Cognitive Dissonance Theory_ Cognitive Consequences of Forced Compliance (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959)

Cognitive Dissonance Theory

• Cognitive Dissonance: A psychological theory associated with the conflict that arises when a person holds two opposing beliefs or opinions.

• Established by Festinger & Carlsmith (1959).

• Example Scenario:

  • A person privately believes in an opinion "X" but states publicly that they do not believe in it ("not X").

Key Concepts

• Control Condition: Participants instructed to wait for the interviewer.

• Experimental Setup:

  • Subjects asked to tell a waiting female "subject" that the task was enjoyable, creating potential cognitive dissonance.

Dissonance Calculation

• Dissonance (D): The sum of opposing beliefs.

• Consonance (C): The sum of supporting beliefs.

• Total Magnitude of Dissonance: Calculated as D/(D+C).

  • The total dissonance magnitude decreases as the number and importance of pressures to state "not X" increase.

  • When pressures (rewards/punishments) barely influence behavior, dissonance is maximal.

  • As incentive increases, the dissonance decreases.

Prediction

• Larger rewards will lead to smaller changes in opinion.

Experimental Procedure

• Participants: 71 males from introductory psychology class.

• Tasks designed to produce a negative opinion of the experiment.

• Experimental Groups:

  • Group receiving $1 (higher dissonance, lower consonance).

  • Group receiving $20 (lower dissonance, higher consonance).

  • Control group without financial expectation.

• Questions Asked:

  • How enjoyable was the task (rated -5 to +5)?

    • Control group: -0.45

    • $1 group: +1.35

    • $20 group: -0.05

  • How much did they learn (rated 0 to 10)?

    • Control group: 3.08

    • $1 group: 2.80

    • $20 group: 3.15

  • Scientific importance (rated 0 to 10)?

    • Control group: 5.60

    • $1 group: 6.45

    • $20 group: 5.18

  • Would they participate in a similar experiment again (rated -5 to +5)?

    • Control group: -0.62

    • $1 group: +1.20

    • $20 group: -0.25

Alternative Explanation

• Self-Convincing Effect: The idea that subjects in the $1 condition may have rehearsed and generated new arguments that influenced their opinion.

• Analysis of recorded conversations between participants showed minimal differences in effort, implying $1 group did not necessarily work harder.

Summary of Findings

• Cognitive Dissonance Theory Validation:

  1. Inducing a person to act against their private opinion will likely result in a change in that opinion.

  2. Greater pressures to act contrary to one’s private beliefs correlate with a diminished tendency to change opinions.

• Conclusion: The lab experiment supports the theory that participants who were financially compensated to represent a lie experienced different degrees of cognitive dissonance, thereby affirming Festinger's theorization.