Social Psychology - COGNITIVE DISSONANCE
What is self-perception theory?
(Bern, 1967) -Alternative theory to cognitive dissonance -Argues dissonance effects are due to non-motivational process of inferring one's own attitude from one's own behaviour -A large incentive can be seen as controlling a behaviour but not a small one -Explains pps actions in Festinger and Carlsmith's (1959) induced compliance study as using their behaviour (lying) to judge their attitude towards the task (positive ratings) only when the incentive was not controlling their behaviours ($1)
What was the precursor to Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance?
-Heider (1946) said there will 'tension' if there isn't a balanced state among the attitudes towards people, events and configurations in which they are related -Cognitive consistency theories argue that inconsistencies (among cognitions, affects or between cognitions and affects) cause attitude change
How can post-decisional dissonance occur in the free choice paradigm?
Can occur due to the rejected alternative having positive aspects that the chosen alternative doesn't OR chosen alternative may have negative aspects that the rejected alternative doesn't have > We reduce unpleasant feelings through the spreading of alternatives (rationalisation to reduce post-decisional dissonance) > the chosen alternative is viewed as more desirable and the unchosen is viewed as undesirable even if the 2 are close in favourability before the decision
What is cognitive dissonance?
Psychological discomfort (due to conflicting cognitions) leading to attitude change > theory put forward by Festinger
What does the induced-compliance paradigm involve?
Suggests that dissonance reduction can be attained through change in beliefs or attitudes (counter attitudinal behaviours)
What did Lee and Schwarz discover about wiping the slate clean in the free choice paradigm?
(2010) -Came up with the hypothesis that washing might reduce the need to justify a choice that is made -Pps browsed 30 CDs covers and were asked to select some and rank them in terms of preference -The experimenter asked them to choose between the 5th and 6th ranked CDs (dissonance possible as close in favourability) -They were then told they were taking part in a product survey where they had to either examine or wash their hands (expected that those who washed their hands were wiping the slate clean so wouldn't need to provide justification for one over the other) -This was followed by a filler task and another ranking of the 10 CDs -Found hand washing after a decision between 2 similarly favourable alternatives can eliminate the re-evaluation of the options (no need to increase desirability of the one you have chosen)
How did Bastian et al study reduction in dissonance?
(2012) -Explored whether perceptions of animals' minds are negatively associated with their edibility (whether they produce negative association between mind attribution and animal consumption) -Asked subjects to rate 32 animals (20 mammals) along mind capacity dimensions e.g. experiencing hunger/fear/pain/pleasure/rage and level of self control/morality/memory/emotion recognition/planning -They then asked questions about the animals' edibility and moral concern for the animals' consumption -Found that perceived mind of animal was negatively associated with it's consumption and positively with moral concerns e.g. "fish don't have feelings so it's ok to eat them" (animals considered appropriate for human consumption are ascribed diminished mental capacities)
What research uses the effort-justification paradigm?
(Aronson & Mills, 1959) -63 college women took part in "embarrassment test" where they were assigned to either the severe condition (e.g. read obscene words) or mild initiation condition (e.g. read not very embarrassing material) or a control condition which involved no reading -They then had to listen to a recorded group discussion which was designed to be uninteresting to increase dissonance (why am I reading this material for a boring group?) felt in the severe condition and evaluative ratings of the discussion and the pps (dull-interesting) were given -Found more favourable ratings of discussion, pps and overall in the severe condition than in the other 2 (underwent unpleasant initiation which increased liking for the group) > Negative cognitions of boring group discussion were dissonant with the cognition that they went through the painful experience to join that group > led to DENIAL of the severity of initiation or change in the view of group discussion (made effort to join group so justify it being worth it)
How has it been shown that cognitive dissonance can be used as a cognitive-behavioural tool?
(Butler, 2016) -Can be used as a cognitive-behavioural tool to explain voice hearers -DYFUNCTIONAL BELIEF is that "my voices are powerful" -DISSONANT BELIEF is that "the voice may be helpful" -The individual has to deal with dissonance caused by conflict between the 2 statements ERRONEOUS BELIEFS (e.g. my voice suggests I should electrocute myself with my new toaster) > INADEQUATE BEHAVIOURS (e.g. I don't open the box with the toaster) > IDENTIFICATION OF ERRORS IN ONE'S SYSTEM OF BELIEFS (e.g. maybe the voice said that I could not that I should) > REVISION AND REASSESSMENT (e.g. I will use the toaster)
How has the induced-compliance paradigm been used in research?
(Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959) -Showed that there is a negative relationship between the amount of inventive received and the amount of attitude change towards the counter-attitudinal behaviour -71 male students at Stanford took part in 2 tasks (putting and removing 12 spools on a tray and turning each of 48 square pegs a quarter turn clockwise) -They were given either $1 or $20 to tell a pps waiting to take part that the tasks were enjoyable and were followed up with final interview questions about likability -Found the small incentive caused people to describe the tasks as pleasant to justify the lie whereas those offered a large amount of money to lie experienced no attitude change and still felt the task was boring -$1 was insufficient justification for lying so dissonance was induced by changing the attitude towards the task -In $20 condition cognitions are consonant which leads to no dissonance
What does the case study of Dorothy Martin tell us about cognitive dissonance?
(Festinger, Riecken & Schachter) -Received a message from planet Clarion that the world would end before dawn on 21st Dec 1954 following a flood and that a group of believers ("The Seekers") would flee though flying saucers -Researchers infiltrated the group to conduct an observation and found that as the prophecy was disconfirmed an arousal of dissonance was caused -Found that group members were unable to change their belief whereas those who were isolated easily gave up on belief as there was a lack of support source -Typical reaction to dissonance was proselytism to seek social support (group members seeked support to keep belief) > addition of consonant cognition led to dissonance reduction > The book based on this research ('When Prophecy Fails') was one of the first to publish findings of cognitive dissonance
What is the impression management theory?
(Tedeschi, Schlenker & Bonoma, 1971) -Alternative theory to cognitive dissonance -Subjects only seem to change their attitude after a counter attitudinal behaviour so that they can manage the impressions others have of them (no genuine attitude change) > pps not PASSIVE > BUT this account physiological changes following behaviour justification and cannot explain results of the free choice paradigm (just choosing between options and re-evaluating desirability ratings unlikely to add positive impressions)
In what scenarios was the social thinker presented as a consistency seeker prior to cognitive dissonance?
-After WWII (in early 50s) consistency theories represented a reaction to theoretical impasse (lots of studies at group level) -Consistency theories viewed social thinkers as consistency seekers motivated by a negative drive state to reduce the perceived inconsistency among cognitions or among feelings and cognitions (when experiencing imbalance have a drive to reduce tension and inconsistencies producing tension) -We strive to reduce tension in our cognitive structure
What is the origin of the theory of dissonance?
-After an earthquake in India in 1934, Prasad (1950) recorded rumours in an area that felt the shock but didn't have any damage -Fear persisted after the earthquake -Dissonance was created by inconsistency between the cognition of fear and the knowledge that there was no destruction - "rumours provided cognition consonant with being afraid" according to Festinger (1957) -Festinger used this as a real world study of dissonance INCONSISTENT COGNITIONS > DISSONANCE (e.g. aversive feeling) > DESIRE TO REDUCE INCONSISTENCY > ATTITUDE CHANGE - STATE OF CONSONANCE
How is the self-perception theory limited?
-Cannot account for findings from misattribution paradigm > Zanna & Cooper (1974) told pps to take a pill (actually placebo) known to cause tenseness (vs told it caused relaxation/no side effects) before writing a counter attitudinal essay and found that pps in the tense condition didn't change their attitude (tension due to dissonance misattributed to the pill) > As there is a source to explain the tension there is no need to change attitude (motivation to reduce tension not needed as suggested in explanation e.g. pill already present)
What does the beliefs-disconfirmation paradigm involve?
-Dissonance results from disconfirmation of one's beliefs (the prophecy fails e.g. in doomsday example) -Dissonance is reduced by: adding consonant cognitions (seeking social support if alone) in the group members who waited with other members AND the group members who were alone changing their beliefs > Links to doomsday case study of Dorothy Martin who received a message from planet Clarion
What are the 4 main research paradigms of cognitive dissonance?
-FREE CHOICE paradigm - after a decision is made -BELIEF-DISCONFIRMATION paradigm - consequences of being exposed to information contradicting prior beliefs -EFFORT-JUSTIFICATION paradigm - effects of the effort to attain something -INDUCED-COMPLIANCE paradigm - effects of engaging in behaviour inconsistent with own attitudes e.g. writing an essay favouring capital punishment when you are against it (counter attitudinal behaviours)
What does the free choice paradigm involve?
-Involves asking someone to make a decision between 2 very similar choices (e.g. unsure of whether to go to Paris or Rome) causing dissonance -Motivates people to re-evaluate alternatives to reduce dissonance -Brehm (1956) put forward paradigm: (1) ask pps to rate objects on desirability (2) choose between 2 of these very similar objects (3) second rating of the same object's desirability > second desirability judgements tend to differ from the first ones -The closer the alternatives are = the greater the dissonance and attempts to reduce it
How has the dissonance theory been re-evaluated?
-More focus on the self -SELF-CONSISTENCY THEORY: dissonance results from inconsistency between one's self-concept and one's behaviours -"NEW LOOK" VERSION: attitude change resulting from the desire to avoid feeling responsible for negative consequences for the counter attitudinal behaviour -SELF-AFFIRMATION: attitude change resulting from the threat caused by counter attitudinal behaviour to one's sense of integrity > Dissonance theories agree on cognitive changes that occur but disagreement lie in the nature of motivation that triggers resulting changes
How is cognitive inconsistency related to errors in beliefs?
-One way to reduce discomfort is to change beliefs -Cognitive inconsistency signals potential errors in one's reasoning (Gawronski, 2012) e.g. can hold inconsistent beliefs that (1) good friends always go out together (2) John is a good friend of mine (3) John is avoiding me (rational thought: John is not actually avoiding you) -It becomes difficult to identify where the error lies due to working memory limitations ERRONEOUS BELIEFS > INADEQUATE BEHAVIOURS > IDENTIFICATION OF ERRORS IN ONE'S SYSTEM OF BELIEFS (consideration of several components, working memory limits) > REVISION AND REASSESSMENT
What does the effort-justification paradigm involve?
-Rationale that a group is rarely viewed as completely positive > the cognition of going through an unpleasant initiation is dissonant with the cognition that there are unpleasant aspects of the group -People who go through effort to achieve something will value it more highly than those who attain it without effort > Aronson & Millis (1959) hypothesis is that people who undergo an unpleasant initiation to join a group will like it more than people who didn't go through a severe initiation
What methods can we use to reduce dissonance?
-Removing dissonant cognitions e.g. smoking is not harmful -Adding new consonant cognitions e.g. smoking mitigates anxiety -Reducing the importance of dissonant cognitions e.g. the risks from smoking are not as severe as other risks -Increasing the importance of consonant cognitions e.g. pleasure from smoking is important to me
