutions to problems. Why do we behave irrationally? There's a clash between our need to be right and trust others and our need to maintain a positive self-image that depicts us as good, smart, or worthwhile.

Insufficient Justification

When the justification is insufficient, it is enough to entice the behavior and to cause attitude change. When the justification is abundant, there is little reason to change pre-existing attitudes. So, when is justification inadequate? Revisiting Mills study of sixth graders: - Those who cheated to obtain a small reward (inadequate) tended to soften their attitude about cheating more than those who cheated to obtain a large reward (abundant). - Those who refrained from cheating in spite of the temptation of a large reward—a choice that would create a great deal of dissonance—hardened their attitude about cheating to a greater extent than those who refrained in the face of a small reward.