Chapter 6: Cognitive Dissonance/Justifying Our Actions

Cognitive Dissonance Theory

a drive/feeling of discomfort caused by performing an action

that is discrepant from one's customary (usually positive) self-concept

What do we do about dissonance?

it's unpleasant and we are motivated to reduce it

The Hypocrisy Paradigm

1. Make person aware of conflicts between attitudes and behavior

2. Hypocrisy creates dissonance

3. Reduce dissonance by changing behavior

Stone et al., 1994 (The Hypocrisy Paradigm)

More students bought condoms when they were made aware of their hypocrisy and made the video for high school students

How do we react to proven hypocrisy?

Adding new Cognitions:

Bolster the self-concept

Reduce dissonance by adding a cognition about other positive attributes

Self-justification

the justification or excusing of oneself or one's actions

strongly held beliefs

an idea or conviction that someone holds with great certainty and passion

Jones & Kohler, 1959 (Strongly Held Beliefs)

exposed people who were strongly in favor of segregation and strongly opposed to segregation to both plausible and silly arguments in favor of both sides of the issue. They found that people tended to best recall rational arguments of their side and silly arguments of the opposite side the best.

justification of effort

Tendency for individuals to increase their liking for something they have worked hard to attain

Aronson & Mills, 1959 (justification of effort)

The rating for the discussion group was higher for severe initiation than for both none and mild initiation

Post-decision dissonance

Dissonance aroused after making a decision, typically reduced by enhancing the attractiveness of the chosen alternative and devaluating the rejected alternatives.

Brehm, 1956 (Post-decision dissonance)

Rate the appliances

Rate attractiveness

Choose from two rated as equally attractive

20 minutes later, asked to re-rate

Re-rated appliance they picked higher than the one they didn't get

Knowx and Inkster, 1968 (Post-decision dissonance)

Horse Racetrack Study

Who was most confident?

On average people who before they placed the bet rated the chance of winning as fair (3/7)

On average people who after they placed the bet rated the chance of winning as good (5/7)

Permanence of decision seems to be important in helping to resolve post-decision dissonance

Dan Gilbert TED Talk

Egan, Santos, & Bloom, 2110

Rated stickers with smiley faces

Took two stickers they rated the same

Then made a choice between the two

After, researchers pick a third sticker rated the same

Children were then allowed to choose a second sticker:

Either the one they didn't choose

Or the other sticker from the original group that they had rated similarly

Done the same with monkeys and M&M colors

Post-Decision Dissonance in Babies

On average children were more likely to pick the new sticker than the one they didn't choose the first time

Post-Decision Dissonance in Monkeys

On average monkeys were more likely to pick the new M&M color than the one they didn't choose the first time

Lowballing

strategy whereby a salesperson induces a customer to agree to purchase a product at a very low price, subsequently claims it was an error, and then raises the price.

Why does lowballing work?

Elimination of alternatives

Anticipation of positive event

Illusion of irrevocability

Justification of time and effort involved - what's a few extra $$$

Insufficient Justification

people act in ways that go against their beliefs when offered a smaller reward compared to a larger one

"Cognitive Consequence of Forced Compliance," Festinger and Carlsmith, 1959 (insufficient justification)

Tell next participant experiment was fun and interesting when it wasn't:

$1 ($10.35) or $20 ($207.00)

Who rated tasks as more enjoyable?

Control group (no lie) = no dissonance = rated as not enjoyable

$20 = low dissonance = rated a little more enjoyable than control

$1 = high dissonance = rated as most enjoyable

Counterattitudinal Advocacy

stating an opinion or attitude that runs counter to one's private belief or attitude

insufficient punishment

Dissonance is aroused when individuals lack sufficient external justification for having resisted a desired activity or object, usually resulting in the individual's devaluing the forbidden activity or object

Aronson and Carlsmith, 1963 "Forbidden Toy" (insufficient punishment)

Children asked to rate toys

Told not to play with one of the highest rated

Half mild punishment, half severe

Children then asked to re-rate

Devaluing

reduce the worth or importance of

Freedman, 1965 (insufficient punishment)

New experimenter returns a few weeks later to administer unrelated questionnaires

Same children told they can play with any of the toys while they wait

More children on average played with the forbidden toy after threat of severe punishment vs. Mild punishment

derogating victims

innocent victims of suffering are perceived as having less positive traits

Bersheid, Boye, & Walster, 1968 (derogating victims)

Effects of stress on learning

Two 'teachers', two 'observers'

Some participants told roles would be switched

The 'Harm-doer' with no retaliation group on average dislikes the victim more than the group of participants that were 'harm-doers' and expected retaliation

The 'harm-doer' that expects retaliation group on average thinks the victim actually suffered more than the group that did not expect retaliation

Martens et al. (2007, 2010, 2012) (derogating victims) "Killing begets killing"

Increased initial killing may promote increased subsequent killing

More bugs killed when 5 bugs were killed initially and they had high perceived similarity than low perceived similarity and both groups 1 bug killed initially

"Ben Franklin effect"

Doing someone a favor with little or no external justification can create a more favorable attitude toward that person

Jecker & Landy, 1969 ("Ben Franklin effect")

Participate in an activity with an unfriendly experimenter where you win money for each "correct" answer

Experimenter tallies winnings at end and writes you a receipt to submit to the psychology department secretary

When you submit your receipt, you will be asked to complete a survey evaluating your experience

The rating of the experimenter was higher for the group that did a favor for experimenter than those who did a favor for the department and no favor