Self-Justification – Core Exam Notes

Cognitive Dissonance

  • Definition: mental tension from holding inconsistent cognitions or behavior–attitude mismatch.
  • Reduction strategies:
    • Change a cognition.
    • Add consonant cognition.
    • Change behavior/attitude.
  • Key motives: desire to BE right vs. to FEEL right (self-image preservation).
  • Classic demonstrations:
    • Smoking paradox.
    • Capital-punishment bias (Lord, Ross, Lepper) – reading balanced evidence polarizes views.

Consequences of Decisions

  • Post-decision dissonance: enhance positives of chosen option, devalue rejected.
  • Appliance choice (Brehm): ratings shift after selection.
  • Relationship commitment decreases perceived alternatives’ attractiveness (Johnson & Rusbult; Simpson).

Irrevocability

  • Greater commitment ⇒ stronger dissonance relief.
  • Gamblers more confident after placing bets (Knox & Inkster).
  • Photo exchange (Gilbert): no-exchange students like choice more.
  • Low-ball technique (Cialdini): initial low offer → raised price; commitment + anticipation soften price increase.
  • Morality shift: cheaters vs. non-cheaters (Mills).
  • Foot-in-the-door: small act → larger compliance ("Drive Carefully" 55\% vs. 17\%; cancer-pin donations).

External Justification

  • If adequate external reason exists, internal attitude can stay unchanged.
  • Insufficient justification → attitude shifts to match behavior.
    • 1–20 study (Festinger & Carlsmith): low-paid liars later rate boring task as enjoyable.
    • New Haven police letters (Cohen): lower pay ⇒ greater pro-police shift.
  • Insufficient punishment:
    • Forbidden-toy (Aronson & Carlsmith; Freedman): mild threat reduces attraction long-term; severe threat fails.
  • Reward magnitude modulates cheating attitudes (Mills): small-reward cheaters soften stance; large-reward abstainers harden stance.

Dissonance & Self

  • Strongest when actions threaten self-concept and carry personal responsibility.
  • Self-esteem effects:
    • Lowered esteem → more cheating (Aronson & Mettee).
    • Narcissistic ego threat → aggression (Baumeister et al.).

Justification of Effort & Cruelty

  • Effort → increased valuation of goal.
    • Sex-discussion initiation (Aronson & Mills) & shock entry (Gerard & Matthewson).
    • Misremembering ineffective training as beneficial (Conway & Ross).
  • Harm doing leads to victim derogation unless retaliation expected (Davis & Jones; Glass; Berscheid).
  • Mechanism underlies hazing, war dehumanization, discrimination.

Inevitability

  • Accepting unavoidable outcomes by re-evaluation.
    • Disliked vegetable (Brehm): expecting more consumption → higher ratings.
    • Future discussion partners rated more positively (Darley & Berscheid).
    • Residents in unsafe dorms minimize danger (Lehman & Taylor).

Applications & Coping

  • Hypocrisy paradigm: make people advocate desired behavior then recall own lapses.
    • Condom advocacy boosts purchase/use (Aronson et al.).
    • Water-conservation pledges shorten showers (Dickerson et al.).
  • Cult processes: escalating commitments, isolation, high effort.
  • Managing the “inner rationalizer”:
    • Recognize defensiveness.
    • Tolerate mistakes without self-denigration.
    • Admit errors to enable learning & relationships.