Ch. 6: Cognitive Dissensus (Social Psych) 3/1/23

def: the need to protect our self esteem

I. Cognitive Dissonance Theory

(Festinger, 1957, 1964)

A. Dissonance

• Discomfort when two cognitions conflict, or behavior conflicts with attitude.
• Dissonance creates a “drive state”

B. Aronson ‘s Revision

• Most acute or painful when dissonant cognition challenges our self-esteem/self-worth.

<<C. Reducing Dissonance<<

D. Decisions

• Brehm (1956)
  • rate appliances
  • choice between two equally-rated
  • Re-rating:
  • chosen one increases slightly
  • not chosen item rated much lower

E. Decisions (Irrevocability)

• Knox & Inkster (1968)
  • Betting at race track
  • How certain horse will win?
  • Either before placing bet or after
  • who had more confidence in their bet?
  • the people who placed the bet were more confident
• Gilbert & Ebert
  • choice between two photos
  • (Before choice, equally liked)
  • 1/2 have five days to change mind
  • 1/2 choice is final
  • Few days later, who liked chosen photo the most?
  • The ones who’s choice was final was more happy.

F. Effort Justification Paradigm

(Aaronson & Mills. 1959)

• I engaged in an embarrassing task.
• the group I joined is very boring
• = Dissonance
• How do we reduce thew dissonance
  • the screening was mild
  • the screening was severe
  • How interesting was the group discussion?
• Results:
  • participants in the severe screening rated the discussion as more interesting (M=97.6) than participants in the mild screening (m=81.8) or control (m=80.2)
• We like what we have suffered for
  • (severe punishment lead to greater liking than mild punishment)

G. The Induce Compliance Paradigm

(Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959)

• I engaged in a dull boring task
• I told someone else it was fun
• = Dissonance
• How do I reduce my dissonance?
• I was paid $20 to tell this lie.
• I was paid $1 to tell this lie.

Results:

• subjects in the $1 condition rated the task more positively (m=11.76) than subjects in the $20 condition (m=8.03) or a control group (m= 7.61)

<<Behavior = Attitude<<

• <<Behavior affects attitudes<<
• <<small rewards produce greater attitudes change than large ones. (reward paradox)<<

H. Forbidden Toy Parading

(Arondson & Carlsmith 1963)

1. Method

   1. five year old children told not to play with an attractive toy

   2. Severe threat: I would be angry, I would take all my toys and never come back

   3. Mild threat: I would be a little angry if you played with the toy

   4. Rate the toy =

      1. i like the toy
      2. I’m not playing with the toy
      3. = Dissonance

   5. How do we reduce the dissonance?

      1. Children in the mild threat condition evaluated the toy more negatively than children in the severe threat condition
      2. Mild punishments produces greater attitude than severe threat